> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 00:36:14 +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:
> <41a006820801221536k4cd7ba9ble15b4f9ea45a32c(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Hoi,
> Consider please what the WMF is, it is the organisation that makes our
> projects possible. It does the hosting, it provides the framework that
> allows our projects, our communities to thrive. It is however the projects,
> the communities that make a project work or not. It is not for the
> foundation to make a project work.
No, but the foundation should assist and communicate with all WMF
projects, which it does not.
> When a wiki failed we killed them. When a
> particular project does not have what it takes or its function is replaced
> elsewhere, it is for its community to go on or go elsewhere. When Wikipedia
> does better at news then Wikinews, it is for Wikinews to find its niche.
> News and particularly background information to news has been shown one of
> Wikipedias strong points. Asking Wikipedia not to do this is plain not
> realistic. Cooperation between these projects may be realistic but it is not
> assured.
>
It is realistic. Plain and simple: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. If you
want news on an encyclopedis, change it to "Wikipedia and news". Until
thin, this creates a competition between Wikinews and Wikipedia, *not*
collaboration.
> When you indicate that the WMF has to help projects, I disagree. Projects
> help themselves, the WMF may and can facilitate. It can do a lot of
> networking for the projects but it is the projects and their communities
> that will have to do the work. It is people that *do *that make the
> difference. When a particular project does a different or a better job,
> inside or outside the WMF framework, people will find it, recognise this.
> The most important thing the WMF can do is facilitate, make sure that
> connections between like minded projects exist. Help in mashing the data
> that exists in so many places and make it gell together. Because THIS is
> what the WMF is there for; providing people with information, not to save
> projects at any cost.
>
Makes no difference if the foundation/board pays no attention to it
projects, outside of Wikipedia. The foundation should help their
projects, meet their *needs* whenever possible, not ignore them. I never
said WMF has to save a project, but they should protect it them.
> Many projects have started based on the Wiki concept outside of the WMF.
> Many of them are as relevant or more relevant then WMF projects. They are
> however not our competition, they share with us and are part of the Wiki
> ecosystem. All these projects compete in a way and fill their niche. The
> notion that the WMF should safeguard its projects from other projects is
> self defeating; when projects lose their relevance inside or out, their
> readers, their editors their community will evaporate and there is little
> that an organisation can do about it.
> Thanks,
> GerardM
>
Right. The ones *not* in competition are the ones that are not the same
projects or similar to projects of WMF Wikieducator = Wikiverity and
Encyclopedia of Life = Wikispecies. Those IMHO are *direct* competition
and both of which receive an endorsement by WMF. Again, WMF needs to
endorse and think about their projects first and foremost. Period.
Jason Safoutin (DragonFire1024)
