Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Wikipedia: Foundation

A Wikimedia project has forked

 

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All Wikipedia foundation RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


r2d2.strauss at verizon

Sep 12, 2011, 1:50 PM

Post #1 of 79 (1895 views)
Permalink
A Wikimedia project has forked

Greetings everyone,

I thought the Wikimedia community should know that a large portion of WIkinews' contributor base has forked into its own project (http://theopenglobe.org) after becoming deeply dissatisfied with Wikinews. The new wiki has finished its creation stage and is about ready to publish news articles.

At least nine users have pledged to support this fork, and several others (including non-WN Wikimedians) are interested - more than there are active remaining Wikinews contributors.

-Tempodivalse

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


kim at bruning

Sep 12, 2011, 1:05 PM

Post #2 of 79 (1843 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 03:50:55PM -0500, Tempodivalse wrote:
> Greetings everyone,
>
> I thought the Wikimedia community should know that a large portion of WIkinews' contributor base has forked into its own project (http://theopenglobe.org) after becoming deeply dissatisfied with Wikinews. The new wiki has finished its creation stage and is about ready to publish news articles.

Wow, that was a long time coming.

I wish we could have worked together with wikinews better, and I wish
theopenglobe the best of luck going forward. :-)

sincerely,
Kim Bruning

--

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


dgerard at gmail

Sep 12, 2011, 2:02 PM

Post #3 of 79 (1863 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

On 12 September 2011 21:50, Tempodivalse <r2d2.strauss [at] verizon> wrote:

> I thought the Wikimedia community should know that a large portion of WIkinews' contributor base has forked into its own project (http://theopenglobe.org) after becoming deeply dissatisfied with Wikinews. The new wiki has finished its creation stage and is about ready to publish news articles.
> At least nine users have pledged to support this fork, and several others (including non-WN Wikimedians) are interested - more than there are active remaining Wikinews contributors.


Any comment from the Wikinews contributors who just posted to
foundation-l saying everything was fine and people saying it wasn't
were clueless?


- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


erik at wikimedia

Sep 12, 2011, 2:10 PM

Post #4 of 79 (1852 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Tempodivalse <r2d2.strauss [at] verizon> wrote:
> I thought the Wikimedia community should know that a large portion
> of WIkinews' contributor base has forked into its own project (http://theopenglobe.org)

Congratulations to the successful launch of the fork and good luck!
Hopefully this will lead to some new discoveries that will benefit all
efforts in this space.

All best,
Erik

--
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation

Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


kim at bruning

Sep 12, 2011, 2:13 PM

Post #5 of 79 (1859 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 05:57:37PM -0400, MZMcBride wrote:
> Tempodivalse wrote:
>
> It's a great injustice to countless contributors that they receive support
> in name only (as "one of Wikipedia's sister sites" in a handful of
> publications), but it's indisputably the reality. A classic example of this
> reality, incidentally, is the GoogleNewsSitemap extension fiasco on the
> English Wikinews.

Yes, WMF essentially failed there. Priorities are not set correctly.

Actually, this same set of failures is evident in all projects (even en.wp).
However, most projects are larger, and therefore the cost of forking
outweighs the advantages, so far.

> I'll echo others in wishing you all the best of luck going forward. I
> sincerely hope whoever administers your new site will treat you better than
> Wikimedia has.

Hey, we can all still help out. It's a wiki, after all! :-)

sincerely,
Kim Bruning

--

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


kim at bruning

Sep 12, 2011, 2:14 PM

Post #6 of 79 (1856 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 05:59:34PM -0400, Chris Lee wrote:
> I didn't mean what is a fork, or how to fork etc...
>
> I meant more along the lines of the difference in scope, guidelines. Why did
> they break off?

For starters, they weren't happy with the server maintenance by WMF. They
couldn't get essential components deployed for 2 years or so.

I'm not sure what the entire set of circumstances was. Someone should probably
do a debrief and postmortem.

sincerely,
Kim Bruning

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


kim at bruning

Sep 12, 2011, 2:23 PM

Post #7 of 79 (1849 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 03:13:51PM -0700, M. Williamson wrote:

> It's worth noting that several of the other English language
> projects suffer similar levels of inactivity.

Well yeah, first let them wither on the vine, then declare them useless
when they're almost dead.

Then congratulate everyone when they cut off the fat.

One day I'm going to write a manual, and that move is going to be in
there. ;-)

sincerely,
Kim Bruning

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


kim at bruning

Sep 12, 2011, 2:29 PM

Post #8 of 79 (1850 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 11:08:10PM +0100, David Gerard wrote:
>
> Considering Wikinews was started and pushed heavily by Erik Moller
> (early on he was personally bailing people up at wikimeets to get
> them to contribute to it), I suggest your analysis is on
> crack^W^W^Whypothesises too much cause for what is *entirely*
> explicable by a small community going insular and going for
> perceived quality over outreach.

When Erik started working for the WMF, I think he had to go more
hands-off due to COI. GNSM sort of was symptomatic of that.

That said, the heavyweight structure was already coming in years
ago, I actually managed to cut my teeth on denting it once. (I
documented the pattern I used at [[:EN:WP:BRD]] ).

I haven't tracked wikinews as well as I would have liked to, of
late. <scratches head>

sincerely,
Kim Bruning


--

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


theornamentalist at gmail

Sep 12, 2011, 2:32 PM

Post #9 of 79 (1853 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

Not interested in all the details, but does anyone know how is this
different from wikinews?
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


wiki at konsoletek

Sep 12, 2011, 2:39 PM

Post #10 of 79 (1856 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_fork#Forking_free_and_open_source_software

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 14:32, Chris Lee <theornamentalist [at] gmail> wrote:

> Not interested in all the details, but does anyone know how is this
> different from wikinews?
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



--
Jon
[[User:ShakataGaNai]] / KJ6FNQ
http://snowulf.com/
http://ipv6wiki.net/
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


kirill.lokshin at gmail

Sep 12, 2011, 2:39 PM

Post #11 of 79 (1861 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Tempodivalse <r2d2.strauss [at] verizon>wrote:

> At least nine users have pledged to support this fork, and several others
> (including non-WN Wikimedians) are interested - more than there are active
> remaining Wikinews contributors.


Wait, does this mean that Wikinews had fewer than twenty active contributors
prior to the fork? Or am I horribly misinterpreting the statement here?

Kirill
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


kim at bruning

Sep 12, 2011, 2:51 PM

Post #12 of 79 (1859 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 03:50:55PM -0500, Tempodivalse wrote:
> Greetings everyone,
>
> I thought the Wikimedia community should know that a large
> portion of WIkinews' contributor base has forked into its own
> project (http://theopenglobe.org) after becoming deeply
> dissatisfied with Wikinews. The new wiki has finished its
> creation stage and is about ready to publish news articles.

I'm doing a little digging and asking around now. :-)

Here's a list of wikinews issues, from wikinews perspective (for
starters)

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/User:Dendodge/Project_focus


sincerely,
Kim Bruning


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


jayvdb at gmail

Sep 12, 2011, 2:53 PM

Post #13 of 79 (1855 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 7:39 AM, Kirill Lokshin
<kirill.lokshin [at] gmail> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Tempodivalse <r2d2.strauss [at] verizon>wrote:
>
>> At least nine users have pledged to support this fork, and several others
>> (including non-WN Wikimedians) are interested - more than there are active
>> remaining Wikinews contributors.
>
>
> Wait, does this mean that Wikinews had fewer than twenty active contributors
> prior to the fork?  Or am I horribly misinterpreting the statement here?

According to the stats, en.wn has
less than 50 contributors with >5 edits per month, and
less than five contributors with >100 edits per month

http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikinews/EN/TablesWikipediansEditsGt5.htm
http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikinews/EN/TablesWikipediansEditsGt100.htm

--
John Vandenberg

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


z at mzmcbride

Sep 12, 2011, 2:57 PM

Post #14 of 79 (1856 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

Tempodivalse wrote:
> I thought the Wikimedia community should know that a large portion of
> Wikinews' contributor base has forked into its own project
> (http://theopenglobe.org) after becoming deeply dissatisfied with Wikinews.
> The new wiki has finished its creation stage and is about ready to publish
> news articles.

From Wikimedia's perspective, I think this is "one down, several hundred to
go." Wikimedia has made it clear that its singular focus is the English
Wikipedia. All other Wikipedias are peripheral; all other project types are
abandoned. Perhaps with the exception of Wikimedia Commons, which is able to
pull in grant money, so it continues to receive some level of technical
support.

It's a great injustice to countless contributors that they receive support
in name only (as "one of Wikipedia's sister sites" in a handful of
publications), but it's indisputably the reality. A classic example of this
reality, incidentally, is the GoogleNewsSitemap extension fiasco on the
English Wikinews.

I'll echo others in wishing you all the best of luck going forward. I
sincerely hope whoever administers your new site will treat you better than
Wikimedia has.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


node.ue at gmail

Sep 12, 2011, 2:57 PM

Post #15 of 79 (1854 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

I do believe it means exactly that.

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Special:ActiveUsers includes all users with at
least 1 edit in the last 30 days; that seems like a really low threshold
though. I took the liberty of collecting some data based on that page:

- 23 users with at least 30 edits in the last 30 days (= average 1 edit/day)
- 8 users with at least 100 edits in the last 30 days
- 2 users with at least 300 edits in the last 30 days ("super active"):
Brian McNeil and Pi zero

I was a bit shocked to see these numbers myself. Seems rather low,
especially considering Wikinews is not like Wikipedia, where you only need a
handful of active users at one time to work on articles, but rather requires
high activity all the time to be a successful news outlet. English Wikinews
is, in my opinion, a failed project, at least currently. I have tried on
several occasions to switch to Wikinews as my primary news source, each time
I end up asking myself why on earth I did such a thing because it's almost
useless for people who want to stay informed about current events.

2011/9/12 Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin [at] gmail>

> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Tempodivalse <r2d2.strauss [at] verizon
> >wrote:
>
> > At least nine users have pledged to support this fork, and several others
> > (including non-WN Wikimedians) are interested - more than there are
> active
> > remaining Wikinews contributors.
>
>
> Wait, does this mean that Wikinews had fewer than twenty active
> contributors
> prior to the fork? Or am I horribly misinterpreting the statement here?
>
> Kirill
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


kim at bruning

Sep 12, 2011, 2:58 PM

Post #16 of 79 (1852 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 03:50:55PM -0500, Tempodivalse wrote:
> Greetings everyone,

Heya Tempodivalse,

I understand that a lot of this fork is due to personality
conflicts, rather than with WMF itself? That's be a bit of a
<phew> to know WMF weren't the folks causing the trouble.

How can we help both openglobe and wikinews flourish, according to
you and the current team?

sincerely,
Kim Bruning.oO(Keeping open the EGCS gambit as an option)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egcs#EGCS_fork

--

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


theornamentalist at gmail

Sep 12, 2011, 2:59 PM

Post #17 of 79 (1851 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

I didn't mean what is a fork, or how to fork etc...

I meant more along the lines of the difference in scope, guidelines. Why did
they break off?

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 5:39 PM, Jon Davis <wiki [at] konsoletek> wrote:

>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_fork#Forking_free_and_open_source_software
>
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 14:32, Chris Lee <theornamentalist [at] gmail>
> wrote:
>
> > Not interested in all the details, but does anyone know how is this
> > different from wikinews?
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l [at] lists
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jon
> [[User:ShakataGaNai]] / KJ6FNQ
> http://snowulf.com/
> http://ipv6wiki.net/
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


dgerard at gmail

Sep 12, 2011, 3:08 PM

Post #18 of 79 (1857 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

On 12 September 2011 22:57, MZMcBride <z [at] mzmcbride> wrote:

> From Wikimedia's perspective, I think this is "one down, several hundred to
> go." Wikimedia has made it clear that its singular focus is the English
> Wikipedia. All other Wikipedias are peripheral; all other project types are
> abandoned. Perhaps with the exception of Wikimedia Commons, which is able to
> pull in grant money, so it continues to receive some level of technical
> support.


Considering Wikinews was started and pushed heavily by Erik Moller
(early on he was personally bailing people up at wikimeets to get them
to contribute to it), I suggest your analysis is on
crack^W^W^Whypothesises too much cause for what is *entirely*
explicable by a small community going insular and going for perceived
quality over outreach. This is particularly given that Wikinews
explicitly put in the heavyweight review infratructure in order to get
in good with Google News. And that review structure is just the sort
of thing one would expect to leave contributors dissatisfied and
feeling utterly un-wiki about bothering.

I don't know what would be an answer. The new site wants to keep a
*lot* less reviewed. But then there's other failure modes for citizen
journalism, e.g. Before It's News, which has been pretty much overrun
by conspiracy theorists.


- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


thomas.dalton at gmail

Sep 12, 2011, 3:08 PM

Post #19 of 79 (1855 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

Sounds interesting. It is certainly true that wikinews was never as
successful as we had hoped. Perhaps this new project will manage more. Good
luck!
On Sep 12, 2011 9:51 PM, "Tempodivalse" <r2d2.strauss [at] verizon> wrote:
> Greetings everyone,
>
> I thought the Wikimedia community should know that a large portion of
WIkinews' contributor base has forked into its own project (
http://theopenglobe.org) after becoming deeply dissatisfied with Wikinews.
The new wiki has finished its creation stage and is about ready to publish
news articles.
>
> At least nine users have pledged to support this fork, and several others
(including non-WN Wikimedians) are interested - more than there are active
remaining Wikinews contributors.
>
> -Tempodivalse
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


morton.thomas at googlemail

Sep 12, 2011, 3:10 PM

Post #20 of 79 (1846 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

It's a tiny bit disappointing that the tone here is "oh well, we tried and
failed".

When really it should be "cool - now we have a competitor, what do we need
to give WN to help them stay in the market"

Tom
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


node.ue at gmail

Sep 12, 2011, 3:13 PM

Post #21 of 79 (1842 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

It's worth noting that several of the other English language projects suffer
similar levels of inactivity.

English Wikiquote, which I've always considered to be one of our most
pointless and least useful projects, has a total of 5 users who make more
than 100 edits a month. This is a project in English, our highest-traffic
language, that has been open since 2003. That's ridiculous. English
Wikibooks has only 10, which is more than can be said for most language
editions of Wikibooks, which are all but dead.

There are two problems here, I think. The first one is lack of support from
WMF, which everyone likes to talk about a lot. The other one is the
assumption that these projects are worthwhile and that WMF or anyone else
*should* care about them.

Let's say a GeoCities ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeoCities ) site about
your grandmother's pet cat somehow ended up being one of our sister
projects. Since it's not very useful to most people, it remains a very
low-traffic site, and WMF doesn't put a lot of energy into it. Then a lot of
people come along and bellyache that WMF is not giving Grandma's GeoCities
cat site any support and that it's undervalued, with the assumption that
just because it is a sister project, it should be treated exactly equally to
Wikipedia, with the unproven assumption that it offers just as much
potential and just as much educational value as our "flagship" site. Of
course that's nonsense, who cares about your grandmother's cats besides her?

I do think some of the sister projects are extremely valuable (Commons in
particular; Wiktionary can be useful in some ways, same with Wikisource;
Wikibooks and Wikinews were at least nice ideas that don't seem to have been
well-suited to the Wiki process in the end), but I'm tired of the assumption
that people *should* support and care about sister projects just because
they're sister projects, without proving their usefulness or worthiness of
our support.

2011/9/12 M. Williamson <node.ue [at] gmail>

> I do believe it means exactly that.
>
> http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Special:ActiveUsers includes all users with at
> least 1 edit in the last 30 days; that seems like a really low threshold
> though. I took the liberty of collecting some data based on that page:
>
> - 23 users with at least 30 edits in the last 30 days (= average 1
> edit/day)
> - 8 users with at least 100 edits in the last 30 days
> - 2 users with at least 300 edits in the last 30 days ("super active"):
> Brian McNeil and Pi zero
>
> I was a bit shocked to see these numbers myself. Seems rather low,
> especially considering Wikinews is not like Wikipedia, where you only need a
> handful of active users at one time to work on articles, but rather requires
> high activity all the time to be a successful news outlet. English Wikinews
> is, in my opinion, a failed project, at least currently. I have tried on
> several occasions to switch to Wikinews as my primary news source, each time
> I end up asking myself why on earth I did such a thing because it's almost
> useless for people who want to stay informed about current events.
>
>
> 2011/9/12 Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin [at] gmail>
>
>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Tempodivalse <r2d2.strauss [at] verizon
>> >wrote:
>>
>> > At least nine users have pledged to support this fork, and several
>> others
>> > (including non-WN Wikimedians) are interested - more than there are
>> active
>> > remaining Wikinews contributors.
>>
>>
>> Wait, does this mean that Wikinews had fewer than twenty active
>> contributors
>> prior to the fork? Or am I horribly misinterpreting the statement here?
>>
>> Kirill
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l [at] lists
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


emijrp at gmail

Sep 12, 2011, 3:15 PM

Post #22 of 79 (1858 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

Interesting link, but a bit focused on software. No mention to content
communities.

Wiki[pm]edia suffered other forks previously, like Enciclopedia Libre.

2011/9/12 Jon Davis <wiki [at] konsoletek>

>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_fork#Forking_free_and_open_source_software
>
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 14:32, Chris Lee <theornamentalist [at] gmail>
> wrote:
>
> > Not interested in all the details, but does anyone know how is this
> > different from wikinews?
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l [at] lists
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jon
> [[User:ShakataGaNai]] / KJ6FNQ
> http://snowulf.com/
> http://ipv6wiki.net/
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


thomas.dalton at gmail

Sep 12, 2011, 3:17 PM

Post #23 of 79 (1856 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

On Sep 12, 2011 11:10 PM, "Thomas Morton" <morton.thomas [at] googlemail>
wrote:
>
> It's a tiny bit disappointing that the tone here is "oh well, we tried and
> failed".
>
> When really it should be "cool - now we have a competitor, what do we need
> to give WN to help them stay in the market"

In what way are we competing? Our vision is a world where people have free
access to all knowledge. It doesn't say we need to be the ones to provide
that knowledge.

We've failed. Maybe someone else will do better. If they do, our goal will
still be achieved.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


george.herbert at gmail

Sep 12, 2011, 3:18 PM

Post #24 of 79 (1848 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

I am seeing a lot of "lack of support from WMF for these smaller
projects" but not being a smaller projects editor I don't know what
specific issues there are.

Can someone up on the situation send out more specifics?

Thank you.


On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 3:13 PM, M. Williamson <node.ue [at] gmail> wrote:
> It's worth noting that several of the other English language projects suffer
> similar levels of inactivity.
>
> English Wikiquote, which I've always considered to be one of our most
> pointless and least useful projects, has a total of 5 users who make more
> than 100 edits a month. This is a project in English, our highest-traffic
> language, that has been open since 2003. That's ridiculous. English
> Wikibooks has only 10, which is more than can be said for most language
> editions of Wikibooks, which are all but dead.
>
> There are two problems here, I think. The first one is lack of support from
> WMF, which everyone likes to talk about a lot. The other one is the
> assumption that these projects are worthwhile and that WMF or anyone else
> *should* care about them.
>
> Let's say a GeoCities ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeoCities ) site about
> your grandmother's pet cat somehow ended up being one of our sister
> projects. Since it's not very useful to most people, it remains a very
> low-traffic site, and WMF doesn't put a lot of energy into it. Then a lot of
> people come along and bellyache that WMF is not giving Grandma's GeoCities
> cat site any support and that it's undervalued, with the assumption that
> just because it is a sister project, it should be treated exactly equally to
> Wikipedia, with the unproven assumption that it offers just as much
> potential and just as much educational value as our "flagship" site. Of
> course that's nonsense, who cares about your grandmother's cats besides her?
>
> I do think some of the sister projects are extremely valuable (Commons in
> particular; Wiktionary can be useful in some ways, same with Wikisource;
> Wikibooks and Wikinews were at least nice ideas that don't seem to have been
> well-suited to the Wiki process in the end), but I'm tired of the assumption
> that people *should* support and care about sister projects just because
> they're sister projects, without proving their usefulness or worthiness of
> our support.
>
> 2011/9/12 M. Williamson <node.ue [at] gmail>
>
>> I do believe it means exactly that.
>>
>> http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Special:ActiveUsers includes all users with at
>> least 1 edit in the last 30 days; that seems like a really low threshold
>> though. I took the liberty of collecting some data based on that page:
>>
>> - 23 users with at least 30 edits in the last 30 days (= average 1
>> edit/day)
>> - 8 users with at least 100 edits in the last 30 days
>> - 2 users with at least 300 edits in the last 30 days ("super active"):
>> Brian McNeil and Pi zero
>>
>> I was a bit shocked to see these numbers myself. Seems rather low,
>> especially considering Wikinews is not like Wikipedia, where you only need a
>> handful of active users at one time to work on articles, but rather requires
>> high activity all the time to be a successful news outlet. English Wikinews
>> is, in my opinion, a failed project, at least currently. I have tried on
>> several occasions to switch to Wikinews as my primary news source, each time
>> I end up asking myself why on earth I did such a thing because it's almost
>> useless for people who want to stay informed about current events.
>>
>>
>> 2011/9/12 Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin [at] gmail>
>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Tempodivalse <r2d2.strauss [at] verizon
>>> >wrote:
>>>
>>> > At least nine users have pledged to support this fork, and several
>>> others
>>> > (including non-WN Wikimedians) are interested - more than there are
>>> active
>>> > remaining Wikinews contributors.
>>>
>>>
>>> Wait, does this mean that Wikinews had fewer than twenty active
>>> contributors
>>> prior to the fork?  Or am I horribly misinterpreting the statement here?
>>>
>>> Kirill
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>> foundation-l [at] lists
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l [at] lists
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



--
-george william herbert
george.herbert [at] gmail

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


morton.thomas at googlemail

Sep 12, 2011, 3:20 PM

Post #25 of 79 (1860 views)
Permalink
Re: A Wikimedia project has forked [In reply to]

>
> We've failed. Maybe someone else will do better. If they do, our goal will
> still be achieved.


Well that's exactly the problem :)

This should be a last gasp kick up the backside.. not a shrug of the
shoulders.

Just saying.

Tom
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l [at] lists
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All Wikipedia foundation RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.