This works for the notable things that are in Wikipedia. The point of
a project like this would be to go one step further, and have a open
content directory, not based on advertising , that would cover the
local and hobbyist material that either does not make it into
Wikipedia or that is frequently challenged there. Names that i think
indicate the purpose would be Wikipedia2 or Wikilocal. Whether the
Wikimedia foundation is open to the possibilities of an additional
project would be another matter, but there could be another home for
it. I hope that they would consider doing it themselves, for it would
benefit greatly from their sponsorship, their established procedures,
and their commitment to both free copyright and freedom from
advertising.
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 4:14 PM, Ziko van Dijk <zvandijk(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
I have just seen a list of the Wikimedia projects and
noticed that the
last one was created in 2006, is that right?
In spite of all sympathy for a Wiki-directory I am afraid that
partially Wikipedia already has taken over that part. When I am
looking for the web site of a museum I tend to go to the Wikipedia
article about that museum and look there under "Weblinks".
Kind regards
Ziko
2009/10/27 Bod Notbod <bodnotbod(a)gmail.com>om>:
On Tue,
Oct 27, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Shlomi Fish <shlomif(a)iglu.org.il> wrote:
> This was motivated after I was referred to
the "Wikipedia is not a web
> directory" section of:
>
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not
One workaround I've found is to add a "resources" section to the
/talk/ page and list sites there. I've been responsible for a few
rather long 'external links' sections and have been disappointed to
see them trimmed because I felt all of the links I provided were valid
(in that they provided substantial information not easily included in
the article [for example, on an article about an author including
links to articles written by them] or hosted images that we couldn't
use [particularly useful for modern artists]).
With the section on the talk page I added my recommendation that the
section should not be archived when the talk page grew large as I felt
the section would remain of value to editors and ought to remain
relatively prominent.
It's not an ideal solution because there's not much you can do with
the section other than edit/add to it. But I felt it was a good
compromise for those times when I was in disagreement with another
editor over the external links section.
I tend towards the "argh, no, not another project" view on things. I
think because, and perhaps this is unfair, I dislike that they may
drain talent and resources away from the encyclopedias.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
Ziko van Dijk
NL-Silvolde
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l