Benjamin Webb wrote:
It is a few days since Tim wrote this comment, but I still have something to say in reply to it. Before I start I must remind people that it was my fellow Rodovid user Baya who wrote the software, but that doesn't make much difference to the discussion.
Tim suggested setting up Rodovid as an independent project, and although I still prefer the idea of it becoming a Wikimedia project, this is a possible alternative.
The one real issue is the matter of linking from Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects to Rodovid. If it did become a Wikimedia project, then nobody would object to this: we could use link boxes like we currently have for commons etc.
But what if the project is run independently, could any linking be done then. Personally as a Wikipedia contributor myself, I feel having such links would add to the quality of an article. However, I am sure others would disagree with this and delete it as spam linking.
What do subsricbers to the mailing list think about linking?
If you are using Wikimedia compatible software and/or public editing techniques I would encourage applicable sections of Wikiversity to link to your material.
I would encourage you to find several other high quality similar projects online and come to Wikiversity and write some generic materials in related educational areas using links to all other applicable online resources. At the moment we are pending official approval and apparently caught up in the middle of the Wikimedia Foundations internal reorganization efforts so wikiversity.org is inactive. Try starting at: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikiversity.
Some spam linkers are currently enjoying some success at Wikiversity primarily due to the scarcity of local content and scaffolding. I am confident that as our web traffic picks in a permanent URL space and our generic quality is fleshed out these links are going to begin disappearing rapidly.
The large advantage I perceive to this approach is that it will allow you to keep your site focused on what you and/or your community wish it be while enhancing the experience of both Wikiversity participants and your site users. It will take a bit more work on your part initially and patience waiting for Wikiversity participants interested in geneology to get around to your few links among many but there should be no large maintenance effort as there would be if the Wikiversity participants begin to perceive your links as spam and delete them.
Perhaps some of our biological or medically literate people (user:JWSurf is highly qualified and has been approachable in the past) could suggest learning portals related to genetics, biology, evolution, etc. where participants would find online detailed geneological information useful in demonstrating that science applies to human beings as well as the rest of the ecosystem.
Another approach might be to publish an introduction to geneology in general at http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Main_Page. Our Wikiversitians are likely to find your efforts there. If your site is referenced in the book or used for specific data illustrating various techniques then your links should be secure from most of the less militant link police.
OTOH I am not familar with Wikibooks policy as I tend to use their materials in a read only or trivial correction mode at the moment. You probably will wish to review their detailed policies before investing any marketing effort there.
regards, lazyquasar