In addition, from what I've found the enthusiasm grows gradually, at first people being excited but after they work on it a bit more, they're really into it and are more committed by then.
Thus most Wikis don't get off the ground with a commitment, or if they do, it's often a commitment from one or two people.
So far I cannot think of any Wikipedia that is empty and has fallen to vandalism that was started with a commitment from at least one fluent speaker to work on it, except na: which shouldn't count because it wasn't in the language it claimed to be (and even so, it hasn't fallen to petty vandalism yet)
Speaking of the Nauruan Wikipedia, are we ever going to do something about it, or is it just going to sit there? If any *real* Nauruan speakers come and want to write, it will be very discouraging to have that content there the way we do now.
mark
On 03 Nov 2004 23:17:00 +0100, Till Westermayer till@tillwe.de wrote:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . till we *) . . .
Wait, let me get this straight.
You think it makes sense to require 5 users pledged to start a Wiki when our 3rd biggest Wiki, the Japanese Wikipedia, wouldn'tve met this requirement itself, and the German Wikipedia would not have until its second month of existance?
Maybe they would have had if they had to? Maybe a rule like the proposed would lead to an extended "supporters search" phase, starting the wikipedia proper only afterwards? __ . / / / / ... Till Westermayer - till we *) . . . mailto:till@tillwe.de . www.westermayer.de/till/ . icq 320393072 . Hirschstraße 5. 79100 Freiburg . 0761 55697152 . 0160 96619179 . . . . . _______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l