[Textbook-l] Wikiversity and Wikibooks: can we answer the perennial question?

[Peter van Londen]

Hi

2007/11/14, Cormac Lawler <cormaggio at gmail.com>:
>
> On 11/14/07, Peter van Londen <londenp at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > So in short: I would welcome to start with Wikiversity within the
> Wikibooks
> > project, having a separate entree (a redirect from nl.wikiversity.org)
> but
> > not splitting up the community. At least not until we are bigger and
> until
> > the idea behind Wikiversity stands.
>
>
> Thanks very much Peter. :-) However, I'd like to counter the argument
> that creating a Wikiversity will automatically involve splitting the
> existing Wikibooks community - because it is entirely possible (and
> I've seen this myself) that creating a new project with a
> substantially different goal will attract a *new community* of people.
> People are inspired differently by the name Wikiversity than with
> Wikibooks (and vice versa) - some people might not be motivated to
> contribute in one, but they will be in the other. And of course, some
> people will move between both projects, cross-pollinating initiatives,
> and looking for ways to collaborate and share (which should always be
> the goal, in my opinion). So the argument that a split will
> *necessarily* be dividing both projects too thinly does not hold true
> for me (even though it might do in certain ways and circumstances).


Indeed not necessarily but why run the risk? I am open to start up a
Wikiversity in Dutch language, just to attract people to the Dutch
educational projects, being Wikibooks and Wikiversity (and being less
educational the Wikipedia). I did propose that before this discussion in the
Dutch-WB "educators room" in having within Wikibooks four departments being
Wikibooks, Wikijunior, Cookbook and Wikiversity. I really think Wikiversity
would attract people we would not count on in the first place and maybe then
when we have them on board we can think of splitting up the projects.

The other Dutch projects like Wikiquote, Wikisource and Wikinews have there
vegetating periodes now and then or are run by one or two enthusiasts. I
would hate for Wikibooks and Wikiversity to go the same way.

Another idea is: stop with wikibooks and wikiversity at all, as the names do
not cover the intention of the projects anyhow. Wikilearning or Wikieducate
would fit better for both but seem to be taken by other communities, but
that is what we are doing with both projects. So yes I agree with you that
Wikibooks would be better a part of Wikiversity then the other way around,
but this is not what happened as WB started first.

I think the key to this is, as you say yourself, definition of the
> project(s). Wikiversity is understood differently by many of its
> contributors - and I really don't know what many people 'around the
> edges' understand of it. :-) (And that example you bring up -
> Filmmaking - is not, for me, the be-all-and-end-all of Wikiversity
> learning resources - but rather reflects *one* example of creating
> educational resources.) So, this is what I'm trying to raise here -
> how are we to define each project in relation (or contrast) to each
> other? (Restating a previous question: what can Wikiversity do that
> Wikibooks never can?) And should we be thinking of "not splitting
> projects", "splitting and collaborating", or "merging into a larger
> goal"?


Merging into a larger goal would be my idea.

About defining the projects, this is mainly a thing done by the first group,
being in most cases the English communities. But you can not expect that
people from other languages/countries would not have a different view. This
can be based on experiences with different educational systems then the
Anglo-Saxon systems. So how much you would want to get other languages to
adopt the definitions made by the first group you can not impose this upon
other language communities. You can try to find a common base, but then you
should be prepared that your definition has to be changed to fit to the
ideas of different languages. In fact exactly then when you think you are
done with the process.

I reacted on your mail, but I also have read the mail from Teemu and I find
his ideas also interesting.
Wikiversity for creating educational programs and Wikibooks for the content
as a clear distinction is quite convincing to me.

Peter/Londenp