No it is not since the Commons is a common place to host data and files
that
are used by more than one wiki. It therefore helps to bind us together,
not
divide us.
It was my understanding that Wikispecies is to be a common place to host species data that is used by more than one wiki. So why doesn't Wikispecies help to bind us together?
Anthony DiPierro wrote:
No it is not since the Commons is a common place to host data and files
that
are used by more than one wiki. It therefore helps to bind us together,
not
divide us.
It was my understanding that Wikispecies is to be a common place to host species data that is used by more than one wiki. So why doesn't Wikispecies help to bind us together? _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Wikispecies will be a common place to host bioligical data that will be available to all wikiresources. It will help to bind the scientific world and the wikiworld together. Data like the scientific text to describe a taxon. Discussions on the merits of a particular phenomenon, scientific research data and papers that have no place in an encyclopedy will be in WikiSpecies.
It is a fallacy to think WikiSpecies will be less available than WikiCommons. WikiSpecies will host scientific data, it will be accecible from within WikiMedia. Technically there is no reason for it to be otherwise. With WikiScience outside of WikiMedia you are correct, that is however the least beneficial option for both worlds.
Again, Wikipedia is not only en:wikipedia. En:ToL is currently a resource that is limited to en:. I wish this was not true, I wish the en:ToL is open to other wikipedia. The arguments that WikiSpecies is a fork are the same arguments that keep en:ToL a fork of Taxonominal information within Wikipedia.
Thanks, GerardM
Anthony DiPierro wrote:
No it is not since the Commons is a common place to host data and files
that
are used by more than one wiki. It therefore helps to bind us together,
not
divide us.
It was my understanding that Wikispecies is to be a common place to host species data that is used by more than one wiki. So why doesn't Wikispecies help to bind us together?
I think people are using "data" to mean different things. If it means language-independent data (maximum recorded length, say), along with a way to splice it into each language's article, then great, it would be just as beneficial as sharing images; each language WP would get consistent statistics, which would eliminate a major maintenance load, and speed creation of articles for all the languages - just mention the common taxobox, or common general characteristics, and boom, Bulgarian gets content just as good as English.
If Wikispeces data means quasi-articles with text in some language, that has much more undesirable forking potential.
Stan
Stan Shebs wrote:
Anthony DiPierro wrote:
No it is not since the Commons is a common place to host data and files
that
are used by more than one wiki. It therefore helps to bind us together,
not
divide us.
It was my understanding that Wikispecies is to be a common place to host species data that is used by more than one wiki. So why doesn't Wikispecies help to bind us together?
I think people are using "data" to mean different things. If it means language-independent data (maximum recorded length, say), along with a way to splice it into each language's article, then great, it would be just as beneficial as sharing images; each language WP would get consistent statistics, which would eliminate a major maintenance load, and speed creation of articles for all the languages - just mention the common taxobox, or common general characteristics, and boom, Bulgarian gets content just as good as English.
If Wikispeces data means quasi-articles with text in some language, that has much more undesirable forking potential.
Stan
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Hear, Hear !! WikiSpecies will be mainly in the biological language of choise, therefore it will be mainly English. It is most definetly not the idea to have quasi-articles. It is certainly the intention to link to wikipedias for encyclopedic information. There is no wish for creating what is already there. Propably resources like WikiCommons will be used to store pictures in exactly the same way as with Wikipedia. Maybe WikiSource will be used for fixed scientific texts. Too much speculation is not good either.
Definetly, the idea is not to fork and the idea is to share strengths and overcome weaknesses.
Thanks, GerardM
--- Stan Shebs shebs@apple.com wrote:
I think people are using "data" to mean different things. If it means language-independent data (maximum recorded length, say), along with a way to splice it into each language's article, then great, it would be just as beneficial as sharing images; each language WP would get consistent statistics, which would eliminate a major maintenance load, and speed creation of articles for all the languages - just mention the common taxobox, or common general characteristics, and boom, Bulgarian gets content just as good as English.
Exactly the point of the Wikimedia Commons. No reason why wikispecies.org can't be pointed to the project page for taxobox/species relational info on the Commons. But all encyclopedic info (such as the example Jimbo gave from fishbase) should go into the respective wikipedia language versions. If that info is too much detail for the main article on any species/taxon, then [[evolution of ...]] and [[biology of ...]] articles could go into the needed detail with summaries left at the main entry.
But a common place to have things like taxoboxes will be most useful.
-- mav
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org