[Foundation-l] On curiosity, cats and scapegoats

[Phil Nash]

MZMcBride wrote:
> Jimmy Wales wrote:
>> On 9/7/11 9:15 AM, Milos Rancic wrote:
>>> I think that damage produced by this<whatever>  should be localized.
>>> The target is English Wikipedia, Board is not especially interested
>>> in other Wikipedia editions and other projects in English; which
>>> means that it should be localized on English Wikipedia.
>>
>> Milos, you are way out of line here.  The board is not especially
>> interested in English Wikipedia, and indeed, very little of our
>> discussion of this feature has any particular relevance to English
>> Wikipedia.
>
> It's not out of line to suggest that Wikimedia is especially
> interested in the English Wikipedia. It's _indisputable_ at the
> Wikimedia Foundation level. Whether it's as true at the Wikimedia
> Board level is a bit more arguable, though there's a good deal of
> evidence to suggest that it's equally true there. A cursory look at
> the Wikimedia Board resolutions is pretty damning.
>
> When the Wikimedia Foundation places the English Wikipedia on a
> pedestal and treats all other wiki projects/families as peripheral,
> it's not at all unexpected that occasionally people will vent
> frustration at this.
>
> MZMcBride

I think it's more the case that Wikipedia is the most prominent project 
within the WM umbrella, and therefore, it attracts commensurate attention. 
Whereas I have only slight experience of other language WPs than en:wp, my 
take is that when local problems arise, the natural focus for complaint 
seems to be Jimbo's en:wp Talk page rather than a Meta page. en:wp editors 
quite rightly have directed those complaints to more appropriate venues. 
Whether this is due to local wp problems, I cannot tell.

Whether en:wp should be regarded as a paragon of virtue w.r.t. WM seems to 
me to be extremely moot; being the most trafficked project within the WM 
umbrella, it clearly is going to be the cockpit for some disputes, perhaps 
more those based on policy rather than content, and it is, like any 
sub-project, self-governing, and the Foundation does not step in, in either 
an advisory, administrative, admonitory, or judicial capacity, and perhaps 
nor should it.

It would be wonderful if en:wp could be *the* model of behaviour, structure, 
review, and "how to write an online encyclopedia", but, sadly, it ain't. I'd 
amplify, but I'm tired; of more or less everything. I didn't come here to 
fight for the obvious, because it should be simply that: obvious. I'm glad 
in a way, that I am banned from Wikipedia, because it no longer stresses me 
as it did- unfortunately for the world, I can no longer add to the sum total 
of human knowledge, as Jimmy so optimistically offered. I keep a list of 
articles suitable for en:wp, but missing; but it doesn't shrink in the 
current circumstances. What a waste of an opportunity!