[Foundation-l] Porchesia

Birgitte SB birgitte_sb at yahoo.com
Mon Oct 2 01:37:34 UTC 2006

--- Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 10/1/06, Luiz Augusto <lugusto at gmail.com> wrote:
> > WikiMedia isn't only WikiPedia. I'm on wikibreak
> in anothers wikis and now
> > edit only in Wikisource. I can't find any problem
> with encyclopedic articles
> > because my home wiki is intended to host only
> primary sources.
> > English Wikipedia have your on mailing list and
> wikipedia-l is intended to
> > be a mailing list for global issues on Wikipedia
> projects. The
> > question of credibility
> > is relevant to all Wikimedia projects, but
> attempts in talk about
> > encyclopedia credibility is not relevant to all
> Wikimedia projects.

> It's funny that you'd effectively accuse the person
> who is probably
> the #1 human contributor to enWiksource (Danny) of
> having project
> tunnel vision.

Danny is a huge contributor at Wikisource.  I don't
see why a person stating they dislike something or the
way something is handled should be taken as a knock on
the person who brought it up.  Danny bringing this
sort of thing is up is not suddenly new or something
particular to Danny.  However the fact that something
has been done in the past does not mean it can never
be objected to now or in the future.

> The fact of the matter is that the problems
> discussed in this thread
> are a real concern for all of our projects,
> including Wikisource.
> Any solution which would help us keep imaginary
> islands out of
> Wikisource would also likely help us keep imaginary
> primary sources
> out of Wikisource.
> Collectively we need to figure out how to work
> together better across
> the project and linguistic barriers that divide us. 
> Simply putting
> our heads in the sand and pretending that the
> difficulties of openness
> are limited to enwiki is counterproductive.

I don't disagree with this but you are missing the
point of the criticism.  People from all sorts of
projects come here when they have hit a brick wall 
When they have a problem or a question they *cannot*
handle within their own community.  When they can find
no solution, no answer, on their own someone suggests
asking foundation-l and they do.  They often get very
little help.  They may get a large response, but
generally very little help.  

Now en.WP has an amazing amount of resources. 
REsources which are very focused on en.WP.  To remind
you of  this I will quote what I was told by david
gerard when pointing out the unbalenced amount of
development resources at en.WP

"That is: if your project doesn't get its favourite
bugs fixed, it's
not favouritism to en:wp - it's your project not
contributing to the
development. These are volunteers, if you recall."

So en.WP has many, many of "their" volunteers. 
Manpower that is unbelievable to the wider Wikimedia
community.  But now, and this just not about
Porchesia, when en.WP has a problem.  When en.WP has
this problem it is brought straight to this list to
ask the attention and help of this wider Wikimedia
community.  Now any other project, tries their hardest
to solve a problem themselves before coming here.  But
en.WP with their massive resources and manpower. 
en.WP skips the step of working on the problem within
the project and comes straight here to use the
resources of the wider Wikimedia community.  And the
wider Wikimedia community is supposed to work on this
with the hope there might be some carryover to their
own home project.  Still when the home project has a
problem, they are not given answers and solutions.  I
was told to "adjust my expectations to reality".  Many
others are told that they must figure it out "within
the community".  But no one except en.WP comes here
until they exhausted the ability of thier home
community.  I am just asking that en.WP approach this
list as every other project in the wider Wikimedia
community does.

Birgitte SB

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 

More information about the foundation-l mailing list