[Foundation-l] Do we have a complete set of WMF projects?
Robin P.
robinp.1273 at gmail.com
Wed Sep 9 14:16:58 UTC 2009
Yes.
Btw, if we had a deadline, what should we do when a project reaches the
deadline? The most logical is deleting it. The problem with that, however,
is that nobody would contribute to a test project knowing that it will be
deleted when it reaches the deadline. If there is interest again, it would
then have to be undeleted. That would be also too much work for nothing.
So not really a solution.
2009/9/9 Jiri Hofman <hofmanj op aldebaran.cz>
> Are inactive project in incubator really such a big problem? Could not be
> strict deadlines given to new projects in incubator the solution of this
> problem?
>
> Jiri
>
> On Wednesday, 09. September 2009 16:10:26 Robin P. wrote:
> > In the past there were several project proposals on incubator, but we
> > deleted them because they were not active. Since then, tests for new WMF
> > projects are not allowed. If they were still allowed, Incubator would be
> > full of inactive projects. Even now, there are inactive test projects for
> > new languages, because the procedure is difficult and takes a very long
> > time. I assume requests for creating entirely new projects would require
> > even more difficult and longer procedures, resulting in an Incubator full
> of
> > inactive tests.
> >
> > 2009/9/9 Brian <Brian.Mingus op colorado.edu>
> >
> > > On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Erik Moeller <erik op wikimedia.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > 2009/9/8 Michael Peel <email op mikepeel.net>:
> > > > > What could be the cause of this recent dearth of new projects?
> > > >
> > > > Certainly the process for getting a new project underway is so
> complex
> > > > and exhausting that it's not something that many people will be
> likely
> > > > to engage in - especially considering that project ideas are often
> > > > proposed by people who aren't currently very active Wikimedians.
> > > > Perhaps we need to set up a formal system for long-time Wikimedians
> to
> > > > adopt ideas they're excited about, to help push them to approval? In
> > > > any event, if you want to add to the Wikimedia family, my guess is
> > > > that it's currently a commitment of 2-3 months of several hours per
> > > > week to get to that point, provided it's achievable to begin with.
> > > >
> > > > I do think that project adoption is something that we should explore
> > > > in the right circumstances; it's not something we've ever done but
> IMO
> > > > we should be open to it. I don't think OpenStreetMap or OpenLibrary
> > > > want or need to be adopted. ;-) But there may be other smaller
> > > > semi-successful projects that would like to join our project family,
> > > > and that would make sense as part of it.
> > > >
> > > > I would also make the point that adding capabilities to existing
> > > > projects can be just as effective at cultivating new communities of
> > > > participants as creating an entirely new wiki, and sometimes more so.
> > > > For example, as of a few weeks ago, there's now a fledgling community
> > > > of people on Wikimedia Commons who add annotations to images, because
> > > > a volunteer developed a cool image annotation tool. The entire
> > > > community of people adding categories to Wikipedia articles could
> only
> > > > form after the categorization functionality was developed.
> > > >
> > > > Because the Wikipedia community is so vast, adding capabilities that
> > > > engage more people on Wikipedia specifically, or improving access to
> > > > the existing capabilities, can have dramatically greater impact than
> > > > creating a blank-slate wiki.
> > > >
> > > > That is not to say that I think there should be no new blank-slate
> > > > wikis, or wikis with custom software, for specific purposes. But I
> > > > would also not see the fact that no new top-level Wikimedia project
> > > > has been created in recent years as a sign of stagnation - wonderful
> > > > capabilities have been created in the existing Wikimedia ecosystem in
> > > > that same time period, some of them with dramatic positive impact.
> > > > --
> > > > Erik Möller
> > > > Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
> > > >
> > > > Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
> > > >
> > > >
> > > I propose expanding the notion of the Wikimedia Incubator to include
> > > entirely new projects that are very, very easy to create. They don't
> need
> > > to
> > > be approved by the WMF - they just need to demonstrate their value by
> > > attracting a community and creating great content. This would be more
> like
> > > the Apache Incubator, but even more open. This gives people an easy way
> to
> > > prototype their ideas for new projects, to advertise them, and over
> time
> > > will give an overview of what kinds of projects and approaches to
> projects
> > > are likely to succeed and likely to fail.
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l op lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l op lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> *
> .
> .
> . ...
> . M45 ..
> M1 .
> # .
> * . . Jiri Hofman
> . . Opiskelijankatu 38 B28
> . * Tampere
> . ** 33720
> ¤. . Finland
> **. *
> .
> . . . *
> * . . . * .
> . .
> * . *
> * . *
> gsm: +358504661860 . .
> +358504384197 * .
> http://www.aldebaran.cz/~hofmanj <http://www.aldebaran.cz/%7Ehofmanj>
> .
> *
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l op lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
More information about the foundation-l
mailing list