* Wikipedia needs publicity badly. As long as many of our projects do
not cover encyclopaedic and other information well, there are MANY
projects that are in a genuine need for more contributors and also
readers. I am sure that the Neapolitan wikipedia would be thrilled to
bits to have 5 more regular contributors. It would grow the content a
lot and this in turn would increase the exposure of Neapolitan to many
* Coding is done on LiquidThreads. This may help make a proposal like
yours interesting and relevant.. The publicity we could have: "hey guys,
we can still innovate".
Michael R. Irwin wrote:
Some of you might find this article by David Brin (P,hd in Space Physics
& SciFi Author) interesting:
He outlines a top down design to try to use the Internet as a
collaborative discussion and thinking tool.
It seems to me that the Wikimedia software and various projects
utilizing some simple rules (NPOV, only one 32K article per subject or
title, comprehensive history of revision, and the ever evolving
community guidelines) allowed solutions meeting his basic criteria and
goals to self organize.
As a publicity drive or stunt we might consider inviting him to evaluate
how well Wikipedia or some other Wikimedia project meets his proposed
requirements for useful Internet sites on his website for his fans.
Perhaps a good time (considering that Wikipedia hardly needs publicity
drives considering its current success and maturity) would be after a
few months of Wikiversity's authorized operation makes it clear that
good ideas or material tends to float or stay on the current page of
learning/study activities there; just like the best material and
presentations drift to the current article or definition on Wikipedia
I would be very interested in reactions or opinions why or why not
Wikipedia currently meets or does not meet his stated goals or criteria
for a "Disputation Arena".