James R. Johnson wrote:
I don't know much about the "category
system," but if you were to use
Kingdom, Phylum, Subphylum, Family, Class, Order, etc. down to Genus and
Species as categories, that'd make it quite simple. I don't know how you'd
work that, but it would make things simpler.
I have mixed feelings about the proposal. While the textual material
might be better in the existing encyclopedias, there are probably data
structural advantages that could be derived from the proposal, though I
would see it as a single project that could be interlinked with the
various Wikipedias. The idea of having a separate Wikispecies for each
language would be a tremendous waste of resources.
Having a sample Wiki that works out some of the problems over a limited
taxonomic range would likely be helpful so that those involved could
work out the bugs in their system. This includes dealing with the view
of some cladists that the traditional taxonomic ranks shown above whould
be avoided. It will also be the best way to convince the skeptics that
this could be a valuable spin-off. At the same time it should be made
abundantly clear that support of a sample Wikispecies should not imply
acceptance of a full blown project.
Spin-off or daughter projects need to be distinguished from forks in
that they would seek to maintain full interoperability with the other
member projects in the family. They should be bound by the same
fundamental principles such as NPOV, free access, respect for copyright
and each other, and the software used by each should maximize
compatibility. Outside that core of policies, the diversity of
approaches and formats enriches us all. It encourages members to find
their own solutions to problems. In the long run over time these
diverse solutions can be compared, and the techniques that prove
successful on one project can be imported into another when the
participants are ready. This gives more opportunity to think outside
the box. The one big single project sometimes requires us to apply
solutions prematurely in a way that makes it more difficult to
reconsider what in hindsight might have been a superior solution.
Smaller projects also involve more people in the decision making, and
mean that a newbie can feel some level of ownership much earlier. That
means more wikiholics are available to do work, many of whom would soon
feel unwanted on a big single project. This is a much bigger question
than what happens with Wikispecies. It has more to do with scalability,
and the fundamental right of every individual to reinvent the wheel.
Ec