[Wikimedia-l] An idea for a different type of community-pedia project

[Andreas Kolbe]

Doh! For "Wikipedia community governance review" at the end of the first
paragraph read "Wikimedia UK governance review".

A.

On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Andreas Kolbe <jayen466 at gmail.com> wrote:

> An idea that arose from a discussion on whether to lift restrictions on
> Gibraltarpedia hooks on the English Wikipedia main page (1), in the wake of
> the recently published Wikipedia community governance review (2):
>
> Would it not make sense to run content generation projects with a local
> focus – think Maltapedia, Guyanapedia etc. – under the aegis and
> supervision of the foundation, and with funding from donations and
> university grants, much like the Public Policy Initiative? This could
> involve hiring a freelance consultant to coordinate the project, paid and
> supervised by the foundation rather than a tourism office.
>
> Note that the Wikimedia UK governance review** commented on page 31 on an
> absence of "career paths" for Wikipedians, with the result that people had
> begun "inventing them". This type of project could provide a bona fide
> career path for Wikipedians that would remain under the supervision and
> control of the foundation.
>
> Content selection could be done strictly on the basis of an encyclopedic
> needs assessment, rather than on the basis of commercial interest. For
> example, if a particular country is poorly covered, or if there are dozens
> of sizeable Chinese cities that Wikipedia doesn't have articles for yet,
> there could be a corresponding Wikimedia project to expand coverage.
>
> Given that the foundation is "flush with funds, short on volunteers" (3),
> it strikes me that this could also be a powerful recruitment tool: a
> project like Maltapedia could be widely advertised in the press and
> specialist journals, along with a call for knowledgeable members of the
> public to come forward and join the effort, complete with a competition and
> prizes sponsored by the foundation. Publicity around such projects could
> also draw topic suggestions from the general public.
>
> This would be an alternative to projects like Monmouthpedia and
> Gibraltarpedia, which are funded by local government, tourism offices and
> the like, and are managed by private contractors. It might also avoid some
> of the pitfalls associated with these projects.
>
> Of course, there is no need to bar the latter type of project. There could
> still be a free market for this type of more commercially motivated
> community project, independently of the foundation's own projects.
>
> However, in order to cut out the paid product placement element, articles
> generated as part of such free-market projects should not qualify for
> Wikipedia main page DYK slots. Even without main page placement, there is
> still a benefit for people locally from better online coverage of their
> area; the incentive for participation should no longer include the promise
> of coverage on Wikipedia main pages (4), or incentivise the submission of
> DYKs.
>
> Andreas
>
> (1)
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know/Gibraltar-related_DYKs
>
> (2)
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_UK_gov_review_rpt_v5.djvu
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_UK_Governance_Review_Descriptive_Chronology_v6.djvu
>
> (3)
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-02-13/wikipedia-faces-shortage-of-editors/4515928
>
> (4)
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=rO6ZrWJeaOM#t=742s
>