Yes, one of its uses will be as a database to be mined as an historical record, but I cannot see why you say that it is the only one. The actual use and readership of WP pages is very high. There seem to be some hundred millions or so people right now who find it useful; I want them to find it more useful yet.
Most of the subjects I work on are well-recorded elsewhere in much more professional sources, but where there is little of high quality available for the non-academic reader. We don't need WP as an archive in science or history or philosophy. There are really good sources out there. But we do need a easy-to-use and to understand source for the general reader, a free one, universally accessible. That';s the part I care most about. It wont interfere with your purpose. But making it into a low quality vacuum cleaner will detract from its overall reliability. There are other projects for an internet archive.
Of course we should cover popular culture thoroughly. In a quality-filtered version. I am one of those supported good plot summaries. Not long rambling pseudo-transcripts of the script. Not one sentence teaser is a long list. Good well-written episode descriptions in two or three clear paragraphs telling someone who isnt going to see the show what has happened there so they know about it. Good articles about major and recurring minor characters that summarize their role from a different aspect. Good articles about the use of major themes in major creative works--even they are primarily a list. This is the sort of material not available otherwise on the internet as well. And we need it for now, when people want to use it, as well as for later, when they also will.
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 2:01 AM, Bryan Derksen bryan.derksen@shaw.ca wrote:
David Goodman wrote:
Of course we have a responsibility to the web. we are writing an encyclopedia for use.
No, not quite. The Wikipedia that you see on the web is not our product, that's our working area. It's there first and foremost for editors. The fact that general readers also find it useful is a happy coincidence since that's how we draw most of our new editors in.
The product of Wikipedia is our database. If all we cared about was publishing an online encyclopedia we wouldn't need the GFDL or other open licence, we wouldn't need to worry about keeping the licensing consistent and compatible, we could just say "by posting your work here you're granting us the right to display it on Wikimedia" or somesuch. There are already tons of other user-generated sites out there with similar ad-hoc licensing that don't care about ease of reuse.
No, our most important target audience for re-use are people and organizations like those found on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mirrors_and_forks, or anyone else who wishes to build something out of the resource we make available, big or small. Some day Wikipedia-the-project will be defunct (or evolve into something completely different) and the database will be what we leave behind for our successors to pick up and use or work with.
Label and categorize things, sure. Many mirrors and forks will likely be interested only in a subset of our content and this sort of labeling will allow them to cull that out more easily. But it makes no sense to cull out cull out topics for them ahead of time because we don't know what they'll be interested in. Maybe someone down the road will want to make the Encyclopedia Pokemonia, or set up a competitor for IMDB that focuses on TV shows, or whatever, and they could have used Wikipedia's articles for that.
The web context we work in is aware of other browsers and other web services. We arent making a new system from scratch, we work in that environment, and we need to pay attention to how we are used and we need to have respect for those who depend upon us. No large information system on the web can operate in isolation from google.
Sure it can. If Google were to decide tomorrow to exclude Wikipedia from their search results entirely we wouldn't close shop and shut down.
I personally don't use Google very much any more for searching for general information, I have a Wikipedia search installed in my browser's search bar to go there directly. IIRC Firefox 3 is going to be distributed with Wikipedia as one of the default searches pre-installed. Not to mention the traffic we get from direct links people post on their own external web sites, and from the other various search engines still out there. Google's handy but we don't really need it.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l