[Foundation-l] Community Assembly

[Samuel Klein]

Pharos, I think that many such 'separate projects' do come into being on
parent sites, sometimes with initial friction (with people saying that the
new entries do not belong).  I agree with your point that active merging as
well as branching of projects is good - a sign of evolution and
homeostasis.

Meta is a good place to discuss most things, but I don't know that meta is
the /best/ place to propose something until one has a clear enough idea and
enough effort being put into a fledgling project for it to be viable as
something new, unless all existing projects disown the type of material in
question.

SJ


On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 11:29 PM, Pharos <pharosofalexandria at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 5:25 PM, Jesse Plamondon-Willard
> <pathoschild at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Pharos <pharosofalexandria at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Isn't that a sign of stagnation?
> >> [...]
> >> I'm personally of the opinion that some of our existing projects
> >> might benefit by being merged, and I feel this should be an
> >> issue for a community structure to consider as well.
> >
> > Isn't that contradictory? You feel that creating few new projects (low
> > growth) is a sign of stagnation, which the community assembly could
> > correct by un-creating a few (negative growth)?
>
> "Do I contradict myself? Very well then I contradict myself, (I am
> large, I contain multitudes.)"
>
> The growth that we need as a vibrant Wikimedia is the addition of new
> types of reference works to our collections.  This is the growth that
> is stagnating.
>
> Now, whether a proposal is eventually implemented as a new wiki, or as
> a defined "subproject" under an existing wiki (like Wikijunior on
> Wikibooks or Wikisaurus on Wiktionary), is a different issue.  It
> should, in my opinion, ultimately be a pragmatic decision based on
> what can form a viable separate wiki.  And a few of our existing
> projects perhaps do not have this type of independent viability.
>
> Wikijunior and Wikisaurus, I believe, started as proposals on Meta
> too.  And I believe Meta is the right place for these types of
> proposals, whether they are eventually implemented as new wikis, or as
> defined "subprojects" under existing wikis.  And for discussion of the
> possible merging of existing wikis too.  Not necessarily in a
> "community assembly", but certainly in some more developed community
> structure than we have now.
>
> Thanks,
> Pharos
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>