> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 13:05:07 +0100
> From: "Gerard Meijssen" <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Seeking clarification
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> <41a006820801230405r3e39055ft589fa3e99b98d6c0(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Hoi,
> I would turn it around, are the communities of the projects communicating
> with the WMF? I would argue that there is a gaggle of people all talking
> among each other making such a din that they are not heard over make so much
> noise that the WMF is not heard. I would also argue that it is for the
> people themselves to organise when and what they need, mindful of there
> being a foundation that will have to approve of what they come up with,
>
One. At least two board members were regular helpers and contributers to
Wikinews and to Wikipedia, and probably many other project. Both of
which do not participate in the community anymore, both who, as elected
board memberes, have basically ignored the needs and or requests of
those projects. Erik is the *founder* of Wikinews...but where is he?
Worried about Kaltura and Wikieducator and Encyclopedia of life.
> Wikipedia predates Wikinews. Wikipedia did news before Wiknews existed. Much
> of the relevance of Wikipedia is in their bringing background information to
> the news. If Wikinews cannot handle this, tough. If it means that Wikinews
> is a project that is a failure, tough. In the end it is a failure for the
> people who promoted the idea of Wikinews, however I think there is plenty of
> scope for Wikinews to hack it. But the Wikinewsies have to find their own
> way, their own niche. So please move on.
>
Again. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Wikinews is news. Wikipedia is not
the only WMF project and its them that needs to realize that, along with
the board/WMF, which they currently don't. It's not a matter of handling
it, its a matter of competition, which is NOT the goal of the WMF or
their projects. If anything, Wikinews should be granted a majority of
their news section...after all Wikipedia gets their own links throughout
WMF projects.
Wikinews is far from a failure. It IMHO is one of the most successful
Citizen Journalism site on the web. We have more OR Exclusive stories
than any CJ site and we also interviewed a head of state...something NO
other CJ site has come remotely close to doing. Not to mention the
handful of BIG stories WN broke. So to even incline that WN is a failure
is just 100% wrong.
Hard to move on, when the scope of WMF's *current* view is what's best
for only WP, WP, WP....I think it's time they move on, and remember they
have other projects.
> Again, it is YOU that has to make things work. At best the WMF provides you
> with a framework. It is you, the editor, the community that have to make
> things work. The WMF provides the hammer a nail, it is you that has to hit
> the nail on the head.
>
Then maybe the board and such should not get in the habit of making
policies or resolutions for projects, especially when that item does not
conform to the needs and goals of a project. Like the image resolution
for example. I think WN and other smaller projects have hit the nail on
the head, and have driven it into the wood...I just think those projects
are being neglected by their parents.
> In conclusion, I could not disagree with you more.
> Thanks,
> GerardM
>
Sometimes we have to agree to disagree.
Jason Safoutin (DragonFire1024)
