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(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 3:01 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak
<darekj(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>