[Foundation-l] It Is not Us
gerard.meijssen at gmail.com
Wed Jun 29 06:37:04 UTC 2011
Recently research showed that the majority of our editors is multi lingual
and edits on multiple projects. This is without considering Commons ... I
have a user on 491 projects and I am certainly not the only one who has many
As we did not know the extend to which we generally edit in many languages,
we have not considered the needs of this majority. Our view has always been
on single projects. We can do better and we should do better for our
On 28 June 2011 13:27, Peter Coombe <thewub.wiki at googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 28 June 2011 08:35, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hoi,
> > I have read the replies that are against social networking functionality.
> > my opinion you are all missing the point. Our projects are crowd sourced
> > projects and we do not support collaboration, we do not support special
> > projects. We need to.
> Yeah! Special projects with a narrower focus would be great, how about
> giving them a catchy name like "WikiProjects". Maybe we could give
> every article a "talk page" for users to collaborate on. Heck, let's
> go mad and give users their own talk pages too! Now if only there was
> some protocol for real time chats we could use...
> > Social networking in our context will not be a Facebook, a Twitter or an
> > IRC. It will have the parts that we need and it will support our
> > Thanks,
> I'm all for improving the interface around these things, but exactly
> what functionality are you asking for that we don't already have?
> Pete / the wub
> > On 27 June 2011 18:24, Nathan <nawrich at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Gerard Meijssen
> >> <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Hoi.
> >> > Wikipedia should be more like a social network. It provides us with
> >> > opportunity to reach out to people when we want to crowd source some
> >> > activity. We have a problem in retaining people particular newbies.
> >> we
> >> > show a social side to our work on open content (not only encyclopaedic
> >> > content) we stand a better chance we are likely to do better.
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > GerardM
> >> That's an interesting theory. Wikipedia is sort of the epitome of a
> >> social enterprise, and all of the good and the bad in the project can
> >> be traced to its social nature. Trying to make it more like a "social
> >> network" can only be interpreted as making it more like some other
> >> social network, perhaps by integrating purely social mechanisms a la
> >> Facebook. Of course, that could either help or hinder, with no way to
> >> know for sure in advance; perhaps encouraging more social interaction
> >> would exacerbate and personalize the disputes and conflicts that drive
> >> people away.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> foundation-l mailing list
> >> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
More information about the foundation-l