[Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

[Ting Chen]

Hello Ziko,

speaking for myself. I am for such an approach. But I would also like to 
see such a project, because it is so important, to be prepared 
carefully. The suggestions is not made the first time, and last time 
when the suggetion was on meta, it was discussed until no one can give 
it a chance anymore.

I also don't see such a project really as a compititor to the "adult" 
Wikipedia. I think both projects can benefit from each other alot.

Now one step back. Encyclopedia for kids is not new. A lot of classic 
encyclopedia has their kid version. This shows that a kid encyclopedia 
is not just an encyclopedia in "dumn" language. Contrarily, I think a 
kid encyclopedia is far more challenging to write, because you need more 
pedagogic skills. And building up such skills by our contributors can 
again benefit Wikipedia. There are also other online kid encyclopedia 
from which we can learn from their experiences. I definitively would 
like to see what Robert would find out in this respect and how his 
research can encourage us or help us in this new endeavor.

Greetings
Ting

Ziko van Dijk wrote:
> Hello,
>
> It seems to me doubtless that there is a substantial number of active
> Wikimedians who see the need in a simple or children-encyclopedia and
> would like to invest some of their own sweat, blood and tears. Others,
> who disagree, may stand on the side line and comment if they like.
>
> There are a lot of single questions when defining the exact scope
> etc., but the main question remains: Would WMF accept such a project,
> or would it reject it for being just another Wikipedia in already
> existing languages. So, how different the new project must be from
> Wikipedia. The original fear is that a linguistic group is split into
> two communities whereas the forces usually should be concentrated in
> one Wikipedia. A Wikipedia in "simple English", we were told, is
> essentially a Wikipedia in English.
>
> But if a project, for example, directs itself to a relativeley limited
> group of readers (children), with consequences for the content
> (limited length of articles, no explicit images), usage of language
> (no hard words), wouldn't it be different enough from a "usual"
> Wikipedia?
>
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
>
>
> 2010/6/27 Ting Chen <wing.philopp at gmx.de>:
>   
>> Hello Milos,
>>
>> reading your mail below I am wondering why your reaction on my first
>> mail was so aggressive. It looks to me as if your consideration is not
>> that far away from mine. Especially I wrote in my suggestion that first
>> of all the project must have a very clearly defined scope and audiance,
>> second that it should have a more rigid editorial and anti-vandal
>> mechanism and third that we need more research.
>>
>> Greetings
>> Ting
>>
>> Milos Rancic wrote:
>>     
>>> On Sat, Jun 26, 2010 at 2:09 AM, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> The difference was that Wikipedia was not made for young people.
>>>>
>>>> If I run a social group for adults and there are issues with children
>>>> who visit, I can blame it on their parents and say they should control
>>>> them better. If I run a social group for children, I'm now a childcare
>>>> provider and have a greater degree of responsibility.
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> It is not [just] about blaming each other. It is about underestimating
>>> child capacities and playing with their trust.
>>>
>>> Child is perfectly able to recognize what is "for adults" and what is
>>> "for children": everything not marked ("marked" in various ways) as
>>> "for children" is for adults. And they are able to treat differently
>>> those two types of phenomena. "For adults" is not safe, while "for
>>> children" is safe. Depending on circumstances, "for children"
>>> phenomena could be also boring to them, but safe.
>>>
>>> And if we want to make a project in which children will trust as safe,
>>> we have much higher responsibility than we have for creating any other
>>> project not marked as a "project for children".
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> foundation-l mailing list
>>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>
>>>       
>> --
>> Ting
>>
>> Ting's Blog: http://wingphilopp.blogspot.com/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>     
>
>
>
>   


-- 
Ting

Ting's Blog: http://wingphilopp.blogspot.com/