Michael Snow wrote:
Florence Devouard wrote:
Meta is mostly a work-environment. Transforming it to be a rather public
site would damage its own current role.
WikimediaFoundation wiki would fit that role better. However, there is
much more to the Wikimedia mouvement than just the Foundation.
Currently, we do have a private wiki playing that role. That's
internalwiki. The new site would simply be the public version of internal.
I'm not especially clear on what the boundaries are here. Meta is a work
environment, I suppose, but it's also public in various senses. Most
notably, right now, it's the place where information about the board
election is presented. What damage do you envision this doing to Meta's
My inclination is to view Meta, much like Commons, as a project
primarily to serve the rest of the larger movement. That means it may
end up hosting a mixture of things, depending on what is needed. These
areas may still develop a distinct community of their own, but I'm
concerned about a tendency to exclude matters from their scope when they
have legitimate value to the movement and no other obvious home.
Deletionism is tricky enough in our projects whose scope is more clearly
Opening up wikimediafoundation.org
to more people, in
flagged revisions, is another possibility that's been suggested a few
times. That may be good, although I agree it may not be sufficient and
this is broader than just the foundation. But I'm not sure about the
value of throwing more wikis at the issue, be they public or private,
freely editable or more limited.
Given that I was the one who originally suggested that it would be a
good idea to open wmf editing thanks to flaggued revisions, I am not
going to say it is a bad idea.
However, considering wmf site as the official hosting of information
regarding all of our organization would be a huge mistake.
A website should never have two different roles, in particular when
roles may be conflicting with each other. That would be really looking
WMF needs to control its editorial content as it is a corporate website.
It can not accept personal essays from non wmf members if the personal
essay conveys a message not consistent with wmf agreed public message.
Chapters are often much more politically involved than WMF, involved in
lobbying, in such a way that might be unacceptable to WMF. Results might
1) frustration from chapter who want to post something but get moderated
by WMF staff;
2) loss of time for WMF staff who needs to understand (sometimes
translate) a text from a chapter before validating its publication;
3) conflicting messaging
4) feeling of submission of chapters toward WMF
I am pretty sure it would not work. Two proofs being the following
pages, opened by Jay for public participation from chapters
post contacts made with the press generally)
I can wait a couple of months and come back to you in september to show
you how these pages evolve if you wish ;-)
I am quite sure these pages will never be populated. Either because the
chapter do not track such information. Or because it will be a
duplicated effort with a page already existing on the chapter website.
Or because chapter people will fail to see what their interest is in
providing this effort.
Could this be hosted on meta ?
Yes, certainly. At least for a while.
But again, the role of that new site would be different from the role of
meta and this might enter in conflict, in particular with regards to the
meta main page is meant to be super practical. Can you figure out a
visitor coming to meta to understand better what wikimedia is, and
finding this page ? http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
Please take a step back and try to figure out what all these funny
little words mean for the layman ? CheckUser queries ? SUL ? 1.13alpha
(r35980) ? Sandbox ? Babel templates ?
Versus a main page stating in a few words, "what is wikimedia ?"
With links to the following pages
* pressbook and press releases
* is there a wikimeet soon in your area ?
* conferences were wikimedia people are present this month ?
* do you want to buy a wikimedia tee-shirt ?
* is jimmy wales coming to your city in the next 5 years ?
* events organized by wikimedia people this year
* Wikipedia on DVD. Which languages ? Where to get them ?
Sure enough, all these pages could be hosted on meta. But navigation
might get very confusing given that it include all other pages on meta.
At a minimum, we need a separate main page that would be editable.
But I would imagine that this futur website will not only (or simply) be
a wiki in the future. Other technologies might make sense as well.
Would it be a duplication from current chapter websites ?
Yes, in part. So it is necessary to avoid duplication as much as
possible. However, I feel that the recent meeting in Netherlands seemed
to imply that chapters and wmf felt there was not enough cooperation and
sharing between organizations. A common public website is a beginning of
an answer toward more "cooperation" and coordination.
I may be too early in proposing this and you guys are not ready in your
mind. That's okay. I'll let it sink nicely and will come back in a few
months. There is no hurry.