On 16/07/11 13:19, Alec Conroy wrote:
On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 12:30 AM, Keegan Peterzell keegan.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
In reply overall-- I definitely agree that Wikipedia is, by far, our strongest brand-- and a very different brand than the one that would be served by a wider unnamed movement.
I haven't been anywhere near as ambition to think we could get a brand anywhere as good as Wikipedia. Its brand is so off-the-charts it's a little unfathomable.
I'd be happy with something in the neighborhood of Wikimedia-- if donors and editors communities can easily understand it means "Wikimedia Movement on other servers", I'm good.
Now, how can we expand this into another name? Simple answer: we can't.
Well... we certainly do it as well as Wikipedia. But we can "piggyback" off the Wikipedia name in ways, as the name Wikimedia does. ...
"Wiki" is the key word: for good or ill, the word "wiki" now means "wikipedia-like collaborative things" to the general public. Perhaps the "Wikiknowledge movement"?
-- Neil