I guess I don't understand why Wikipedians would care about this, apart from preening.
Am I missing something?
Will being in the top ten help us to write a better encyclopedia in some way that being in the top 100 doesn't?
On 1/6/07, Daniel P. B. Smith wikipedia2006@dpbsmith.com wrote:
I guess I don't understand why Wikipedians would care about this, apart from preening.
Am I missing something?
Will being in the top ten help us to write a better encyclopedia in some way that being in the top 100 doesn't?
It suggests that people are *using* the encyclopedia that we are writing. I think that is a Good Thing, as well as a remember of the responsibilities we have.
Newyorkbrad
On Jan 6, 2007, at 15:46, Daniel P. B. Smith wrote:
I guess I don't understand why Wikipedians would care about this, apart from preening.
Am I missing something?
Will being in the top ten help us to write a better encyclopedia in some way that being in the top 100 doesn't?
Being popular shows that we're useful to a good number of people, which indicates that we are doing a good job. Other than that... I have no idea. --keitei
On 1/6/07, Keitei nihthraefn@gmail.com wrote:
On Jan 6, 2007, at 15:46, Daniel P. B. Smith wrote:
I guess I don't understand why Wikipedians would care about this, apart from preening.
Am I missing something?
Will being in the top ten help us to write a better encyclopedia in some way that being in the top 100 doesn't?
Being popular shows that we're useful to a good number of people, which indicates that we are doing a good job. Other than that... I have no idea.
"Yay, we're a success...."
"Oh, Crap, we're a success..."
(everyone who suffered personally and professionally from the dot-com boom's insane ramp-up, take a drink)
On 1/6/07, Daniel P. B. Smith wikipedia2006@dpbsmith.com wrote:
I guess I don't understand why Wikipedians would care about this, apart from preening.
Am I missing something?
Will being in the top ten help us to write a better encyclopedia in some way that being in the top 100 doesn't?
W:Hi archive/goverment/charity X we would like to work with you X:What are you? W:A website X:Get lost W:we are in the top ten on the web X:hold on a sec
Well that is the theory in any case.
Daniel P. B. Smith wrote:
I guess I don't understand why Wikipedians would care about this, apart from preening.
Am I missing something?
Will being in the top ten help us to write a better encyclopedia in some way that being in the top 100 doesn't?
More readers => more writers to share the work, better coverage of niche subjects.
More readers => more influence to get bigger things done.
More readers => more mindshare for the free culture movement => more similar projects.
-- Neil
On 1/7/07, Neil Harris neil@tonal.clara.co.uk wrote:
Daniel P. B. Smith wrote:
I guess I don't understand why Wikipedians would care about this, apart from preening.
Am I missing something?
Will being in the top ten help us to write a better encyclopedia in some way that being in the top 100 doesn't?
More readers => more writers to share the work, better coverage of niche subjects.
More readers => more influence to get bigger things done.
More readers => more mindshare for the free culture movement => more similar projects.
-- Neil
Yeah, that, but there is also nothing wrong about being proud of your work. We're in the top 10! We rule! Isn't that a great feeling?