[Wikimedia-l] "Adopt a page"
peter.southwood at telkomsa.net
Sun Mar 31 04:06:00 UTC 2013
How would sponsorship money for a page be spent to make the sponsorship
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steven Walling" <steven.walling at gmail.com>
To: "Wikimedia Mailing List" <wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2013 9:51 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] "Adopt a page"
> On Saturday, March 30, 2013, Strainu wrote:
>> Guys, I think you're reading more into it than it is. When you're
>> an animal you don't get to decide what and how much it gets to eat.
>> Similarly adopting a wiki page wouldn't mean you pay for having a say on
>> the content. At the bottom end of the reward scale you could get a badge
>> you could put on YOUR website, without having your name on Wikipedia at
>> I'm not necessarely in favour of this idea but i wanted to see if it's
>> discussed before. I guess that if it has, people havebeen confusing this
>> idea with paid editing.
> Big +1 to this comment.
> There's actually plenty of even more neutral ways to do this IMO, and none
> of them have anything to do with promoting the donor or paid editing. For
> example: a simple count of how many readers donated in support of this
> article. "This article sponsored by 70 Wikipedia readers like you.
> Contribute today by editing or donating." Or something like that.
> Anyway this discussion should be on a public wiki, ideally Meta, and we
> should invite Megan, Zack, and the rest of the fundraising team, not to
> mention the wider community.
>> Pe sâmbătă, 30 martie 2013, Thomas Morton
>> > It's a weird dichotomy.
>> > I've spent several hundred quid on source material for my current topic
>> > area. I could easily have spent several grand.
>> > Paid editing is a major issue, because it conflicts with our culture
>> > But if someone were able to buy my sources then it would be of huge
>> > benefit.
>> > And, controversially, if someone could fund me one day a week to write
>> > these articles I could likely expand from one GA per month to covering
>> > entire field in GAs in a year.
>> > Without that it will take me a good five years
>> > I've come recently to see that funding article work is not inherently
>> > an
>> > awful thing. But it needs to be done with extreme care to protect our
>> > ideals and neutrality. And that is a HARD problem.
>> > Tom
>> > On Saturday, March 30, 2013, Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> >> On Mar 30, 2013 1:04 AM, "Mono" <monomium at gmail.com
>> >> >
>> >> > How so?
>> >> It would be completely against our culture. Wikipedia is a volunteer
>> >> written encyclopedia.
>> >> You would end up with a two-tier system of paid editors and unpaid
>> >> There would inevitably be a lot of conflict between those groups. The
>> >> concept would be extremely divisive.
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.2240 / Virus Database: 2641/5714 - Release Date: 03/30/13
More information about the Wikimedia-l