[Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia 1.0 or Wikipedia 2004

[Peter Jaros]

Sorry if this is a doublepost...

In article <024b01c3c4f7$0398af10$74001c12 at reflection>,
  "The Cunctator" <cunctator-+4VDYf+6WHMAvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org>
  wrote:

 > > From: Chuck Smith on Wednesday, December 17, 2003 6:20 PM
 > >
 > > > Wikipedia is in the process of becoming a household
 > > > name.
 > > > I am confident that in a year's time it will be a
 > > > name that is as well
 > > > known as or better than Britannica and Encarta.
 > >
 > > I just want to say that I agree completely.  We're in
 > > the process of branding a name here.  "Wikipedia 1.0"
 > > seems perfect to me.  It shows that it's stable and
 > > includes the same name.  "Wikipedia 2004" could also
 > > be used if we want to publish a new stable version
 > > every year like traditional encyclopedias.
 >
 > There's a number of naming issues here; the name for the frozen 
version,
 > and the name for the project of creating that version.
 >
 > In terms of naming the frozen version, I prefer Wikipedia 2004 to
 > Wikipedia 1.0.

I agree.  Wikipedia 1.0 implies that there will be a Wikipedia 1.1, 
which I would interpret as professing to be what Wikipedia itself is, 
the in-between revisions (yes, it's more than that, but I'm speaking 
purely in terms of published versions).  Wikipedia 2004 implies that it 
is the 2004 *edition* (rather that release) of the Static Wikipedia 
(one hell of an oxymoron, mind you).  The reference is to an edition of 
an electronic reference material, rather than to a release of a piece 
of software, the development process of which is, I think, not 
applicable to this project.  I'm having a bad night for clarity.

Peter