Peter Mackay wrote:
From: wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Alphax (Wikipedia email) Sent: Tuesday, 3 January 2006 00:09 To: English Wikipedia Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Ads on Wikipedia
Peter Mackay wrote:
From: wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces@Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Lisa Thurston
Why shouldn't the companies making money from the Wikipedia data at the microscale should be the primary funders of Wikipedia?
<snip>
If, as you say, some large companies derive a commercial
benefit from
WP and should fund us, then what is to stop them from downloading MediaWiki, hiring some professionals, and building their own encyclopaedia, perhaps as a joint effort with Google along with toolbars and popups and so on? That way, they'd get the
same benefits
as well as control over the operation and a more focused product.
There's one thing they wouldn't get - control of the community. Yes, WP is primarily an encyclopedia, but it wouldn't be /anything/ without its contributors.
Granted, but I'm quite sure that recruiting a few thousand ambitious know-it-alls isn't as big a task as you might imagine. In fact, I think Googleopedia or Wikiexpedia would merely have to open their doors and they would instantly get tens of thousands of enthusiastic contributors and media exposure that we can only dream about. Remember all that fuss when Gmail began and Gvites were being auctioned on eBay for sizable amounts?
So what can (insert name of commercial fork here) offer that WP can't? Will they pay their editors?