<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
Daniel Mayer wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid20040524180552.528901158194@mail.wikimedia.org">
<pre wrap="">--- Joel Konkle-Parker <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jjk3@msstate.edu"><jjk3@msstate.edu></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Quoting Daniel Mayer <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:maveric149@yahoo.com"><maveric149@yahoo.com></a>:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I've already proposed that at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimorial">http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimorial</a> .
The idea is to simply expand the focus of the the Sep11wiki (which is a rather lonely place).
The only major stumbling block was the name - some people didn't like 'Wikimorial'. Other ideas were:
*Wikimedia Memorial (generic and boring, IMO),
*Wikipeople (I liked this one so I bought the domain names),
*Wikifamily (another one I liked - although in the U.S. right-wing
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Christian
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">fundamentalists have co-opted the word "family").
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Well, I guess I missed that one. It sounds like our end goal is the same, but for different reasons. Your description and name (Wikimorial) implies a memorial/obituary/mourning project, more than a living global genealogy. But perhaps this is not the case?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->It would be both. There would be individual pages on individual people and there also would be memorial pages that list people who died in some
disaster/military assault/terrorist act/industrial accident/whatever. The
"memorial"-type names were just an emphasis on that aspect.
I would also like to see actual family trees constructed on family name pages. There is a wiki syntax to do this that is being developed.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">What I had in mind was a living genealogy reference, not so much
memorializing the past, but serving as a reference guide to those curious about their ancestors. This goal wouldn't require a ban on content for the living, either (I'd be interested in looking up my uncle and seeing "So-and-so is a consultant for Whatchamathingy Inc.).
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->I fear that having pages on the living would cause the creation of vanity pages and the use of Wikimedia resources for personal webpages. At least at first, I would like to ban any articles about any person still living.</pre>
</blockquote>
I can see why misuse of this project to host personal vanity webpages
would be a concern, but I think there may be better ways to discourage
that. I don't see a good reason to ban articles about the living,
especially since it's probably easier to get information about a person
while they're still alive.<br>
<br>
Instead, if the project is oriented toward genealogy rather than
encyclopedic biography, it could be designed to focus on certain
categories of information. "Family trees" all have something in common
in terms of format, and most genealogical data is directed towards
things like dates and places for major life events. A genealogy project
might have more in common with Wiktionary than Wikipedia, in the sense
that entries are more restricted in the types of information that are
presented. An article might allow for dates and places of birth, death,
marriage, etc., cause of death, names of parents and siblings, and
other appropriate information, the same way that a Wiktionary article
would consist primarily of spelling, pronunciation, part of speech,
definition, etymology, usage, etc. If the purpose of the project is
clear, we can set boundaries that prevent people from using it as a
vehicle for a blog, or whatever else it is we don't want them doing
with it.<br>
<br>
--Michael Snow<br>
</body>
</html>