I concur with Phoebe and others that the time for such a change was 10 or
15 years ago, and would not be appropriate or productive now.
One thing that this corporate rebranding after our most popular product
would erase is the "Wikimedia movement" - a social movement that is the
leading modern manifestation of the Free Culture movement that attracted me
as a member of Student For Free Culture a decade ago. Rebranding ourselves
after a mere product is in some ways an erasure of the underlying social
movement. When one is part of the "Wikipedia movement", one is just a user
of a specific website, and it sounds as empty as the "Facebook movement".
That said, I do agree with common-sense changes like WikiCommons and
perhaps others. But I don't think that just because we have more money
now, and maybe it would have been a good idea 10 years ago, that corporate
rebranding around our most popular product is a good thing to do at this
stage in the evolution of our movement.
Thanks,
Pharos
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:01 PM Paulo Santos Perneta <
paulosperneta(a)gmail.com> wrote:
When I joined Wikimedia in 2009 I also tried WikiNews,
which looked yet
another fantastic Wikimedia project. I soon realized, however, that it was
just a repeater of CC-BY sources of news, with very residual (if any)
proper production. When an handcrafted news-piece I've made was merged with
one of those automatic repeaters, I left that project and never looked
back. As far as I now it never was attractive, it never managed to
congregate any proper community worth of that name (at least the Portuguese
version) - It was kind of a failed project already 10 years ago. And that
was one of the reasons and motivations for Jimbo trying to reshuffle the
thing as his new child WikiTribune. Personally, I do not need that project
at all. When some news is notable enough (like the tragic Notre-Dame fire
yesterday) I create the article for it and build it as an encyclopedic
article, which is much more motivating and permanent than whatever is made
in WikiNews.
Personally, I see this branding project as a two headed beast: In one head,
WMF trying to take undue credit from the Wikipedia brand; on another head,
some incipient Wikipedia dream of colonization towards other projects. As
many, I started my contributions in the Wikimedia projects in Wikipedia,
but very soon found Commons and the whole Wikipedia-free oasis that thrives
there. I always looked at Commons as a kind of small paradise, precisely
for not being necessarily associated with Wikipedia. So, 10 years ago, I
would be as against the idea of placing Commons under the Wikipedia
umbrella as I am today. (no opinion about WikiCommons, though, as we can
continue shortnaming it to Commons anyway)
On the whole, I very much agree with what Phoebe wrote about it.
Wikicolonizations/WMFappropriations apart, it's very difficult to foresee
how such a move would advance the goals of our Movement. What problem is
solved by it? If anything, it seems to bring even more confusion between
Wikipedia and the other sister projects.
Best,
Paulo
Jennifer Pryor-Summers <jennifer.pryorsummers(a)gmail.com> escreveu no dia
terça, 16/04/2019 à(s) 07:52:
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 3:49 AM Paulo Santos
Perneta <
paulosperneta(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I wouldn't describe Wikinews as a success
case, though.
Paulo
Compared to Wikitribune it is! But more importantly, if Wikinews is not
thriving, then why not? Does it lack resources? What could or should
the
WMF do to revive it? Perhaps some of the money
spent on rebranding would
be better spent on the projects that are not doing so well as the big
Wikipedias -- or perhaps the WMF should cut its losses and close them
down,
on the principle of reinforcing success instead.
These are the big
questions it should be asking itself.
JPS
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
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>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
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>