I do not say that te main thing is to share in the sum of all knowledge, no
What I say is that sharing in the sum of all knowledge has primacy which is
a totally different thing. Much of what we do has been possible because of
our communities. It is therefore a vital resource and consequently enabling
our communities, taking care of the health of our communities is vitally
important. It is one of the primary tasks of a chapter and of the WMF.
When a community decides on things that prevent us from sharing in the sum
of all knowledge, it does not change our primary objective and at that
point there is an issue. A problem that is not decided by those who are
most vocal and "represent" the community. Their decision is faulty at best
and arguments need to be made and found to revisit what the "community"
I have argued before that many Wikipedia communities restrict what
information is made available. The arguments used are in my opinion
typically wrong. It is necessary to work to undo such points of view of the
community. This can be done by a chapter, the WMF and by groups and
On 8 April 2014 11:25, Steffen Prößdorf <steffen.proessdorf(a)wikimedia.de>wrote;wrote:
thanks for pointing this out. This is just the question I mentioned on my
You say the main thing is to share in the sum of all knowledge, no matter
I say the main thing is to support the communities doing this. These are
the opposite opinions I mentioned - and we should discuss this in a very
And that's why I cited the mission of the foundation in my blogpost, with
the first sentence *"Our mission is to empower a global volunteer community
to collect and develop the world's knowledge and to make it available to
everyone for free, for any purpose."*
Empower the community is stated there as the main thing, and not share in
the sum of all knowledge.
That's why I think this question is not answered yet, and I want to find an
answer for WMDE at least.
2014-04-08 8:22 GMT+02:00 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>om>:
Take one step back. What our aim is, is to share in the sum of all
knowledge. Arguably, this is the main and overriding objective of what we
do. There are many strategies to get to the point where we share
information. From where I stand, with Wikidata we have the opportunity to
do better than with an only Wikipedia strategy: with Wikipedia we share
sum of knowledge that is available in one
Wikipedia and with Wikidata we
share in the sum of all the knowledge that is available to us.
Wikidata provides access to more information than any Wikipedia by a
There are those in our communities who aim to restrict the practices that
realise Wikidata as the resource of information that is available to us.
say it in a political correct way, they can be
and should be ignored.
are organisations that want to share information
with us under a CC-0
license and there are those who want to share information under a CC-by
license. The later can and should be ignored as well.
However, when I am to argue these points in a private setting, I will say
that they can screw themselves. It is to make the point forcefully, it is
to hammer on the fact that our objective is not the community but the
sharing of knowledge. Yes, the community is important but that is the
extend of it. When we can gain authoritative information provided by a
GLAM, we should not consider the fact that we can enter all that
information by hand. Those who want to add statements by hand can do so
they should not force their behaviour and
attitudes on others.
Wikimedia-l mailing list