First, I think the argument has become clearer now, thank you for your information.
On 7/31/07, Casey Brown cbrown1023@comcast.net wrote:
(For the record, you were not the one arguing on semantics, you had a genuine question and I was happy you asked it.)
I said #wikipedia *should* be the mother channel, but it's crap now. :)
When I joined the project, it was considered the center channel or channel for English and languages which had no their own, so historically it was. Then we created other channels, #wikimedia, for other projects (tionary, quote, news, commons ...).
Today, it works for English people and perhaps for people who had no their own language's yet. But for coordination I suppose #wikimedia enough. I heard once Spanish Wikipedians were complainted since they spoke Spanish on #wikipedia, and I think it bad if it is really what happened ... but I have no reason to make it "the mother channel for wikipedia", as what it is not now.
And ... even if it is the argument about Wikipedia at large, is it enough to call for opinions on wikipedia-l?
That's what we are trying to change. By all means, discuss anything you want about it. :)
Casey Brown Cbrown1023
-----Original Message----- From: foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Gatto Nero Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 11:46 AM To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] #wikipedia IRC channel guidelines review
2007/7/31, Casey Brown cbrown1023@comcast.net:
Okay... I thought I cleared this up, but obviously not.
Now it's a bit more clear :D
But please, can we stop arguing on semantics and get the guidelines? They only apply to #wikipedia, so you do not need to think that you are going
to
get attacked by them in your local language's channel.
Could I propose, also, an OT brainstorming? You say: #wikipedia is a "mother channel", a IRCchannel that should represent all the languages. It is not perceived so. It's perceveid like a (messy) english-language channel.
The problem is: we have a lot of localized channels that works well. What's the meaning of #wikipedia? Why does it exist? What should it offer to the visitors? I suppose we should rethink it...
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 8/2/07, Aphaia aphaia@gmail.com wrote:
First, I think the argument has become clearer now, thank you for your information.
On 7/31/07, Casey Brown cbrown1023@comcast.net wrote:
(For the record, you were not the one arguing on semantics, you had a genuine question and I was happy you asked it.)
I said #wikipedia *should* be the mother channel, but it's crap now. :)
When I joined the project, it was considered the center channel or channel for English and languages which had no their own, so historically it was. Then we created other channels, #wikimedia, for other projects (tionary, quote, news, commons ...).
Today, it works for English people and perhaps for people who had no their own language's yet. But for coordination I suppose #wikimedia enough. I heard once Spanish Wikipedians were complainted since they spoke Spanish on #wikipedia, and I think it bad if it is really what happened ... but I have no reason to make it "the mother channel for wikipedia", as what it is not now.
And ... even if it is the argument about Wikipedia at large, is it enough to call for opinions on wikipedia-l?
I think this is the heart of the issue. #wikipedia cannot be shoehorned into being something it is not, and in the course of nature, will never be.
There remains the question of can it be restored to playing the (valuable) part it used to fulfill. I don't know personally, but some useful things *can* be done to help that.
-- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org