Hoi,
Wikieducator does not really need our help. Wikieducator is seriously good
at running projects, applying for grants, developing software. When you
compare Wikiversity with Wikieducator. What is now a community within the
Wikimedia Foundation made the argument that it would be good to have
Wikiversity. People are seriously trying to come up with a model that works
for them. This is a volunteer organisation. You compare it with a
professional organisation that is operating globally, an organisation
involved in organising conferences, an organisation that is seriously
investing money in the development of software that improves functionality
of MediaWiki when used in an educational setting.
Seriously, the two projects cannot be compared. I think the WMF helps
Wikiversity more then it helps Wikieducator. I would not be surprised if the
Commonwealth of Learning helps the Wikimedia Foundation more then the
Wikimedia Foundation is helping the Commonwealth of Learning.
Thanks,
GerardM
On Jan 22, 2008 6:01 PM, Chad <innocentkiller(a)gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
On Jan 22, 2008 9:39 AM, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
The notion that one project should not and can
not compete
with another is false anyway. Both Wikipedia and Wikinews do news.
[/snip]
I don't think the relationship between Wikipedia and Wikinews on the topic
of
news coverage is exactly a fair example of "competition." Let's take a
random
subject: 2008 Riots in XYZ country. We'd expect both Wikinews and
Wikipedia
to cover this topic; however, from two different angles.
Wikipedia should cover the overall encyclopedic topic (ie: the event, what
lead
up to it, causes, effects, background information, additional information
etc).
This being said, Wikinews should be covering it from a /news/ perspective.
What's going on, how does it affect you, what are people saying about it,
etc.
This isn't competition, but rather two different coverages of the same
topic from
two different perspective.
I think the issues being raised about the similarities between Wikiversity
and
WikiEducator (and I thank those who gave further information, it was very
enlightening). The semantics of mentioning students in their target
vision aside,
I believe the projects are two very closely aligned, and can benefit
greatly from
quite a bit of inter-wiki cooperation. However, I still wonder why
we'd be supporting
WikiEducator publicly without seeming to give Wikiversity much help at all
(it
always, along with WikiSpecies, seemed like the red-headed-stepchild of
the
Foundation's projects from my perspective).
Always,
Chad
On Jan 22, 2008 9:39 AM, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hoi,
It is exactly because Wikiversity does target students that makes
Wikieducator different.
What Wikieducator is about:
* planning of education projects linked with the development of free
content;
* development of free content on Wikieducator for e-learning;
* work on building open education resources (OERs) on how to create
OERs.
* networking on funding proposals developed as free content.*
*So my argument is good.
All WMF projects aim to provide information. They all do it in a
slightly
different way. The notion that one project should
not and can not
compete
with another is false anyway. Both Wikipedia and
Wikinews do news. Both
Wikibooks and Wikiversity work on educational material Of relevance is
the
difference in emphasis. This is what makes
projects valid in their own
right.
With the notion that projects cannot compete, you effectively convict
projects to stay in the same mold. When there are two groups with
markedly
different insights, one of these has to give up
their ideas and would
not be
allowed to experiment with their notions of how
things should be / can
be
done. This is evil.
In my opinion, there should be room for experiments and if we find that
a
new kid on the block does good. More power to
him/her. The beneficiary
of
such experiments are the people that matter; the
people we are providing
information to.
Thanks,
GerardM
On Jan 22, 2008 12:27 PM, Jason Safoutin <jason.safoutin(a)wikinewsie.org>
wrote:
> Correct me if I am wrong. But does the front page of Wikiversity say
> that the project i for teachers students and researchers? If so, then
> your argument is false.
>
> No WMF project should, EVER, compete with one another. If we do, we
may
> as well take the collaborative scheme, and
throw it out of the window
too.
>
> This "competition" goes against the WMF's mission.
>
> Jason Safoutin (DragonFire1024)
> >
> > Message: 6
> > Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 07:36:15 +0100
> > From: "Gerard Meijssen" <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Seeking clarification
> > To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> > <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> > Message-ID:
> > <41a006820801212236v70332058qdf7cf18df083a835(a)mail.gmail.com>
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> >
> > Hoi,
> > In principle I would agree that the WMF could build all kinds of
> everything.
> > In practice the WMF has not been able to implement a project like
Single
> > User Login in almost two year now I
think it is. Practically it is
> either a
> > really dedicated and/or talented person that gets something
organised
or
> it
> > just does not happen.
> >
> > Also in the Open Source world it is a given that competing projects
> > invigorate each other because of their perceived competition. This
may
> seem
> > rather Darwinistic but hey it seems to work for them so why not for
us
?
> The
> > approach taken by Wikiversity and Wikieducator is markedly
different.
> > Wikieducator is very much organised for
and by people who are
working in
> the
> > educational field while Wikiversity is not. These projects occupy
> different
> > niches, and therefore there is not so much competition after all.
> > Thanks,
> > GerardM
> >
> > On Jan 22, 2008 6:42 AM, Jason Safoutin <
jason.safoutin(a)wikinewsie.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Why should Wikiversity or Wikispecies or any other WMF project have
to
> >> compete with another WMF project,
with basically the same goals?
> >>
> >> I am all for free collaborative content, but not if it means WMF
> >> projects have to compete against one another. Would that not defy
the
> >> meaning of collaborative? Why not
take what WMF has already and
make it
> >> better. We know they have the
capabilities to make new things like
a
> >> collaborative video program...so
why not?
> >>
> >> Point is the projects are all supposed to be part of a community of
> >> collaborators. We are supposed to be part of a foundation that
supports
> >> that. Not driving the communities
apart.
> >>
> >> Jason Safoutin
> >>
> >>> I understood Erik was asked to join their advisory board since he
was
> >>> a Board of Trustees at WMF and
both organizations were largely in
a
> >>> same mind (free content for
educational purpose). I think Erik
said
> >>> something at the announcement
of his appointment to Deputy ED but
not
> >>> dig the archive right now (the
network is a bit slow for me now).
> >>>
> >>> Btw I have no reason for making a panic -- sorry but it was my
first
> >>> impression in this thread, so
sorry if I just misunderstood your
> >>> reaction --- even if WikiEducator was a competitor of Wikiversity.
Is
> >>> our world so small not as to
allow two or more online educational
> >>> projects mainly for adult or in an advanced level? In real life we
> >>> have several high educational institutions. In several layers they
> >>> compete each others but still there are also collaborations in
many
> >>> levels: both officially and
informally they share lectures, books
and
> >>> other educational resources and
do research jointly etc. Can it be
> >>> this case or is there no such room for online projects at all?
> >>>
> >>> On Jan 22, 2008 10:21 AM, Nathan <nawrich(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> For a conflict of interest, interests must conflict. How do the
> >>>> interests of Wikimedia and WikiEducator conflict? That isn't
clear to
> >>>> me. The goal is the same -
the proliferation of easily accessible
> >>>> knowledge. Ideally, they could exchange content so that neither
has
> >>>> anything the other lacks
(depending on licenses, which I don't
know
> >>>> the details of). FWIW,
Erik is the deputy executive director.
> >>>>
> >>>> Nathan
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Jan 21, 2008 8:12 PM, Jason Safoutin <
> jason.safoutin(a)wikinewsie.org>
> >>>>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>>> If I have to be the first to say it, I will. I know some of
these
> >>>>>
> >> links
> >>
> >>>>> have been passed around here before, but for reference I will
ad
> them,
> >>>>> and then some.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It has become clear to me, at least a few things anyway. One
bing
> that
> >>>>> there is clearly a conflict of interest on Erik Moeller's
part.
He
> is
> >>>>> currently on the advisory board for Wikieducator:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> *
http://www.wikieducator.org/WikiEducator:Advisory_Board
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "/WikiEducator's Interim International Advisory Board
was
assembled
> by
> >>>>> project founder Wayne Mackintosh to serve as a means of
involving
> the
> >>>>> community until the project has grown large enough to elect a
Board
> >>>>> through democratic
means. Once 2,500 users have joined the wiki,
> >>>>> elections will be held to select a successor Board./",
says the
> >>>>>
> >> website.
> >>
> >>>>> Not only that, but Kultra has some involvement with
Wikieducator,
> and
> >>>>>
> >> if
> >>
> >>>>> I am not mistaken Wikieducator is slated to be on WMF servers:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> * _ Kaltura Collaborative Video Editing Extension
Enabled:_
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>
>
http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator/browse_thread/thread/345c056f83…
> >>
> >>>>> The way I see it, Wikieducator is the same thing that
Wikiversity
> is.
> >>>>> Wikieducator is not to compete with Wikiversity, it is a means
to
> IMO
> >>>>> eventually replace it. Don't believe me?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Wikieducator:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> * *planning* of education projects linked with the
development
> of
> >>>>> free content
<http://freedomdefined.org/Definition>;
> >>>>> * *development* of free content on Wikieducator
> >>>>> <http://www.wikieducator.org/Content> for
e-learning;
> >>>>> * work on building *open education resources* (OERs) on
*how* to
> >>>>> create OERs.
> >>>>> * networking on *funding proposals
> >>>>> <http://www.wikieducator.org/Metawikieducator>*
developed
as
> >>>>>
> >> free
> >>
> >>>>> content.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Wikiversity: /*Wikiversity* is a community for the creation of
> >>>>>
> >> learning
> >>
> >>>>> activities and development of free learning materials. Students
and
>>>>> teachers
>>>>> <http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Wikiversity_teachers
> are
> >>>>> invited to join the project as collaborators in teaching,
learning,
> >>>>>
> >> and
> >>
> >>>>> research. Wikiversity strives to be an open and vibrant
community
> >>>>>
> >> where
> >>
> >>>>> you can explore and learn about your personal interests.
Wikiversity
> >>>>> hosts and develops free
learning materials for all age groups.
> Please
> >>>>> participate and help build collaborative learning projects and
> >>>>> communities; at Wikiversity we learn by doing
> >>>>> <
http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Portal:Education/Wikiversity_model>gt;,
> >>>>>
> >> we
> >>
> >>>>> learn by editing./
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So...what is different about the two? Nothing...other than a
few
> more
> >>>>> bells and whistles.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> We all heard about the wonderful amazing and quite eye
catiching,
> The
> >>>>> Encyclopedia Of Life - A collaborative encyclopedia to contain
the
> >>>>> entire earth's
species....I thought that's what Wikispecies is?
Not
> to
> >>>>> mention that Erik is on their Institutional Council, which he
also
> >>>>> represents the
Wikimedia Foundation. Again not another
competition,
> >>>>>
> >> but
> >>
> >>>>> if you have been to their website, you will see what I mean
about
> >>>>>
"replacement".
> >>>>>
> >>>>> *
http://www.eol.org/home.html
> >>>>> *
http://blog.valuewiki.com/2007/05/09/encyclopedia-of-life/
> >>>>> *
http://www.eol.org/partners.html#p3
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So let cut to the chase. What is going on in WMF? Why is the
> Executive
> >>>>> Director involved with projects that are clearly designed to
either
> >>>>> replace or out do WMF
projects? Why is the WMF involved at all?
And
> >>>>>
> >> why,
> >>
> >>>>> is the Board of Trustees, the group the communities elected,
not
> >>>>>
> >> saying
> >>
> >>>>> anything? Whats going on and who is making these decisions?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In all respects, we have to right to know at least some things.
As
> it
> >>>>> stands, Kaltura is directly endorsing the WMF on its front
page:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
http://www.kaltura.com/devwiki/index.php/Main_Page
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "/As recently announced
> >>>>> <
> >>>>>
> >>
>
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Invites_Users_to_Take_Part_in…
> >>
> >>> ,
> >>>
> >>>>> the Wikimedia Foundation and Kaltura have begun a process aimed
at
> >>>>> bringing rich-media
collaboration to Wikipedia and other wiki
> >>>>>
> >> websites.
> >>
> >>>>> The vision of this project is to enable the Wikipedia community
to
> >>>>> further enhance and
enrich Wikipedia articles with rich-media
> >>>>>
> >> content./"
> >>
> >>>>> They mention Wikipedia three times in just the first
paragraph...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So who is in charge now????????????
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jason Safoutin
> >>>>>
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> foundation-l mailing list
> >>>>> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >>>>> Unsubscribe:
>
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> foundation-l mailing list
> >>>> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >>>> Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> foundation-l mailing list
> >> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
End of foundation-l Digest, Vol 46, Issue 154
*********************************************
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l