Thanks for the review.
On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 11:34 PM, Thehelpfulone thehelpfulonewiki@gmail.com wrote:
Wikitravel already seems to have some guidelines for this, http://wikitravel.org/en/Wikitravel:Be_fair as an example.
Yes, this seems like a decent starting point.
Wikitravel again has a policy for this, http://wikitravel.org/en/Wikitravel:Don%27t_tout, but we could consider putting some Abuse Filters or similar in place to help alleviate issues with this.
I agree -- and this is a problem that has been getting worse recently on all of our wikis. I don't know how to deal with it beyond a stronger emphasis on good anti-spam extensions, and helping people in those areas work better together.
I am happy to endorse the proposal. I also note that if this proposal is approved by the Board, I am happy to volunteer with any of the administrative work including setting up the wiki, adding interwiki links in various places, reading over policies etc as I'm sure many of the other members of our community will be.
That's good to hear. A number of other commentors like Guaka who have set up their own travel-related sites have said the same. Which is a good sign beyond general willingness to edit.
On sending out a message to get wider feedback:
Yes, that would be a good precedent to set. It can be a very easy-to-translate message. We should try to get the intro paragraph of the proposal translated into major langs as well. Maybe we can wait a few days for initial translations and allow other translations to be sent out as they are done?
I know we're running a bit behind for this, but did you still want to get a message up and sent? It would be cutting it quite close but it might be an idea to see if there is any opposition from anyone, although I take into account that Village Pumps and/or Community Portals might not be as effective as we would like them to be for this purpose.
Yes, we should do it. I think this should be a requirement before projects go live.
As long as this process is underway by Wikimania, it will alert attendees that this is happening -- there is already a meeting planned of current supporters, but this could make even better use of that time if any hard questions are raised in the next week. The Board can then weigh the input so far, and make a decision such as "if this gains community approval in a site-noticed RfC, we support making it a new sister project".
SJ