[Foundation-l] Incubator Wiki for New Wikimedia Projects

[Ray Saintonge]

Robert Scott Horning wrote:

> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>> Anthony DiPierro wrote:
>>
>>> As for Wikijunior, well, I find it hard to see how that's not a book,
>>> but that's a completely different discussion.
>>
>> The discussions for Wikiversity and Wikijunior have been going on for 
>> some time already.  Whatever one thinks of them, I don't think that 
>> their issues are the kind that would be solved in a seed project.  
>> The purpose of a seed project would be primarily to see if there is 
>> enough interest to sustain an otherwise acceptable project.  The 
>> problems connected with Wikiversity and Wikijunior are different; I 
>> have no doubt that if started both could easily meet the 
>> participation critera..  Neither project should be a part of this 
>> discussion.
>
> The problem with Wikiversity and Wikijunior is that they should have 
> been new proposed Wikimedia projects instead of something different. 
> Wikijunior, IMHO, was "forced" upon Wikibooks, and with the plan to 
> turn Wikijunior more into a kids version of Wikipedia, the connection 
> with Wikibooks is far less than what it could have been in the past. 
> Wikijunior is precisely what the seed wiki would be about... to get a 
> community going on a concept and see if there will be some viability 
> for keeping that community going.  Many Wikicities projects only last 
> a few weeks or months before they die out, and it would be a good idea 
> to see if that would happen before something gets the status of a full 
> Wikimedia sister project.  This seed wiki can provide that objective 
> view about some project idea.
>
> Why Wikijunior in particular is a part of this discussion is because 
> it is an objective example of what kind of project could be started on 
> the seed wiki.  It should have started on a seed wiki rather than on 
> Wikibooks, especially with the Beck Foundation grant and other issues 
> that still have yet to be explained fully within the Wikijunior 
> community, and some significant policy differences between Wikijunior 
> and Wikibooks.  I also have my doubts as to if Wikijunior could in 
> fact get the necessary participation criteria, but I'm willing to wait 
> and see.

As long as Wikijunior was only for producing age-appropriate textbooks 
for children it was probably fine in Wikibooks.  Something, however, 
which specifically seeks the participation of children is something 
else.  I think that the participation level may be easy to attain.  A 
far more worrisome problem would be what kind of people are involved.  
If parents start to see it as a haven for predators the damage could be 
severe.  Security standards need to be much higher than in the other 
projects.

Ec