[WikiEN-l] WIKIPEDIA FOREVER

[stevertigo]

Brian J Mingus <Brian.Mingus at colorado.edu> wrote:
> I believe the banner will be judged, not based on the almost universally bad
> impressions of it that I have seen from Wikipedians, but based on how much
> money it makes. I don't think it's surprising that the banner rubs many
> Wikipedians the wrong way. It was created by a PR agency with the express
> purpose of raking in as much cash as possible. It's supposed to hit all the
> right chords of the hundreds of millions of visitors that will see it, of
> whom we long time Wikipedians are a miniscule fraction.

Well its tacky - if for no other reason that it presumes to represent
Wikipedia's eternal presence. Which is an interesting thought about
futurism, but one that needs an essay to link to.  And the slogan is
in SHOUTCASE, which everybody knows is the quasi-official font of
tacky.

So, not to be too hard on the creative marketing staff who came up
with the slogan, or the executive staff who somehow implemented it, it
just belies our sense of tradition and community so see things like
these (or any things we do for that matter) implemented without open
collaboration - the kind that usually mitigates tackiness, or any
appearance thereof.

The best (worst) part is the conceptualization of 'protection' - "Our
shared knowledge. Our shared treasure. Help us protect it" and "This
is where we protect Wikipedia, the encyclopedia written by the people"
read like they were written from a commodity point of view, by someone
who doesn't understand that Wikipedia is actually about destroying
traditional knowledge more than it is about preserving it.

Wikimedia's job is in fact just to keep the lights on - not to
"protect" Wikipedia (which, ironically, would get along just fine
without Wikimedia).

-Stevertigo