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.
On 03 Nov 2004 23:17:00 +0100, Till Westermayer <till(a)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:firstname.lastname@example.org . www.westermayer.de/till/
. icq 320393072
. Hirschstraße 5. 79100 Freiburg . 0761 55697152 . 0160 96619179
. . . . .
Wikipedia-l mailing list