[Foundation-l] A Wikimedia project has forked

[Jussi-Ville Heiskanen]

On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 6:04 AM, Phil Nash <phnash at blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> Sue Gardner wrote:
>> On 12 September 2011 18:15, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 12 September 2011 23:45, Samuel Klein <meta.sj at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Now: what do we need to do to make Wikinews better and more useful?
>>>> What are the costs and technical or other work involved?
>>>
>>> Very little. Mostly wikinews is misstargeted. Yet another website
>>> rewriting AP reports is never going to draw crowds. Wikinews needed
>>> original research and never really had very much of it. It is also
>>> operating in an extremely crowded market where as wikipedia had the
>>> field pretty much to itself when it started.
>>
>> Jimmy said once that part of the reason Wikipedia works so well is
>> because everybody knows what an encyclopedia article is supposed to
>> look like.
>
> Practical experience on a day-to-day basis would suggest that this is unduly
> optimistic. We are failing to attract new editors who can be, or wish to be,
> educated into "what an encyclopedia article is supposed to look like", and
> are discarding those experienced editors who do. Even those who remain but
> are becoming increasingly disillusioned with all the nonsense that goes on
> will eventually leave, or create a fork of Wikipedia, and to be honest, if I
> had the money right now, I'd do it myself, and cast ArbCom in its present
> form into the bottomless pit.
>
> I used to care about Wikipedia, as did others, but it's becoming
> increasingly difficult to do so.
>
>

If money is the problem, I can solve that. I recently came into an inheritance.



-- 
--
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]