Hey Gnagarra,
(changing topics here as we're going on a tangent) in an attempt to avoid/limit additional work for organizers that are totally worn out at the end of a cycle: - What would be your intended use for such document/journal? - What would be the intended readership - Would you imagine volunteering to organize such journal, even if you're not on the organizing team? After all, anyone could collect such information together.
Best, Lodewijk
2016-10-22 12:06 GMT+02:00 Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com:
It would be nice to see past events wrapped up into one journal covering all aspects from original discussion until the final reporting of the event including financials, attendee reports and media reports at the moment everything is spread across chapter, foundation, event pages which means lessons, pitfalls, successes, the work involved over time arent where people can find easily
On 22 October 2016 at 17:56, rupert THURNER rupert.thurner@gmail.com wrote:
the points lodewijk mentioned with styles, and independent user groups working on it are quite valid points imo. additionally the purpose of a wiki is to collaborate on a purpose. if the purpose is gone, no wiki software is necessary. following that logic, one could argue to dump a past wikimania wiki into a static html page is best. search could be done via standard web search. if the wikis are not disturbing one could let them just sit where they are.
rupert
On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:
The discussion has now been moved to https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia_Forum#Wikimania_wikis apparently, where it will probably also get archived not too distant in the future. I hope someone will post a link here to that archive page.
Lodewijk
2016-10-22 11:07 GMT+02:00 Rehman Abubakr rehman.wikimedia@live.com:
(cross-posting to Wikimania-l and Wikimedia-l)
Hi,
As earlier discussions on this topic received relatively little response from the community, I'm sending this email to let you know about the new topic posted at https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Meta:Babel#Wikimania_wikis, with regards to having a single unified Wikimania wiki.
I have copied the original post below for ease of reading. Please post your comments on the meta page.
Hi. I was looking at Special:SiteMatrix https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:SiteMatrix and couldn't help noticing the whopping 14 separate wikis (and growing) for all the different Wikimanias, including a separate wiki for a "Wikimania team". Is there any current plans of a more sustainable or streamlined approach to running these wikis?
I am aware that this has been discussed a few times before, but no significant effort was put into it. Wikimania project domain https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_project_domain is the most significant discussion which I could find, but participation was quite low on that, with no(?) WMF staff comments.
From what I understand from the above linked discussion, some key points against a unified Wikimania wiki was that:
- We will not be able to preserve old Wikimania wikis as a "time
capsule" 2. Older Wikimania organizers may face new organizers "steamrolling" over their pages 3. Organizers will not have complete control over the site as old admins might interrupt for whatever reasons. (or vice versa)
My though for these points was:
- Why not have each Wikimania project branch their pages as
wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/2016/Main page, or alternatively, have separate namespaces for each project (i.e. 2016:, 2017:, etc). We could then protect all pages under a project (i.e. 2016/ or 2016:) once a project is over. 2. This could be avoided by protection, as stated above. 3. Make it much less complicated. Once the project is over, all previous admin rights will be revoked, and the new organizers will get the rights. New admins can be advise to not modify previous project namespaces, or if better, if we can block previous projects' namespaces from editing? Furthermore, there could be a bot logging all changes made to old project namespaces, for transparency.
Is there any other views on this? Did I miss something obvious? Looking forward to your comments. Cheers, Rehman.
Thanks and regards,
User:Rehman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rehman
Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
-- GN. President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l