[Foundation-l] Rethinking brands

GerardM gerard.meijssen at gmail.com
Wed May 9 07:07:19 UTC 2007

When you end this Wikipedia is everything else and now make it Wikipedia is
the organisation as well, does that mean that there is a need for an
organisation for every project ??

On 5/9/07, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> On 5/9/07, Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Some of our projects (Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Commons, Wikiquote)
> > naturally lend themselves to a kind of "shallow" entry where number of
> > hits is a more or less accurate metric for success - people come to
> > these projects looking for bite-sized pieces (one page) of
> > information.
> Wikipedia, one page of information? Many topics start with very
> detailed overview articles and allow you to explore in depth, and the
> creative uses around Wikipedia that we know about certainly encompass
> everything you list for Wikibooks+. You can definitely consult WP in
> similar manners as you would a textbook. Yes, the average engagement
> with the resource may be shorter. But I think traffic is still a
> reasonable measure of that, as short lookups are unlikely to lead to
> lots of subsequent hits. And, let's not kid ourselves as to the size
> of the gap in recognition & use.
> > Anyway, your general comparisons with Google are not wholly
> > convincing, because Google Mail is built by paid Google employees who
> > don't need to be personally invested in the identity and importance of
> > the project they're working on.
> To be fair, the largest community that Google operates is not strongly
> Google-branded: Orkut. But there's another big difference, in that
> Wikipedia _does_ stand for a community of values & the non-profit that
> operates it, not just for some faceless corporate entity.
> The strongest argument against the rebranding I see is that people do
> not want to be seen as mere service providers to Wikipedia. I can
> argue against that perception, of course (which I think is certainly
> logically flawed), but if that is the majority feeling, and unlikely
> to change, then it may be pointless to debate the issue any further
> (and be useful to limit the discussion, perhaps, to the
> Wikimedia/Wikipedia confusion). So, the best next step will probably
> be to summarize the arguments that have been made here, and to poll
> for some numbers.
> --
> Peace & Love,
> Erik
> DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
> the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
> "An old, rigid civilization is reluctantly dying. Something new, open,
> free and exciting is waking up." -- Ming the Mechanic
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

More information about the foundation-l mailing list