On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Nikola Smolenski <smolensk(a)eunet.rs> wrote:
Дана Saturday 19 June 2010 07:37:18 Milos Rancic
On Sat, Jun 19, 2010 at 7:30 AM, Nikola Smolenski
Or perhaps we don't even have to build one,
but just use the existing
ones. [People are always against making Wikipedia a social network.] Have
RSS feeds of articles you created/pictures you uploaded. These could then
be connected to Facebook or wherever for your friends to see what are you
Then you are using Facebook, not Wikimedia. And Flickr is much better
for private photos than Wikimedia.
Then your Facebook friends will see that you are doing interesting things on
Wikipedia projects and will want to do them too.
I don't think that it is particularly interesting to see someone's
edits. If you are not a passionate Wikimedian, of course.
Besides that, contemporary term for "site" is "social network". There
are just more and less successful social networks. Wikimedia is
successful social network for a very specific type of demographics:
young middle class males. Actually, not so young anymore. I think that
we are loosing males from younger generations, too.
That means that we have to work on diversification of our editor
demographics. And one edit in ten days is better than no edits at all.
We need cleverly created concepts which would make editing easy, fun,
causal. With a lot of interesting content around; probably, based on
existing Wikimedia content, but not necessary.
The time when wiki concept was new and interesting passed a few years
ago. And even Microsoft has better sense for new technologies than us.
For example, our goal is not to make a possibility to read Wikipedia
from iPhone. Apple did that. The goal is to have easy access to
editing from iPhone.