Hi Robert,
This becomes a bit confusing for me. I only posted on this list because Matthias pointed out the discussion that was going on this list. I do not at this moment see any reason to become an Wikimedia sister project. I don't even know what that means. What are the advantages? This also isn't really a project proposal.
WikiKids isn't an project in the "development hell". It is up and running. Maybe this was the wrong place to post a message. Again, I only posted here to explain what WikiKids is. There already is a small community around WikiKids in the Netherlands. And it's growing. Also with people from Belgium (Flanders).
Some closing remarks:
WikiKids is currently running on Wikia-server as a part of the Kennisnet-wiki's.
People involved with WikiKids are also very busy with life (mostly teachers and students) and also devote a great deal of time to WikiKids
We are not involved with WikiJunior in the Netherlands.
Thank you for explaining what you mean with "motivated leaders". Although I don't really understand what you mean with "owning an idea".
Gerard
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: foundation-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org]Namens Robert Horning
Verzonden: woensdag 30 mei 2007 4:35
Aan: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Onderwerp: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
Gerard Dummer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My name is Gerard Dummer and one of the people who started WikiKids.nl. WikiKids started as a project to write an encyclopedia for and by children.
> When we started with this project (janauary 2006) we had no idea what you could do with a wiki. And we didn't know if it would work. But we knew that we started a project that could have a great impact on education. That we could realize an authentic learning environment for children. Unlike any other project before to integrate ICT in education. To be precise: for children in the age of 8 - 13.
> Along the way we learned quite a lot of things. That is to say about the technical aspect as well as the educational aspects. This is a process that continues untill now and I believe will for the next few years.
> There are two main goals: 1)provide information for children to use in assigments 2) create a writing environment.
> This is a projected that is most of all an educational project. On the OnderwijsPortaal (EductionPortal) teacher can find different lessonplans, webquests, why they should use WikiKids in their classes and so on: http://kennisnet.wikia.com/wikikids/wiki/Portaal:Onderwijs
> This project differs from WikiJunior as mentioned by Mathias.
> @Robert. I have no experiences with other WikiMedia projects so I can't say anything about that. I very much believe that children can write articles for eachother. That doesn't mean that the articles are all perfect. But even an article that isn't finished is an opportunity for other children to rewrite that article to improve it. That is of course trying to use a weakness as a strength.
> I am very sorry to hear that there where any hostilities. I can't image that we would be hostile to any other Wikimediagroup. I hope this is a misunderstanding or that there is an other explanation.
> Also if you could tell something more about what you mean with a "motivated leader". What "next step" should be taken?
> @Matthias
> Anyone can contribute on WikiKids. Children, teens and adults. Just as long as the subjects are suitable. Just as on Vikidia teenagers also play an important role. Some are sysop.
> I agree also with that fact that children can write about a subject. But we also try to stimulate to write an article with a group of children or a class. Everyone can contribute that way.
>
> Gerard Dummer
> www.wikikids.nl
>
This mailing list, in addition to general business about the Wikimedia
Foundation, also tends to be a discussion forum for new project ideas.
This can take the form of both non-wiki as well as wiki-based projects,
and a major reason for this is due to the new projects page on the Meta
wiki requesting that individuals wishing to start new projects like this
contact this very list. I've been lurking (and occasionally adding my
$0.02 cents along the way) on this mailing list for more than two years,
and I've seen these proposals come and go. Some have been successful
and have produced their own independent communities, and a couple have
even become full Wikimedia sister projects. I've even been involved
with some of that effort on a few different levels.
What I'm talking about here with a "motivated leader" in regards to
actually starting a new Wikimedia sister project, as opposed to
advertising some wiki-based website that you are seeking some
cooperation, is that you can't "own" the idea yourself, no matter how
hard you try. There is a certain bureaucratic process that goes into
establishing a sister project, and I'm beginning to see a bit of wisdom
to that process as well. I should note that 95% (I think it is actually
worse than this) of all new project ideas are shot down or left in a
sort of "development hell" (to borrow a term from the motion picture
industry) where a couple of ideas keep recurring, but don't seem to take
off for some reason or another. A children's oriented encyclopedia
happens to be one of those recurring ideas, I should point out, and you
nor those you are working with are the first to come up with this idea.
I don't think you will be the last to bring it up in this forum either.
A small number of these projects actually get to the point that instead
of "waiting" for approval from the WMF, they simply go and start their
own independent wiki server. The disadvantage of this is that the
relationship with the other Wikimedia projects tends to be quite a bit
weaker, and many contributors don't see a relationship at all. The
advantages and disadvantages of becoming a Wikimedia sister project are
too numerous to mention in a short post, but I could write a multi page
paper on that from my experience at this point. Perhaps I should for an
upcoming Wikimania :)
To cut to the point, you have been trying to defend your project here on
this mailing list, and I'm still not entirely sure what it is that you
would like to see happen ultimately with this project proposal of yours
if everything went exactly as you would like it to happen. If your goal
here was merely to let people know that your project exists and that you
are recruiting individuals to help out, by itself that isn't a terrible
thing, but I would note that there are much more effective places and
means to "advertise" a non-foundation wiki than on this Foundation
mailing list. I've given some mild criticism, but at the same time this
is something that I too would like to developed further. I should also
note that nearly all of the "regular" people who post to this list are
usually *very* busy with life, and what free time they have it already
devoted to some Wikimedia project, whether as an administrator or key
user/community leader on one of the Wikimedia sister projects or with
some aspect of the Wikimedia Foundation. I would much more strongly
recommend that you post something on one of the Village Pump pages on
Wikipedia if this is your goal, and you will have much more success for
your effort.
The reason I bring up Wikijunior is because there are people who read
the discussion pages for Wikijunior that may have a bit more time on
their hands, looking for something more to do that is very similar in
nature to what they are already doing with Wikijunior. And posting a
message on those talk pages is not likely to be lost in the pages of
debate that sometimes rage on the Village Pump or other high volume
discussion forii. There are topics on the English Wikijunior talk page
that are over a year old.... and they do get read by new users all of
the time. The French Wikijunior talk page has only a couple of comments
on it, and the Dutch Wikijunior talk page is still blank. The Dutch
Wikibooks "Staff Lounge"
(http://nl.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikibooks:Lerarenkamer) does have some
modest discussion about Wikijunior, including some recent comments from
what I can see that the Wikimedia trademark "Wikijunior" in the form of
(http://www.wikijunior.nl) is currently redirecting to your project.
I'll leave that point alone for now, but that may be a minor problem
that perhaps should be corrected.
I hope that your site remains successful, and there certainly is a
learning curve to try and maintain a healthy wiki site.
Robert Horning
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I am not persuaded. WMF is not the creator of the content it has to
follow the rules of the GNU FDL as a license. There might be good
reasons to block live mirrors but that doesn't matter if blocking live
mirrors is something lika a DRM. And the GNU FDL forbidds DRM.
Klaus Graf
Just trying to get something straight.
Is this an official survey from the Foundation, or a survey from Erik
Möller as an individual?
(the introduction is absolutely not clear about this)
Thank you,
Delphine
On 5/31/07, Erik Moeller <erik(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> I'd like to invite you to participate in a survey about Wikimedia's
> brands, their uses, and possible changes to our brand strategy:
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_brand_survey
>
> Thank you.
>
> --
> Peace & Love,
> Erik
>
> DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
> the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
>
> "An old, rigid civilization is reluctantly dying. Something new, open,
> free and exciting is waking up." -- Ming the Mechanic
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
--
~notafish
NB. This address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails sent to
this address will probably get lost.
NB. Cette adresse est utilisée pour les listes de diffusion. Tout
email personnel envoyé à cette adresse sera probablement perdu.
Michael Bimmler wrote:
> Okay...wait.
> It is very bad style to use another emailaddress to circumvent
> moderation, whatever the content of your message is.
> This is not acceptable. You could have submitted the message with the
> old account and I would have approved it, as there is nothing
> objectionable in it.
> But using another emailadress to prevent this? No way.
I believe Anthony had agreed to use a different email address because
several people complained that his previous one was confusing. This
should probably be allowed. I don't know whether he was thinking about
the moderation of his messages, but if moderation is still deemed
appropriate, it should be easy enough to apply it to the new address and
treat the one-time circumvention as inadvertent.
--Michael Snow
Hi,
My name is Gerard Dummer and one of the people who started WikiKids.nl. WikiKids started as a project to write an encyclopedia for and by children.
When we started with this project (janauary 2006) we had no idea what you could do with a wiki. And we didn't know if it would work. But we knew that we started a project that could have a great impact on education. That we could realize an authentic learning environment for children. Unlike any other project before to integrate ICT in education. To be precise: for children in the age of 8 - 13.
Along the way we learned quite a lot of things. That is to say about the technical aspect as well as the educational aspects. This is a process that continues untill now and I believe will for the next few years.
There are two main goals: 1)provide information for children to use in assigments 2) create a writing environment.
This is a projected that is most of all an educational project. On the OnderwijsPortaal (EductionPortal) teacher can find different lessonplans, webquests, why they should use WikiKids in their classes and so on: http://kennisnet.wikia.com/wikikids/wiki/Portaal:Onderwijs
This project differs from WikiJunior as mentioned by Mathias.
@Robert. I have no experiences with other WikiMedia projects so I can't say anything about that. I very much believe that children can write articles for eachother. That doesn't mean that the articles are all perfect. But even an article that isn't finished is an opportunity for other children to rewrite that article to improve it. That is of course trying to use a weakness as a strength.
I am very sorry to hear that there where any hostilities. I can't image that we would be hostile to any other Wikimediagroup. I hope this is a misunderstanding or that there is an other explanation.
Also if you could tell something more about what you mean with a "motivated leader". What "next step" should be taken?
@Matthias
Anyone can contribute on WikiKids. Children, teens and adults. Just as long as the subjects are suitable. Just as on Vikidia teenagers also play an important role. Some are sysop.
I agree also with that fact that children can write about a subject. But we also try to stimulate to write an article with a group of children or a class. Everyone can contribute that way.
Gerard Dummer
www.wikikids.nl
I cannot see that blocking life mirrors is allowed by the GNU FDL:
"You may not use technical measures to obstruct or control the reading
or further copying of the copies you make or distribute."
Klaus Graf
Angela wrote
>
>Considering meta itself doesn't have a mailing list, and there is no
>meta equivalent to the English Wikipedia's unblock-en-l mailing list,
>I don't think bringing issues about meta to this list is actually a
>problem. If it is, then perhaps we need a new list - this one is
>rarely about the Foundation, but about anything which doesn't fit
>neatly into one of the project lists. I think a new Wikimedia projects
>list would be useful so that foundation-l could be kept only for
>foundation matters.
>
>Angela
>
>
>
I would agree a separate list for Meta issues would be a good idea,
especially to avoid ambiguity.
Alex (Majorly)
_________________________________________________________________
The next generation of Hotmail is here! http://www.newhotmail.co.uk
Please for the love of God STOP SENDING ME EMAILS!!!
On May 29, 2007, at 1:46 PM, foundation-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
wrote:
> Send foundation-l mailing list submissions to
> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> foundation-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> foundation-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of foundation-l digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Meta Ban (Alex Newman)
> 2. Re: Wikikids (Nicholas Moreau)
> 3. Re: Wikikids (Angela)
> 4. Re: Wikikids (teun spaans)
> 5. Re: Meta Ban (Azdiyy)
> 6. Re: Wikikids (Mathias)
> 7. Re: Wikikids (Samuel Klein)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 13:20:48 +0100
> From: "Alex Newman" <alex9891(a)hotmail.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Meta Ban
> To: foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Message-ID: <BAY119-F21F2A735C12BF8C0B022468B2F0(a)phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>
> Azdiyy wrote:
>> Hello,
>> Sorry if i'm in the wrong place, but i wonder what one can do if they
>> think their ban on meta is unjustified.
>>
>> trying to talk to the blocking admin by email or irc (and to others)
>> led nowhere.
>> m:user:Azdiyy was blocked indef on may 24 with no warning. if meta is
>> not suitable
>> for my postings i am willing to learn. but an indef ban is too
>> much imo.
>>
>> many thanks,
>> azdiyy
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>
> Guillom said to complain about users on the individual wiki, not
> Meta. Maybe
> your postings were not suitable for Meta (I haven't actually looked
> at all
> your edits, but your most recent ones on talk pages seem rather
> unsuitable
> to me.
>
> Alex (Majorly)
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> New, exclusive and FREE - Download Madonna's "Hey You" now!
> http://www.liveearth.msn.com
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 10:17:34 -0400
> From: "Nicholas Moreau" <nicholasmoreau(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
> To: foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Message-ID:
> <2540ad290705290717u3e8d6658o378f8bba60ccbd2c(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On this topic, I find it disappointing (at least in the footer and the
> "English explanation of WikiKids") that Kennisnet hasn't made the
> project's content available under a free license. On edit pages it
> notes:
>
> "GEBRUIK GEEN MATERIAAL DAT BESCHERMD WORDT DOOR AUTEURSRECHT, TENZIJ
> JE DAARTOE TOESTEMMING HEBT!"
>
> which means:
>
> "USE NO MATERIAL WHICH IS PROTECTED COPYRIGHT, UNLESS YOU HAVE TO THIS
> END AUTHORISATION!"
>
> But beyond shooing away plagiarism, there doesn't seem to be any
> obvious mention. They've even removed the default mention of the GNU
> FDL that appears by default on Wikia hosted wikis.
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 15:41:14 +0100
> From: Angela <beesley(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> <8b722b800705290741l46e9a095k4af5cecbe0fc43c4(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 5/29/07, Nicholas Moreau <nicholasmoreau(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> On this topic, I find it disappointing (at least in the footer and
>> the
>> "English explanation of WikiKids") that Kennisnet hasn't made the
>> project's content available under a free license. On edit pages it
>> notes:
>>
>> "GEBRUIK GEEN MATERIAAL DAT BESCHERMD WORDT DOOR AUTEURSRECHT, TENZIJ
>> JE DAARTOE TOESTEMMING HEBT!"
>
> This is just the default message in MediaWiki. You can see the same
> thing in the original version of the Dutch Wikipedia -
> http://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
> title=MediaWiki:Copyrightwarning&oldid=178550
>
>> But beyond shooing away plagiarism, there doesn't seem to be any
>> obvious mention. They've even removed the default mention of the GNU
>> FDL that appears by default on Wikia hosted wikis.
>
> The wiki is GFDL. The edit page links to
> http://kennisnet.wikia.com/wikikids/wiki/Wikikids:Auteursrechten which
> says that the text on Wikikids is released under the same licence as
> on Wikipedia, namely the GFDL.
>
> Angela
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 16:44:04 +0200
> From: "teun spaans" <teun.spaans(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> <8fb899d70705290744g577e2797p451de62dca21db72(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> This is just a warning that users should not use copyrighted
> material unless
> they have permission.
>
> It is a bit out of sight, but another page says:
> De teksten op Wikikids worden vrijgegeven onder dezelfde licentie
> als op
> Wikipedia <http://nl.wikipedia.org/>, namelijk de
> GFDL-licentie<http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html>
> The texts on wikikids are being made available under the same
> license as
> Wikipeda, that is the GFDL license.
>
> I wish you health and happiness,
> teun spaans
>
>
> On 5/29/07, Nicholas Moreau <nicholasmoreau(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On this topic, I find it disappointing (at least in the footer and
>> the
>> "English explanation of WikiKids") that Kennisnet hasn't made the
>> project's content available under a free license. On edit pages it
>> notes:
>>
>> "GEBRUIK GEEN MATERIAAL DAT BESCHERMD WORDT DOOR AUTEURSRECHT, TENZIJ
>> JE DAARTOE TOESTEMMING HEBT!"
>>
>> which means:
>>
>> "USE NO MATERIAL WHICH IS PROTECTED COPYRIGHT, UNLESS YOU HAVE TO
>> THIS
>> END AUTHORISATION!"
>>
>> But beyond shooing away plagiarism, there doesn't seem to be any
>> obvious mention. They've even removed the default mention of the GNU
>> FDL that appears by default on Wikia hosted wikis.
>>
>> Nick
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 16:25:48 +0100
> From: Azdiyy <azdiyy(a)googlemail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Meta Ban
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> <6af34c650705290825k5479f911n8ae92ca2339dc15e(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> if they're unsuitable, what about warning the 'offender' or a short
> ban?
> Azdiyy
>
> On 29/05/07, Alex Newman <alex9891(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> Azdiyy wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> Sorry if i'm in the wrong place, but i wonder what one can do if
>>> they
>>> think their ban on meta is unjustified.
>>>
>>> trying to talk to the blocking admin by email or irc (and to others)
>>> led nowhere.
>>> m:user:Azdiyy was blocked indef on may 24 with no warning. if
>>> meta is
>>> not suitable
>>> for my postings i am willing to learn. but an indef ban is too
>>> much imo.
>>>
>>> many thanks,
>>> azdiyy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Guillom said to complain about users on the individual wiki, not
>> Meta. Maybe
>> your postings were not suitable for Meta (I haven't actually
>> looked at all
>> your edits, but your most recent ones on talk pages seem rather
>> unsuitable
>> to me.
>>
>> Alex (Majorly)
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 19:19:42 +0200
> From: Mathias <mathias.damour(a)laposte.net>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <465C60AE.D7FA4210(a)laposte.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Hi,
>
> Robert Horning a ?crit :
>>
>> mathias.damour wrote:
>>> Another point is that Wikijunior "only" aims to produce and
>>> offer content for children whereas Wikikids.nl and Vikidia
>>> want children to be involved in building this content. We want
>>> to let them be active with knowledge for pedagogical interest.
>>> See this article : http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Writing-to-learn
>>
>> I have serious doubts about the ability of children to get
>> involved in
>> this process, other than to the extent that they already are involved
>> with Wikimedia projects. There are minors (including some that have
>> administrator access... as discussed in some earlier threads) who are
>> involved with Wikipedia content (and a few I suspected on
>> Wikibooks as
>> well), but these tend to be kids that are exceptionally
>> motivated. And
>> they participate on Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects as
>> peers to
>> everybody else who is a contributor, with no special distinction.
>> While
>> the idea of having kids write for kids sounds appealing on paper, a
>> bunch of 4th graders write like... well... a bunch of 4th
>> graders. They
>> are still trying to learn the basic mechanics of writing, and
>> ought to
>> be learning how to write from those who have already mastered the
>> skill,
>> not from those who are still apprentices in the subject. I
>> digress if
>> you think some contributors on Wikipedia don't know how to write, but
>> that more or less proves my point as well.
>
> It would be nice to have a feed-back from those who are involved in
> the
> Wikikids.nl project on this point.
> I would say a few things :
> - We choosed not to make special distinction related to age on
> Vikidia (no
> more than on Wikipedia). It is just asked that if you tell your age
> on your
> user page, you shouldn't cheat about it, just as you shouldn't
> cheat about
> your Diploma/academic degree on Wikipedia. (It's written in the
> disclaimer
> that a user could be blocked if he cheat about his age, but that you
> shouldn't assumed that it has been checked.)
> - 8-13 years is the readers target age. They are welcomed to edit, but
> adults so as - say - 13-18 years are welcomed too. We could guess that
> quite a lot of these (teenagers) could be willing to edit in a
> wiki, but
> don't feel able to do it on Wikipedia. They can be pleased to do it
> for
> younger people. That's what happen on Vikidia, where teenage
> editors are
> quite importants.
> - it seems that children are not able to write as much as older
> people,
> but they could do a quite good job on one subject. Anyway, it's a
> wiki so
> their articles are to be bettered by others (which can be formative
> to them).
> They can aslo get involved in maintenance task (internal links...)
> which
> make them become active readers rather than only content recipient.
> Participation of children is nevertheless something like a pillar for
> these wikis.
>
>> What I'm trying to point out is that those who are involved with
>> Wikijunior were not even contacted about this idea in the first place
>> when the idea was originally brought up on Meta, and suggestions
>> on Meta
>> to look at the Wikijunior project as perhaps something to work
>> with were
>> met with incredible hostility by those suggesting this Wikikids
>> project. This doesn't have to be an either-or situation, as I
>> believe
>> the sum is healthier than the individual parts alone.
>
> I'm not sure I understand well ; "This doesn't have to be an either-or
> situation" do you mean that they can be book for children AND
> adults on
> Wikibooks, or that they can be wikibooks AND an encyclopedia for
> children.
> That's what I would say.
>
>> I am presuming that you are writing about this because you want to
>> seek
>> input from the Wikimedia community, and would like to enlist
>> support for
>> those who might want to get involved with a project of this
>> nature. I'm
>> merely suggesting here that there are individuals who may want to
>> join
>> in this sort of project, and you should try to join with these
>> efforts.
>> There have been some attempts in the past to move Wikijunior to a
>> completely separate project and domain name, including forming
>> Wikijunior as a completely independent Wikimedia sister project.
>> One of
>> these proposals, and not rejected by the Wikijunior community, was to
>> move to a more Wikipedia-like format of articles rather than the
>> themed
>> collections organized into books such as currently exist on
>> Wikibooks.
>> Please ask those involved with the development of Wikijunior to at
>> least
>> comment on your ideas. For English Wikijunior, the best place is at
>> http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Talk:Wikijunior
>>
>> What all this concept is lacking is a very motivated leader who is
>> willing to take the next step and demonstrate that there is a large
>> concensus among those want to go this route. And unlike the problems
>> that existed with Wikiversity on Wikibooks, there is virtually nobody
>> who wants to see Wikijunior "kicked off" of Wikibooks. Wikijunior
>> enjoys a nearly independent existence without having to worry
>> about the
>> project overhead of maintaining a separate group of admins, and a
>> strongly symbiotic relationship exists as well between Wikibooks and
>> Wikijunior to bring new users and contributors to both projects. I
>> think that Wikijunior would struggle with a great many issues if
>> it had
>> an independent existence at the moment that it doesn't have to worry
>> about right now.
>
> I had a look to the wikijunior pages in english and french. On the
> english
> talk page, the topic on a separated website is about either a read-
> only
> website for safe reading for children, or a separate wikibooks. I can
> understand that if wikijunior should still aim to writes books,
> there is
> no determining utility to make a separate wiki for it.
> But the wikikids idea is quite different, since it has a "Wikipedia-
> like
> format" as you say, and for it aims to let children write on it.
>
> I don't know if wikijunior could (and would like) to move to that, and
> anyway "This doesn't have to be an either-or situation" ;-)
>
> Mathias Damour
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 13:49:11 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Samuel Klein <meta.sj(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0705291321090.25804(a)hera.hcs.harvard.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="x-unknown"
>
>
> There are a few issues here, which should perhaps be addressed by more
> than one project.
>
> 1) Simplifying language
>
> Finding a way to provide versions of articles targeted at different
> audiences -- different levels of jargon or language complexity --
> would
> be a valuable achievement. Our early effort with Simple-English
> remains
> a hack which needs improvement and localization.
>
> Examples: simple english, simple spanish
>
>
> 2) Writing for children
>
> There is a long tradition of providing children with books about the
> world, including drawings, games, and activities; with a shift in
> focus,
> layout, and tone from more general encyclopedias. At the same time, I
> believe that most full-length English encyclopedias have for
> decades been
> primarily marketed for home use by schoolchildren...
>
> Examples: Andrew Cates' SOS selection of Wikipedia
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Wikipedia_CD_Selection
> Wikijunior
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikijunior
>
>
> 3) Projects by and for children
>
> There is a need for space for younger authors to develop and share
> their
> own work. This may or may not be directly related to one of the above
> projects.
>
> Examples: Few. UNICEF's Voices of Youth project offers some space
> for
> this sort of collaboration among their young contributors.
>
>
> 4) Packaging things into books v. ongoing development of articles
>
> This has been a slightly confusing distinction since we started
> putting
> 'books' into digital form, breaking the traditions of bound and
> printed
> works one by one. There are useful distinctions b/t wikipedia and
> wikibooks, and likewise between a children's encyclopedia idea and
> wikijunior, but they are as much philosophical as unavoidable. This
> is especially true as books become more and more modular, and parts of
> books are used in multiple works.
>
>
> -----
>
> It would be good to start a discussion and collaboration including
> interested groups... and to seed a children's encyclopedia with
> some of
> the existing material that is in other formats.
>
> The advantage to 3) over the others is that projects whose primary
> audience can contribute directly to their development have an
> excellent
> model for sustained growth.
>
> SJ
>
>
> On Mon, 28 May 2007, mathias.damour wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Robert Horning wrote:
>>>
>>> Mathias wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Such a wiki has been launched in french (in which I am
>> involved) see an english explanation about it:
>> http://fr.vikidia.org/index.php/Vikidia:About and in Dutch
>> (see
>> http://kennisnet.wikia.com/wikikids/wiki/Wikikids:English_explanation
>> None of them are Wikimedia project.)
>>>> Both have a quite active community and have reached 1000
>> articles.
>>>
>>> (...)
>>> And Wikijunior is also quite multilingual, with some sort of
>>> Wikijunior project on nearly every language edition of
>> Wikibooks,
>>> including French, German, Italian, Spanish, Chinese, and
>> English. In
>>> many cases these "articles" or "modules" have been translated or
>>> rewritten in multiple languages as well, especially the original
>>> Wikijunior books of the Solar System and the Big Cats.
>>>
>>> And Wikijunior is clearly a Wikimedia project in its own
>> right, other
>>> than it is hosted concurrently with Wikibooks. Try
>>> http://en.wikijunior.org/ to see where the wikijunior domain
>> goes.
>>>
>>> This isn't to say that some effort shouldn't happen to
>> perhaps expand
>>> the range of this proposal, but it seems like the largest
>> problem it has
>>> faced is an ever fragmenting community and leaders who
>> havn't had the
>>> desire to keep the project moving. Writing literary content for
>>> children is not an easy task, and it takes a focused
>> community to keep
>>> the project growing.
>>
>> Wikijunior is clearly a wikibooks project. I mean that it is
>> not a Wikipedia-like project, and being hosted on the
>> wikibooks wiki makes impossible several feature of Wikipedia.
>> For example you can't make easy internal wikilinks : wikilink
>> to "Aluminum" is not [[Aluminum]] but [[Wikijunior The
>> Elements/Aluminum]]. The "oxygen" page:
>> http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikijunior_The_Elements/Oxygen
>> should only tell about the element, not the dioxygen gas. (it
>> does indeed, and doesn't make it clear between one and the
>> other) and it doesn't make it easy to create another page
>> about the gas, since this wikibooks is about the elements.
>>
>> Another point is that Wikijunior "only" aims to produce and
>> offer content for children whereas Wikikids.nl and Vikidia
>> want children to be involved in building this content. We want
>> to let them be active with knowledge for pedagogical interest.
>> See this article : http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Writing-to-learn
>>
>> I don't think that "fragmenting community and leaders" is a
>> real danger now that several Wikipedia have reached such a
>> huge size both in articles and in editors.
>>
>> Some people have had the idea to make either special articles
>> or a special wiki for children of each grade, or even for each
>> grade AND each school. (because you would have to explain in a
>> different way to a 9 years old child than to a 12 years old)
>> see this discusion:
>> http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Talk:Wikis_for_children) I feel that
>> it would be "fragmenting community" and that one single
>> encyclopedic wiki for 8 to 13 year old children and for one
>> language is a fair middle.
>>
>>
>>> As for the health of Wikijunior books, many of them have reached
>>> "featured book" status as some of the "best of..."
>> Wikibooks, and on
>>> en.wikbooks I would say that you could easily get much more
>> than 1000
>>> modules that could easily seed an en.wikikids project. Many
>> of these
>>> modules could on their own reach featured article status on
>>> en.wikipedia, but for the fact they are not on Wikipedia.
>> Rather than
>>> try to dissect what went wrong with the previous attempt at
>> an English
>>> language version of this project, I would suggest that you
>> try and see
>>> what has been done "right" by Wikijunior and its development
>> community.
>>> And certainly try to pool the efforts of this "Wikikids"
>> group and those
>>> who are writing "Wikijunior" content. I have not seen any
>> effort to
>>> recruit those involved with Wikijunior to help with this
>> proposal in any
>>> meaningful way.
>>
>> Do you tell about this attempt ?
>> http://editthis.info/wikikidsen/Main_Page I didn't look at it
>> closely, but I am afraid that it wasn't lead in a proper way.
>> Another think is that there is "simple english wikipedia",
>> whom no other equivalent have been created in any other
>> language. I guess that it would make less easy to create a
>> wikikids in english, as it would be partly similar to simple,
>> and I would also say that the fact that this wiki is not so
>> big and hasn't been created in other language may show that
>> its aim would not be so clear, mobilizing and justifying.
>>
>> The idea to seed from wikijunior could be good, so as the idea
>> to create such wiki on the Vikidia and Wikikids.nl model.
>> I can't say about Wikikids.nl, but if by chance they would be
>> some encyclopedic wikis dedicated to children to open in other
>> language, Vikidia (in french) would rather become a wikimedia
>> project and work on it together than see them created by
>> isolated groups in each language.
>>
>> Hope to hear from you,
>>
>> Mathias Damour
>>
>> Cr?ez votre adresse ?lectronique prenom.nom(a)laposte.net
>> 1 Go d'espace de stockage, anti-spam et anti-virus int?gr?s.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> End of foundation-l Digest, Vol 38, Issue 101
> *********************************************
Please for the love of God STOP SENDING ME EMAILS!!!
On May 29, 2007, at 1:46 PM, foundation-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
wrote:
> Send foundation-l mailing list submissions to
> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> foundation-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> foundation-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of foundation-l digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Meta Ban (Alex Newman)
> 2. Re: Wikikids (Nicholas Moreau)
> 3. Re: Wikikids (Angela)
> 4. Re: Wikikids (teun spaans)
> 5. Re: Meta Ban (Azdiyy)
> 6. Re: Wikikids (Mathias)
> 7. Re: Wikikids (Samuel Klein)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 13:20:48 +0100
> From: "Alex Newman" <alex9891(a)hotmail.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Meta Ban
> To: foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Message-ID: <BAY119-F21F2A735C12BF8C0B022468B2F0(a)phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>
> Azdiyy wrote:
>> Hello,
>> Sorry if i'm in the wrong place, but i wonder what one can do if they
>> think their ban on meta is unjustified.
>>
>> trying to talk to the blocking admin by email or irc (and to others)
>> led nowhere.
>> m:user:Azdiyy was blocked indef on may 24 with no warning. if meta is
>> not suitable
>> for my postings i am willing to learn. but an indef ban is too
>> much imo.
>>
>> many thanks,
>> azdiyy
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>
> Guillom said to complain about users on the individual wiki, not
> Meta. Maybe
> your postings were not suitable for Meta (I haven't actually looked
> at all
> your edits, but your most recent ones on talk pages seem rather
> unsuitable
> to me.
>
> Alex (Majorly)
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> New, exclusive and FREE - Download Madonna's "Hey You" now!
> http://www.liveearth.msn.com
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 10:17:34 -0400
> From: "Nicholas Moreau" <nicholasmoreau(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
> To: foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Message-ID:
> <2540ad290705290717u3e8d6658o378f8bba60ccbd2c(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On this topic, I find it disappointing (at least in the footer and the
> "English explanation of WikiKids") that Kennisnet hasn't made the
> project's content available under a free license. On edit pages it
> notes:
>
> "GEBRUIK GEEN MATERIAAL DAT BESCHERMD WORDT DOOR AUTEURSRECHT, TENZIJ
> JE DAARTOE TOESTEMMING HEBT!"
>
> which means:
>
> "USE NO MATERIAL WHICH IS PROTECTED COPYRIGHT, UNLESS YOU HAVE TO THIS
> END AUTHORISATION!"
>
> But beyond shooing away plagiarism, there doesn't seem to be any
> obvious mention. They've even removed the default mention of the GNU
> FDL that appears by default on Wikia hosted wikis.
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 15:41:14 +0100
> From: Angela <beesley(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> <8b722b800705290741l46e9a095k4af5cecbe0fc43c4(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 5/29/07, Nicholas Moreau <nicholasmoreau(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> On this topic, I find it disappointing (at least in the footer and
>> the
>> "English explanation of WikiKids") that Kennisnet hasn't made the
>> project's content available under a free license. On edit pages it
>> notes:
>>
>> "GEBRUIK GEEN MATERIAAL DAT BESCHERMD WORDT DOOR AUTEURSRECHT, TENZIJ
>> JE DAARTOE TOESTEMMING HEBT!"
>
> This is just the default message in MediaWiki. You can see the same
> thing in the original version of the Dutch Wikipedia -
> http://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
> title=MediaWiki:Copyrightwarning&oldid=178550
>
>> But beyond shooing away plagiarism, there doesn't seem to be any
>> obvious mention. They've even removed the default mention of the GNU
>> FDL that appears by default on Wikia hosted wikis.
>
> The wiki is GFDL. The edit page links to
> http://kennisnet.wikia.com/wikikids/wiki/Wikikids:Auteursrechten which
> says that the text on Wikikids is released under the same licence as
> on Wikipedia, namely the GFDL.
>
> Angela
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 16:44:04 +0200
> From: "teun spaans" <teun.spaans(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> <8fb899d70705290744g577e2797p451de62dca21db72(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> This is just a warning that users should not use copyrighted
> material unless
> they have permission.
>
> It is a bit out of sight, but another page says:
> De teksten op Wikikids worden vrijgegeven onder dezelfde licentie
> als op
> Wikipedia <http://nl.wikipedia.org/>, namelijk de
> GFDL-licentie<http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html>
> The texts on wikikids are being made available under the same
> license as
> Wikipeda, that is the GFDL license.
>
> I wish you health and happiness,
> teun spaans
>
>
> On 5/29/07, Nicholas Moreau <nicholasmoreau(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On this topic, I find it disappointing (at least in the footer and
>> the
>> "English explanation of WikiKids") that Kennisnet hasn't made the
>> project's content available under a free license. On edit pages it
>> notes:
>>
>> "GEBRUIK GEEN MATERIAAL DAT BESCHERMD WORDT DOOR AUTEURSRECHT, TENZIJ
>> JE DAARTOE TOESTEMMING HEBT!"
>>
>> which means:
>>
>> "USE NO MATERIAL WHICH IS PROTECTED COPYRIGHT, UNLESS YOU HAVE TO
>> THIS
>> END AUTHORISATION!"
>>
>> But beyond shooing away plagiarism, there doesn't seem to be any
>> obvious mention. They've even removed the default mention of the GNU
>> FDL that appears by default on Wikia hosted wikis.
>>
>> Nick
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 16:25:48 +0100
> From: Azdiyy <azdiyy(a)googlemail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Meta Ban
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> <6af34c650705290825k5479f911n8ae92ca2339dc15e(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> if they're unsuitable, what about warning the 'offender' or a short
> ban?
> Azdiyy
>
> On 29/05/07, Alex Newman <alex9891(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> Azdiyy wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> Sorry if i'm in the wrong place, but i wonder what one can do if
>>> they
>>> think their ban on meta is unjustified.
>>>
>>> trying to talk to the blocking admin by email or irc (and to others)
>>> led nowhere.
>>> m:user:Azdiyy was blocked indef on may 24 with no warning. if
>>> meta is
>>> not suitable
>>> for my postings i am willing to learn. but an indef ban is too
>>> much imo.
>>>
>>> many thanks,
>>> azdiyy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Guillom said to complain about users on the individual wiki, not
>> Meta. Maybe
>> your postings were not suitable for Meta (I haven't actually
>> looked at all
>> your edits, but your most recent ones on talk pages seem rather
>> unsuitable
>> to me.
>>
>> Alex (Majorly)
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 19:19:42 +0200
> From: Mathias <mathias.damour(a)laposte.net>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <465C60AE.D7FA4210(a)laposte.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Hi,
>
> Robert Horning a ?crit :
>>
>> mathias.damour wrote:
>>> Another point is that Wikijunior "only" aims to produce and
>>> offer content for children whereas Wikikids.nl and Vikidia
>>> want children to be involved in building this content. We want
>>> to let them be active with knowledge for pedagogical interest.
>>> See this article : http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Writing-to-learn
>>
>> I have serious doubts about the ability of children to get
>> involved in
>> this process, other than to the extent that they already are involved
>> with Wikimedia projects. There are minors (including some that have
>> administrator access... as discussed in some earlier threads) who are
>> involved with Wikipedia content (and a few I suspected on
>> Wikibooks as
>> well), but these tend to be kids that are exceptionally
>> motivated. And
>> they participate on Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects as
>> peers to
>> everybody else who is a contributor, with no special distinction.
>> While
>> the idea of having kids write for kids sounds appealing on paper, a
>> bunch of 4th graders write like... well... a bunch of 4th
>> graders. They
>> are still trying to learn the basic mechanics of writing, and
>> ought to
>> be learning how to write from those who have already mastered the
>> skill,
>> not from those who are still apprentices in the subject. I
>> digress if
>> you think some contributors on Wikipedia don't know how to write, but
>> that more or less proves my point as well.
>
> It would be nice to have a feed-back from those who are involved in
> the
> Wikikids.nl project on this point.
> I would say a few things :
> - We choosed not to make special distinction related to age on
> Vikidia (no
> more than on Wikipedia). It is just asked that if you tell your age
> on your
> user page, you shouldn't cheat about it, just as you shouldn't
> cheat about
> your Diploma/academic degree on Wikipedia. (It's written in the
> disclaimer
> that a user could be blocked if he cheat about his age, but that you
> shouldn't assumed that it has been checked.)
> - 8-13 years is the readers target age. They are welcomed to edit, but
> adults so as - say - 13-18 years are welcomed too. We could guess that
> quite a lot of these (teenagers) could be willing to edit in a
> wiki, but
> don't feel able to do it on Wikipedia. They can be pleased to do it
> for
> younger people. That's what happen on Vikidia, where teenage
> editors are
> quite importants.
> - it seems that children are not able to write as much as older
> people,
> but they could do a quite good job on one subject. Anyway, it's a
> wiki so
> their articles are to be bettered by others (which can be formative
> to them).
> They can aslo get involved in maintenance task (internal links...)
> which
> make them become active readers rather than only content recipient.
> Participation of children is nevertheless something like a pillar for
> these wikis.
>
>> What I'm trying to point out is that those who are involved with
>> Wikijunior were not even contacted about this idea in the first place
>> when the idea was originally brought up on Meta, and suggestions
>> on Meta
>> to look at the Wikijunior project as perhaps something to work
>> with were
>> met with incredible hostility by those suggesting this Wikikids
>> project. This doesn't have to be an either-or situation, as I
>> believe
>> the sum is healthier than the individual parts alone.
>
> I'm not sure I understand well ; "This doesn't have to be an either-or
> situation" do you mean that they can be book for children AND
> adults on
> Wikibooks, or that they can be wikibooks AND an encyclopedia for
> children.
> That's what I would say.
>
>> I am presuming that you are writing about this because you want to
>> seek
>> input from the Wikimedia community, and would like to enlist
>> support for
>> those who might want to get involved with a project of this
>> nature. I'm
>> merely suggesting here that there are individuals who may want to
>> join
>> in this sort of project, and you should try to join with these
>> efforts.
>> There have been some attempts in the past to move Wikijunior to a
>> completely separate project and domain name, including forming
>> Wikijunior as a completely independent Wikimedia sister project.
>> One of
>> these proposals, and not rejected by the Wikijunior community, was to
>> move to a more Wikipedia-like format of articles rather than the
>> themed
>> collections organized into books such as currently exist on
>> Wikibooks.
>> Please ask those involved with the development of Wikijunior to at
>> least
>> comment on your ideas. For English Wikijunior, the best place is at
>> http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Talk:Wikijunior
>>
>> What all this concept is lacking is a very motivated leader who is
>> willing to take the next step and demonstrate that there is a large
>> concensus among those want to go this route. And unlike the problems
>> that existed with Wikiversity on Wikibooks, there is virtually nobody
>> who wants to see Wikijunior "kicked off" of Wikibooks. Wikijunior
>> enjoys a nearly independent existence without having to worry
>> about the
>> project overhead of maintaining a separate group of admins, and a
>> strongly symbiotic relationship exists as well between Wikibooks and
>> Wikijunior to bring new users and contributors to both projects. I
>> think that Wikijunior would struggle with a great many issues if
>> it had
>> an independent existence at the moment that it doesn't have to worry
>> about right now.
>
> I had a look to the wikijunior pages in english and french. On the
> english
> talk page, the topic on a separated website is about either a read-
> only
> website for safe reading for children, or a separate wikibooks. I can
> understand that if wikijunior should still aim to writes books,
> there is
> no determining utility to make a separate wiki for it.
> But the wikikids idea is quite different, since it has a "Wikipedia-
> like
> format" as you say, and for it aims to let children write on it.
>
> I don't know if wikijunior could (and would like) to move to that, and
> anyway "This doesn't have to be an either-or situation" ;-)
>
> Mathias Damour
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 13:49:11 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Samuel Klein <meta.sj(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0705291321090.25804(a)hera.hcs.harvard.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="x-unknown"
>
>
> There are a few issues here, which should perhaps be addressed by more
> than one project.
>
> 1) Simplifying language
>
> Finding a way to provide versions of articles targeted at different
> audiences -- different levels of jargon or language complexity --
> would
> be a valuable achievement. Our early effort with Simple-English
> remains
> a hack which needs improvement and localization.
>
> Examples: simple english, simple spanish
>
>
> 2) Writing for children
>
> There is a long tradition of providing children with books about the
> world, including drawings, games, and activities; with a shift in
> focus,
> layout, and tone from more general encyclopedias. At the same time, I
> believe that most full-length English encyclopedias have for
> decades been
> primarily marketed for home use by schoolchildren...
>
> Examples: Andrew Cates' SOS selection of Wikipedia
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Wikipedia_CD_Selection
> Wikijunior
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikijunior
>
>
> 3) Projects by and for children
>
> There is a need for space for younger authors to develop and share
> their
> own work. This may or may not be directly related to one of the above
> projects.
>
> Examples: Few. UNICEF's Voices of Youth project offers some space
> for
> this sort of collaboration among their young contributors.
>
>
> 4) Packaging things into books v. ongoing development of articles
>
> This has been a slightly confusing distinction since we started
> putting
> 'books' into digital form, breaking the traditions of bound and
> printed
> works one by one. There are useful distinctions b/t wikipedia and
> wikibooks, and likewise between a children's encyclopedia idea and
> wikijunior, but they are as much philosophical as unavoidable. This
> is especially true as books become more and more modular, and parts of
> books are used in multiple works.
>
>
> -----
>
> It would be good to start a discussion and collaboration including
> interested groups... and to seed a children's encyclopedia with
> some of
> the existing material that is in other formats.
>
> The advantage to 3) over the others is that projects whose primary
> audience can contribute directly to their development have an
> excellent
> model for sustained growth.
>
> SJ
>
>
> On Mon, 28 May 2007, mathias.damour wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Robert Horning wrote:
>>>
>>> Mathias wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Such a wiki has been launched in french (in which I am
>> involved) see an english explanation about it:
>> http://fr.vikidia.org/index.php/Vikidia:About and in Dutch
>> (see
>> http://kennisnet.wikia.com/wikikids/wiki/Wikikids:English_explanation
>> None of them are Wikimedia project.)
>>>> Both have a quite active community and have reached 1000
>> articles.
>>>
>>> (...)
>>> And Wikijunior is also quite multilingual, with some sort of
>>> Wikijunior project on nearly every language edition of
>> Wikibooks,
>>> including French, German, Italian, Spanish, Chinese, and
>> English. In
>>> many cases these "articles" or "modules" have been translated or
>>> rewritten in multiple languages as well, especially the original
>>> Wikijunior books of the Solar System and the Big Cats.
>>>
>>> And Wikijunior is clearly a Wikimedia project in its own
>> right, other
>>> than it is hosted concurrently with Wikibooks. Try
>>> http://en.wikijunior.org/ to see where the wikijunior domain
>> goes.
>>>
>>> This isn't to say that some effort shouldn't happen to
>> perhaps expand
>>> the range of this proposal, but it seems like the largest
>> problem it has
>>> faced is an ever fragmenting community and leaders who
>> havn't had the
>>> desire to keep the project moving. Writing literary content for
>>> children is not an easy task, and it takes a focused
>> community to keep
>>> the project growing.
>>
>> Wikijunior is clearly a wikibooks project. I mean that it is
>> not a Wikipedia-like project, and being hosted on the
>> wikibooks wiki makes impossible several feature of Wikipedia.
>> For example you can't make easy internal wikilinks : wikilink
>> to "Aluminum" is not [[Aluminum]] but [[Wikijunior The
>> Elements/Aluminum]]. The "oxygen" page:
>> http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikijunior_The_Elements/Oxygen
>> should only tell about the element, not the dioxygen gas. (it
>> does indeed, and doesn't make it clear between one and the
>> other) and it doesn't make it easy to create another page
>> about the gas, since this wikibooks is about the elements.
>>
>> Another point is that Wikijunior "only" aims to produce and
>> offer content for children whereas Wikikids.nl and Vikidia
>> want children to be involved in building this content. We want
>> to let them be active with knowledge for pedagogical interest.
>> See this article : http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Writing-to-learn
>>
>> I don't think that "fragmenting community and leaders" is a
>> real danger now that several Wikipedia have reached such a
>> huge size both in articles and in editors.
>>
>> Some people have had the idea to make either special articles
>> or a special wiki for children of each grade, or even for each
>> grade AND each school. (because you would have to explain in a
>> different way to a 9 years old child than to a 12 years old)
>> see this discusion:
>> http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Talk:Wikis_for_children) I feel that
>> it would be "fragmenting community" and that one single
>> encyclopedic wiki for 8 to 13 year old children and for one
>> language is a fair middle.
>>
>>
>>> As for the health of Wikijunior books, many of them have reached
>>> "featured book" status as some of the "best of..."
>> Wikibooks, and on
>>> en.wikbooks I would say that you could easily get much more
>> than 1000
>>> modules that could easily seed an en.wikikids project. Many
>> of these
>>> modules could on their own reach featured article status on
>>> en.wikipedia, but for the fact they are not on Wikipedia.
>> Rather than
>>> try to dissect what went wrong with the previous attempt at
>> an English
>>> language version of this project, I would suggest that you
>> try and see
>>> what has been done "right" by Wikijunior and its development
>> community.
>>> And certainly try to pool the efforts of this "Wikikids"
>> group and those
>>> who are writing "Wikijunior" content. I have not seen any
>> effort to
>>> recruit those involved with Wikijunior to help with this
>> proposal in any
>>> meaningful way.
>>
>> Do you tell about this attempt ?
>> http://editthis.info/wikikidsen/Main_Page I didn't look at it
>> closely, but I am afraid that it wasn't lead in a proper way.
>> Another think is that there is "simple english wikipedia",
>> whom no other equivalent have been created in any other
>> language. I guess that it would make less easy to create a
>> wikikids in english, as it would be partly similar to simple,
>> and I would also say that the fact that this wiki is not so
>> big and hasn't been created in other language may show that
>> its aim would not be so clear, mobilizing and justifying.
>>
>> The idea to seed from wikijunior could be good, so as the idea
>> to create such wiki on the Vikidia and Wikikids.nl model.
>> I can't say about Wikikids.nl, but if by chance they would be
>> some encyclopedic wikis dedicated to children to open in other
>> language, Vikidia (in french) would rather become a wikimedia
>> project and work on it together than see them created by
>> isolated groups in each language.
>>
>> Hope to hear from you,
>>
>> Mathias Damour
>>
>> Cr?ez votre adresse ?lectronique prenom.nom(a)laposte.net
>> 1 Go d'espace de stockage, anti-spam et anti-virus int?gr?s.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> End of foundation-l Digest, Vol 38, Issue 101
> *********************************************
Hi,
Robert Horning wrote:
>
> Mathias wrote:
> >
> > Such a wiki has been launched in french (in which I am
involved) see an english explanation about it:
http://fr.vikidia.org/index.php/Vikidia:About and in Dutch
(see
http://kennisnet.wikia.com/wikikids/wiki/Wikikids:English_explanation
None of them are Wikimedia project.)
> > Both have a quite active community and have reached 1000
articles.
>
> (...)
> And Wikijunior is also quite multilingual, with some sort of
> Wikijunior project on nearly every language edition of
Wikibooks,
> including French, German, Italian, Spanish, Chinese, and
English. In
> many cases these "articles" or "modules" have been translated or
> rewritten in multiple languages as well, especially the original
> Wikijunior books of the Solar System and the Big Cats.
>
> And Wikijunior is clearly a Wikimedia project in its own
right, other
> than it is hosted concurrently with Wikibooks. Try
> http://en.wikijunior.org/ to see where the wikijunior domain
goes.
>
> This isn't to say that some effort shouldn't happen to
perhaps expand
> the range of this proposal, but it seems like the largest
problem it has
> faced is an ever fragmenting community and leaders who
havn't had the
> desire to keep the project moving. Writing literary content for
> children is not an easy task, and it takes a focused
community to keep
> the project growing.
Wikijunior is clearly a wikibooks project. I mean that it is
not a Wikipedia-like project, and being hosted on the
wikibooks wiki makes impossible several feature of Wikipedia.
For example you can't make easy internal wikilinks : wikilink
to "Aluminum" is not [[Aluminum]] but [[Wikijunior The
Elements/Aluminum]]. The "oxygen" page:
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikijunior_The_Elements/Oxygen
should only tell about the element, not the dioxygen gas. (it
does indeed, and doesn't make it clear between one and the
other) and it doesn't make it easy to create another page
about the gas, since this wikibooks is about the elements.
Another point is that Wikijunior "only" aims to produce and
offer content for children whereas Wikikids.nl and Vikidia
want children to be involved in building this content. We want
to let them be active with knowledge for pedagogical interest.
See this article : http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Writing-to-learn
I don't think that "fragmenting community and leaders" is a
real danger now that several Wikipedia have reached such a
huge size both in articles and in editors.
Some people have had the idea to make either special articles
or a special wiki for children of each grade, or even for each
grade AND each school. (because you would have to explain in a
different way to a 9 years old child than to a 12 years old)
see this discusion:
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Talk:Wikis_for_children) I feel that
it would be "fragmenting community" and that one single
encyclopedic wiki for 8 to 13 year old children and for one
language is a fair middle.
> As for the health of Wikijunior books, many of them have reached
> "featured book" status as some of the "best of..."
Wikibooks, and on
> en.wikbooks I would say that you could easily get much more
than 1000
> modules that could easily seed an en.wikikids project. Many
of these
> modules could on their own reach featured article status on
> en.wikipedia, but for the fact they are not on Wikipedia.
Rather than
> try to dissect what went wrong with the previous attempt at
an English
> language version of this project, I would suggest that you
try and see
> what has been done "right" by Wikijunior and its development
community.
> And certainly try to pool the efforts of this "Wikikids"
group and those
> who are writing "Wikijunior" content. I have not seen any
effort to
> recruit those involved with Wikijunior to help with this
proposal in any
> meaningful way.
Do you tell about this attempt ?
http://editthis.info/wikikidsen/Main_Page I didn't look at it
closely, but I am afraid that it wasn't lead in a proper way.
Another think is that there is "simple english wikipedia",
whom no other equivalent have been created in any other
language. I guess that it would make less easy to create a
wikikids in english, as it would be partly similar to simple,
and I would also say that the fact that this wiki is not so
big and hasn't been created in other language may show that
its aim would not be so clear, mobilizing and justifying.
The idea to seed from wikijunior could be good, so as the idea
to create such wiki on the Vikidia and Wikikids.nl model.
I can't say about Wikikids.nl, but if by chance they would be
some encyclopedic wikis dedicated to children to open in other
language, Vikidia (in french) would rather become a wikimedia
project and work on it together than see them created by
isolated groups in each language.
Hope to hear from you,
Mathias Damour
Créez votre adresse électronique prenom.nom(a)laposte.net
1 Go d'espace de stockage, anti-spam et anti-virus intégrés.