Hmmm, okay. I think you guys have concerns, and we need to adress them.
So I will try to answer the best I can.
Since I was part of the discussion on wikispecies on wikipedia-l, and
had an opinion on the matter, I wish to insist that I was not the
promoter of the decision making.
However, I thought it was a good idea to make that decision, hence I
voted. I will come back on the reason why it was imho a good idea later.
For those who followed carefully the discussion, I, as an individual, am
in favor of the project be separated from Wikipedia, though strongly
integrated. I will not come back on my arguments, I already gave them 2
However, if I had had the feeling there was a strong consensus for NOT
having a separated project, I would probably not have supported it on
the board. I *can* vote in a way that I do not think is the best, but is
more acceptable to the community, while still acceptable for me.
In this case, it appeared to me there was no obvious consensus, but I
felt the case was more supported on the "separated project" side, hence
I voted along my heart.
John Lee a écrit:
The sentiment is dittoed here. I don't have a clue
what all this hoo-ha
is about, but that fact alone seems to suggest that something
The fact you do not know of the topic should not suggest that things are
done in a clandestine way. The whole project got huge, and it has become
impossible for anyone to know any time what is going on everywhere.
Just as no human being may know everything, but each of us know a bit.
I do not think it is reasonable to say that the topic was clandestine. A
huge wikispecies occured on this very list just a few weeks ago, and it
was unlikely to go on unnoticed. Since you are registered to that list,
you should not have missed that discussion.
Aside from this, many discussions occured on the irc channel, both on
the #wikipedia (which I may suggest, should become #en.wikipedia, while
#wikipedia become a more general channel) and on #wikimedia. Perhaps
also on #mediawiki.
The irc channels are public discussion place, and everyone is welcome to
join anytime. Many of the discussions between Angela, Jimbo and I take
place over there. If you are interested, you are most welcome :-)
Finally, there were some report on meta, which you may find here :
Unless I am wrong, this link was also given on this ml.
From what I understand, this is something that, if
worked out correctly, *could* be beneficial to all the
why haven't I heard anything about this on en.wikipedia.org? It's not
even on the Community Portal.
Point 5 : Things that could be beneficial to all wikipedias do not
belong to the english wikipedia. They belong to meta, or to wikipedia-l
or on foundation-l.
There are currently more than 50 active languages. We try to unite those
interested by meta topics or by new projects in places where everyone
can share. En.wikipedia is not one of these places.
I also do not think it is fair to expect from the board to go and visit
all 50 projects in turns, to put each and another information on the
local portal page. Everyone should feel concerned by the need there is
for information to be conveyed.
Either some people for each project feel concerned and translate
information, or interested people of each local project come hear to
One attempt at centralizing information has been done on the meta
goings-on : http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Goings-on
I regularly go there to update this page and a couple of people think of
doing this as well.
I had hoped that on projects where there are hundreds of contributors
(such as en), someone will take the time to just COPY the information
which is already in ENGLISH from meta to the english goings-on.
I invite you to look at the current english goings-on, this is self
explanatory : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3AGoings-on
I understand your concerns, but I do not think there is a lack of
information provided. I do not think either that there are not enough
places to find the information. I just think that people need to be
explained over and over and over where to find the information.
And the fact that someone as even-headed
as mav is even thinking about quitting makes me wonder
just what's going on.
([[User:Johnleemk]] on En)
Christopher Mahan wrote:
> --- Daniel Mayer <maveric149(a)yahoo.com>
>> Daniel Mayer (who is now seriously re-evaluating his participation
>> in Wikipedia
>> and Wikimedia)
> When mav says things like this, I don't have to go read 25+ posts to
> know that something has gone horribly wrong.
> I suggest that we:
> --Just build a free encyclopedia
> --Work with each other respectfully
> --Leave the rest of the ideas for another project, another year.
Point 7 : Some people here, like Benedikt, or Gerard, have other ideas
and other dreams. Perhaps it is not treating them respectfully to tell
them "just integrate this in Wikipedia" or to tell them "leave that
aside for a year".
I have much respect for Mav opinions, but I also recognise there other
ideas. That does not mean one side is wrong. But if people have the
energy to have new ideas, that deserve attention.
> PS: If we all even get close to becoming another
ICANN, I'll be out
> the door with mav.