I am a bit concerned about the pace at which new Wikipedia spinoff projects are created. Wiktionary was a good idea, because it filled a gap that was there -- we received lots of dictionary entries, so it seemed like the logical conclusion to start a wiki-dictionary. But now we have a new "Textbook-Wiki" which was started without much discussion - possibly a good idea, but also possibly too specific - and shortly afterwards, a "Wiki-Quote" project was created. Now people are talking about creating a "Wiki-Piki" for pictures. This is all nice and good, but haven't we learned anything from the Wiktionary experience? Wiktionary was set up without much thought as to how the wiki process could be applied to a dictionary; it took months to formulate some kind of standard template, and we still don't have Wiktionaries in other languages. Wiktionary could have benefitted a lot from better planning before it was set up. I'm not sure I like the Wiki- Quote idea at all, as it intersects a lot with Project Sourceberg, is not very wiki-like (a quote is a quote) and not very compatible with the open content idea. Wiki-Quote was only very briefly discussed. Furthermore, it's not exactly like we have lots of free resources. Our database server, pliny, is down on its knees, the full text search on the English wiki is now permanently disabled, we have only a couple of active server administrators, and hardly enough developers to address problems in the software. I propose that 1) we do not start any new Wiki spin-off projects until our current resources have been substantially expanded; 2) we formalize a process for starting such projects, e.g. a planning period of at least 3 months on Meta with exact specifications as to what is to be placed there. After this period, users on the Meta wiki should vote on whether the new wiki should be set up or not. 3 months may seem long, but if interest can't be kept up that long, the idea may not be so great after all. Otherwise I see the danger that we'll end up with lots of nice ideas that all go nowhere, like the sep11.wikipedia.org (which IMHO should never have been set up in the first place). Regards, Erik _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l(a)wikipedia.org

I propose that 1) we do not start any new Wiki spin-off projects until our current resources have been substantially expanded; 2) we formalize a process for starting such projects, e.g. a planning period of at least 3 months on Meta with exact specifications as to what is to be placed there. After this period, users on the Meta wiki should vote on whether the new wiki should be set up or not. 3 months may seem long, but if interest can't be kept up that long, the idea may not be so great after all.

Otherwise I see the danger that we'll end up with lots of nice ideas that all go nowhere, like the sep11.wikipedia.org (which IMHO should never have been set up in the first place).