[Foundation-l] Is popularity a good thing for us?

[GerardM]

Hoi,
This is an argument that points in two directions. If you know anything
about me, you know that you arguing my typical case. :) You are battling a
turf war, is it Wikinews or Wikipedia that can do news. You want to take
away from  Wikipedia something that Wikipedia excells in. So make them an
offer that they cannot refuse.
Thanks,
     GerardM

On Dec 17, 2007 3:32 PM, Andrew Whitworth <wknight8111 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Dec 17, 2007 6:25 AM, GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > There are philosophical reasons to exclude news material from Wikipedia,
> but
> > doing so is clearly detrimental to Wikipedia. Wikinews does not have the
> > exposure that Wikipedia has. It will not get people searching for
> > newsupdates as it happens on Wikipedia. Wikinews has policies that are
> > unknown and unfamiliar to Wikipedians.  In a perfect world the news
> would be
> > in Wikinews, animals and plants in Wikispecies ... but that is not the
> > reality of things in reality you find them in Wikipedia as well.
>
> This is precisely the aspect of Wikipedia that is most infuriating to
> members of the sister projects. The unwillingness to "share", the
> refusal to help the sister projects, the arrogance to think that
> somehow you can just do it all without having to respect boundaries.
> That somehow directing "breaking news" traffic to wikinews would hurt
> Wikipedia is nonsensical. If you allow projects to focus on their
> specialties, you create a series of projects that are definitive
> examples of their particular niche (encyclopedia, news agency, etc).
> The name recognition of all projects increase because the purpose of
> each becomes more well defined. In the end, being known as a "great
> encyclopedia" is more important then being known as an "adequate
> information pile".
>
> Admitting that Wikipedia's specialty is in being an encyclopedia (and
> not a news agency, species repository, book library, etc) is a
> milestone in growth, stability, and maturity that many people (myself
> included) are anxiously waiting for Wikipedia to pass. The "We can do
> whatever we want because we are Wikipedia and we aren't like
> traditional encyclopedias" crap is an admission that you have no
> focus, no specialty, and no understanding of your own core
> competencies.
>
> --Andrew Whitworth
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>