[Foundation-l] Do we have a complete set of WMF projects?

[Michael Peel]

On 2 Sep 2009, at 12:35, David Goodman wrote:

> There is sufficient missing material in  every Wikipedia, sufficient
> lack of coverage of areas outside the primary language zone and in
> earlier periods, sufficient unsourced material; sufficient need for
> updating  articles, sufficient potentially free media to add,
> sufficient needed imagery to get;  that we have more than enough work
> for all the volunteers we are likely to get.

I apologise for taking this slightly out of context, but it touches  
upon something I've been wondering about recently, which is: do we  
have a complete set of WMF projects?

David focuses on Wikipedia, which is the main project, and also  
touches on Wikimedia Commons. We also have (in no particular order)  
WikiBooks, WikiSource, WikiNews, Wikiversity, Wiktionary, Wikiquote  
and WikiSpecies, in all their various languages. Each of these has  
essentially its own set of volunteers (so I disagree with David's  
assertion at the end of his paragraph - different work brings in  
different volunteers).

The latest* one of these projects is Wikiversity, which opened on 15  
September 2006. That's almost 3 years ago. In terms of internet time,  
that's practically a generation ago.

Do we now have all of the projects running now that we could have  
running? Are all of the gaps in our project coverage already done  
sufficiently well by someone else that we couldn't improve on matters  
by having our own?

My personal feeling is that there's plenty of scope for new Wikimedia  
projects. There have been plenty mentioned on this mailing list, or  
on the various wikis, etc.** A wiki version of OpenLibrary is a good  
example of something we could try; even if it failed then it wouldn't  
be time wasted, as the result could be fed into OpenLibrary. So, I  
think the answer to my question is "no".

What could be the cause of this recent dearth of new projects?

Could it be the presence of Wikia?

Are we stuck in the mindset of just Wikipedia + supporting projects?

Is the technical side of things too moribund to easily establish new  
projects?

Are we afraid of trying new things (or worse, unable to try new things)?

Do we lack the leadership to make new projects successful?

Is it a limitation of not being able to make a living from working on  
Wikimedia projects?

Wikimedia is big enough that it can launch new projects very  
publicly, and get a lot of support (both volunteer and financial)  
very quickly. It's widespread enough that you can ask a group of  
people in any room if they know of Wikipedia, and over half of them  
will.*** Actually editing Wikipedia might not appeal to them, but  
working on a different project could, especially if it's in their  
speciality.

One final question: do we need to start looking for project donations  
- i.e. absorbing projects started elsewhere?

Mike

PS: my questions here are posed to be provocative. Please don't take  
them as accurately representing my viewpoints.

* Note that increasing the number of languages that these projects  
use doesn't in my mind count as a new project.
** A few of my favourite examples: WikiJournal, publishing scholarly  
works; WikiReview, providing in-depth reviews of subjects; WikiWrite,  
where fiction can be written collaboratively; etc.
*** Country-dependent. Your language may vary.