On 16 April 2012 10:30, Gordon Joly <gordon.joly(a)pobox.com> wrote:
On 16/04/12 10:26, Gordon Joly wrote:
On 14/04/12 14:16, Roger Bamkin wrote:
I am aware of the commons botload problem ... I did my share as well.
I am aware than Commons is not fit for purpose.
Gordo
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK:
http://uk.wikimedia.org
Commons is not fit for purpose. Trying to get august bodies such a the
Geogolical Society to use it (as suggested in the workshop) is in my
opinion a non starters. Archives for All (Access to Archives) is much
better option for most collections. I have used "Chesire3" for a small
community archive.
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a/
Round pegs, square holes....
As for Geograph ....... words fail me!
As I said there, institutions need to define their purposes, and then act
accordingly. I don't see much percentage in us debating here what "fit for
purpose" means as a generalised thing applied to Commons. It obviously does
support WP and other WMF projects. I'm all for contrarian views rather than
groupthink, but this thread is starting to ramble.
Charles