It was obviously evolving as the project moved from initial conceptualisation to the establishment of the Discovery team but, nevertheless, a clear, meaningful statement of the vision for the project (as it was imagined at the time) would have been appropriate when the team was put together. I think Lila has recently acknowledged this.
The present focus seems to be on improving search within Wikimedia, but the language used by both WMF and Knight leaves them open to later extending Wikipedia's search options to include free knowledge outside our projects. I fully support both improving internal search and later offering the reader the option of including reliable outside sources in their search.
And I support the ED's right - obligation really - to initiate and adequately fund projects like this.
On Friday, 12 February 2016, SarahSV sarahsv.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak darekj@alk.edu.pl wrote:
If we are to survive the next 10 years as the top 10 website, we should focus externally more, and start building more stuff that our readers
care
about. I totally agree that WMF has failed on many occasions here, and
we,
the community, were right (when I recall the first deployment of the VE I grit my teeth). But ultimately we need to be really able to move on, to
be
able to move forward.
dj
Dariuz, when I first heard about this, I understood it to mean that the Foundation was seeking to fix the Wikimedia search function, which is really very poor. But this seems to be a proposal to create an entirely new search engine to complement Google, which will cost many millions.
Sarah _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe