[Foundation-l] Rodovid.org, family tree wiki, wishes to become a wiki project

[Brian]

This would be most useful for famous families, which right now are only 
documented on our site as an unorganized list of names on a 
disambiguation page. Pointing to a graphical pedigree would make things 
much easier for people, especially with all the possibilities for 
back-and-forth interwiki links. See for example:  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acton#People

Then of course there's also the thought of building the most complete, 
freely accessible world family tree, a project that would require a big 
name to begin with, which Wikipedia has.

brian0918


Benjamin Webb wrote:

>Hello again.
>
>Firstly, I didn't actually write the software myself. It was
>Baya<http://engine.rodovid.org/wiki/User:Baya>who did. I am simply
>publiscising the project as I am a native speaker of
>English, whilst he is not. The main reason I think that becoming a WIkimedia
>project would be a good idea is the recognisation. The 'Wikimedia project'
>logo would bring credebility to the site.
>
>Also, of course is the traffic. The great benefit, that I will not get if
>the project is run independently is inter-wiki links. In the same way pages
>have a 'commons has media about the subject: x', if Rodovid became a
>Wikimedia project, we would be able to have 'Rodovid (or alternate name) has
>genealogical information about x'.
>
>Anyway, thanks for pointing me to the category Brian.
>
>Benjamin Webb
>
>On 25/03/06, Tim Starling <t.starling at physics.unimelb.edu.au> wrote:
>  
>
>>Angela wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>On 3/25/06, Benjamin Webb <bjwebb67 at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>I'd noticed that you'd menationed the specialised software on
>>>>        
>>>>
>>wikitree.org,
>>    
>>
>>>>I'd just be intereseted to know what you think about the specialised
>>>>software of Rodovid <http://rodovid.org> and what you, as someone high
>>>>        
>>>>
>>up
>>    
>>
>>>>the the foundation, think about it becoming a foundation project.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>That looks good too, and I've no opinion on whether Rodovid or
>>>Wikitree is using a better approach. Perhaps there are aspects of each
>>>that should be included. I'm also wondering whether Wikidata will fit
>>>into this somehow, or whether the structure you're using on Rodovid
>>>replaces that.
>>>
>>>The last time a genealogy wiki was seriously proposed as a Wikimedia
>>>project, there was little interest, and few answers to the questions I
>>>asked at <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikipeople>.  What
>>>software to use and what to do with the Sep11 wiki still need to be
>>>addressed. However, it is one of the proposals that comes up most
>>>often, so perhaps there is interest there, certainly from editors, but
>>>is there enough interest from developers to give this project the
>>>software changes it would need?
>>>      
>>>
>>The software Benjamin has written himself looks quite solid and reasonably
>>feature complete to me. I
>>don't see why he would need to attract interest from developers when he's
>>obviously quite a
>>proficient one himself. Wikimedia could certainly benefit from Benjamin's
>>expertise, if we could win
>>him over, but I'm not sure what benefit Benjamin expects to derive from
>>Wikimedia. Whether or not
>>this is a Wikimedia project, Benjamin will have to do most of the
>>development and promotion himself.
>>Hosting costs should be small during startup, easily covered by donations.
>>If he can avoid
>>Wikimedia's bureaucracy and run the project himself, why not do so?
>>
>>-- Tim Starling
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>foundation-l mailing list
>>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>    
>>
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>  
>