[Foundation-l] How was the "only people who averaged two edits a week in the last six months can vote" rule decided?

[Pavlo Shevelo]

> I was thinking particularly of ... Wikifamily (Rodovid),

If you're thinking of _this_ Rodovid http://en.rodovid.org/ (frontend
is http://rodovid.org/) I would strongly vote for that.

It's really is
> useful for significant audiences,
and
> implementable in an
> elegant way

In fact it's implemented already though development is going on (as
never ending process).

I would say that there is great synergy (between Rodovid and
Wikipedia) opportunity as there is a lot of genealogy information to
be described for Wikipedia.

As of
> ... if they
> still need support of any kind, but their proposals for Wikimedia
> hosting remain.

I don't know (and never new) the team that is not in need of help.


On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Samuel Klein<meta.sj at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 9:09 PM, Erik Moeller<erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>> 2009/7/31 Samuel Klein <meta.sj at gmail.com>:
>>> On critical complex topics, the Foundation could benefit from more
>>> discussion and better planning.  Why have we made it so hard to start
>>> new Projects?
>>
>> I would suggest that we use the strategy call for proposals to
>> re-surface some of the most important project ideas that people would
>> like to bring attention to.
>>
>> http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Call_for_Proposals
>
> Yes.
>
>> IMO there's simply a lack of community support for a lot of ideas,
>> either because people feel they are bad ideas, out of scope for our
>> mission, already covered within the scope of existing projects, or
>> hard to make work with the existing software. That said, I think there
>
> I was thinking particularly of Wikikids and Wikifamily (Rodovid),
> which are useful for significant audiences, implementable in an
> elegant way, about creating and sharing collections of free knowledge,
> and have existing multilingual communities.  I don't know if they
> still need support of any kind, but their proposals for Wikimedia
> hosting remain.
>
>> are definitely many ideas that are worth exploring further.
>>
>> My personal favorites:
>> * a shared repository for structured data, the equivalent to Wikimedia
>> Commons for data (some coherent synthesis of ideas from FreeBase,
>> OmegaWiki, and Semantic MediaWiki);
>> * a wiki for the global community of makers to share designs and
>> prototypes for both functional and entertaining objects, which is
>> becoming increasingly important as fabbing facilities become
>> commonplace;
>> * a wiki for annotated source code examples, similar to LiteratePrograms.org;
> +1
>
>> * a wiki for standardization;
>> * a dedicated public outreach / evangelism wiki.
>
> What would this look like?
>
> Also...
> *A wiki for book metadata, with an entry for every published work,
> statistics about its use and siblings, and discussion about its
> usefulness as a citation (a collaboration with OpenLibrary, merging
> WikiCite ideas)
>
> Sj
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>