On 9/7/05, Angela beesley@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/30/05, Elisabeth Bauer elian@djini.de wrote:
In my opinion, there are three options:
- we can continue like this and try to make the best out of it
- we can drastically reduce the number of pages on WMF, limit the
translations and make it a very simple information site (similar to what was done on http://www.wikimedia.de, the german associations site)
- or we can reunify meta-wiki and the WMF wiki under
[...] I've been thinking this over for a few days, and I believe the option of reunifying meta and the Foundation wiki makes most sense.
Sorry, I strongly disagree. IMHO the most important problems with the foundation wiki are * the lack of navigation * outdated pages * the issue that it is a wiki
The foundation wiki is a mess, and I don't see how it would help to put it together with a website that's more messy.
The separation means little to external people and only causes extra work for internal people.
We need a place on the web where people, who are not (yet) wiki experts can find reliable (I don't mean "reliable" in the wiki sense which actually means "sometimes reliable, sometimes not") information about us.
Let's think about how to achieve this, and not how to replace a mess with another one (bigger or smaller).
Some ideas that could help: * Look out for a content management system (a wiki is not a cms). In the best case one that is able to handle multilingual content (switching to default language if translation is not up to date) * Think about which pages we really need (a real concept would help) * Think about reducing the number of languages (which would be less important if we find a cms that can handle multilingual content as described above) * Looking for people who take the responsibility for the website.
-- Arne (akl)