[Foundation-l] Vote to create Wikiversity Vote

[Robert Scott Horning]

Anthony DiPierro wrote:

>On 11/9/05, Robert Scott Horning <robert_horning at netzero.net> wrote:
>  
>
>>This legwork has already been
>>accomplished, and the real question is why should this work be
>>duplicated by a seperate organization?
>>
>>--
>>Robert Scott Horning
>>    
>>
>
> That's simple, really - time and money. The people who donated to Wikimedia
>donated the money thinking it would be used to create books, encyclopedias,
>etc., not to run a school. That's the money story, but the more important
>one is time. The board of Wikimedia is stretched too thinly as it is.
>Wikipedia editors can't even participate in Wikibooks or Wikinews without
>creating separate logins. Admins on one project often have to go through a
>long process just to be able to effectively fight vandalism on another
>project. There is very little communication between the different projects.
>Starting up yet another half-baked project with no clear leadership is only
>going to make matters worse.
>
This is a project that has been openly debated within the Wikimedia 
community as a whole.  This debate has been brought onto as large of a 
forum and had far more participation from all opinions and philosophies 
as any single issue has ever had for any topic in the entire history of 
the Wikimedia Foundation or even Wikipedia.  That you have a point of 
view is obvious, and you are entitled to that opinion, but I have a 
contrary opinion that Wikiversity as a seperate domain and a seperate 
"sister project" under the Wikimedia Foundation can succeed and benefit 
all of the Wikimedia projects.  This is not "another half-baked project" 
but something with a real goal in mind and some very clear leadership. 
 That there are multiple opinions on how to accomplish the goals of 
Wikiversity is more the issue, and many people fighting in the arena of 
ideas are trying to figure out how to accomplish the goals of Wikiversity.

As far as admins from one project fighting vandalism on another project, 
my experience is that admins from Wikipedia (just as an example) 
generally don't understand the philosophies and policies on the other 
projects very well unless they have been active participants and gone 
through the process of learning just like they had to do on Wikipedia in 
the first place.  I for one don't feel too comfortable on Wikipedia and 
the high pressure of trying to resolve conflicts in a short period of 
time is not my style.  I am always telling editors who are more familiar 
with Wikipedia that when editing and making changes on Wikbooks, 
particularly dispute resolution like VfD discussions, Wikibooks simply 
takes more time to accomplish the same task.  Have a little bit more 
patience and try to acknowledge that it isn't the same group of editors 
you were previously used to working with.

I don't think the seperate login is as bad of a thing as you seem to 
think it might be.

As far as the people who donated to Wikimedia hoping that it would be 
used only for Wikipedia, I think that is both shortsighted on your part 
with regards to the donors as well as something the donors should be in 
general better informed about when they give money to the Foundation. 
 Most of what Wikiversity is going to be doing on the website anyway is 
writing curriculum standards, course syllibi, instructional examples, 
and testing materials.  How is that any different from writing books or 
encyclopedia articles.  Besides, all of these tasks have been happening 
on Wikibooks anyway.  The only real debate is if these tasks should 
happen as a seperate project or if it is something that belongs within 
Wikibooks.

In addition, this whole discussion wouldn't be happening at all if it 
weren't for the fact that the German Wikiversity, 
http://de.wikiversity.org/ hadn't been started already without going 
through the new project discussions and procedures.  The VfD discussion 
on Wikibooks was in part triggered by a move on the part of a Wikibooks 
admin who requested that en.wikiversity be started as well.  I hope that 
no new projects get started on the fly like the German Wikiversity, and 
my forcing a vote on the issue was only to try and get Wikiversity 
started the way it should have in the first place rather than as a 
"stealth" project with no discussion.  I've shot down Wikijunior as a 
seperate project for the same reason, strongly suggesting that if the 
one user trying to push for Wikijunior to be a seperate Wiki domain 
wants that accomplished, that he needs to go through the established new 
project procedure instead.  That seems to be too much work and he wants 
to short-circuit the whole process.

-- 
Robert Scott Horning