On 7 October 2010 19:39, Paul Houle <[email protected]> wrote: > There probably are thousands or tens of thousands of 'sharing' sites out > there, and you can't draw a clear line between ones that are "big > enough", the ones that are somebody's web-spam project (it isn't hard > to make a flock of electric sheep that can beat the average Digger at > the Turing Test), and ones that are just too little to matter... Not > without offending somebody, and in a consensus-driven organization, > that's a problem.
As an example of this problem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Booksources and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:GeoTemplate (These are enwp, but I'm sure other projects with similar things have similar issues) These two pages aim to provide something vaguely like the social-sharing links - in the first case, resolving an ISBN to a particular source for a book; in the second, resolving a set of coordinates to a mapping service. Both began with a handful of major services and rapidly grew; inevitably, there were kludgy attempts to come up with "most important" ones, arguments over how to order them, etc.; and by now, both are pretty unenticing to use. "Booksellers" is obviously a bigger pool than social networking sites or microblogging services or what have you, but I can certainly see Paul's point here that it's opening us up to a lot of potential hassle, and a lot of fuss from people who have very strong incentives to get their service listed. -- - Andrew Gray [email protected] _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
