[Wikipedia-l] Re: No more new Wikipedias !

[Ray Saintonge]

Tim Starling wrote:

>Arbeo M wrote:
>  
>
>I've stated my position on new language wikis, and we've been through
>all the arguments before. Just because I'm no longer interested in
>arguing every case, or putting my name on the oppose votes, doesn't mean
>I've changed my mind.
>
It's sad that a tech savvy person can't devise a bot to automatically 
place a no vote whenever any of these questions come up. :-)

>The problem with voting on the matter is that it is a vote to expand the
>community. It should come as no surprise that those people who are on
>the outside are voting to be on the inside. As I've previously said, we
>should judge the value of a wiki by the number of readers, and by the
>information it brings to those readers, not by the number of editors.
>
An interesting and important point!  That some action will drive away 
editors is a classic argument around here.  Certainly some who 
consistently lose votes will be driven away.  (Is that so bad?)  Whether 
that harms the overall project is a matter of speculation, since no-one 
has over provided evidence to back that up.

>I tired of the
>repetitive debate long ago, so I'm happy to consider the current set of
>languages sufficient. Hopefully if there's any really important
>languages that we've missed, a Board member will let me know.
>
If we spend all our time making sure that we have expressed ourselves on 
every vote nothing else would be accomplished.  Therein lies the biggest 
problem in any voting process.

>>I was just wondering if somebody
>>has an idea how we could remedy this situation and
>>maybe have, like, one new WP per month (so we don't
>>lose too many potential new contributors)? 
>>
The way some people around here read rules that would soon be taken as 
meaning that one new WP per month would be mandatory.

>If those potential new contributors only want to write articles in some
>little-known conlang, I won't shed any tears if they stay away.
>  
>
There will be very few wet eyes in the crowd.

Ec