On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 8:17 AM, James Heilman <[email protected]> wrote: > This is indeed one of the greatest suggestion I have heard in a long > time. Having people add "Part of the Wikimedia Movement" would benefit > both parties. All of us here I think support free knowledge wherever > it is found. Allowing our GLAM partners to use this wording and those > who are actively collaborating with us would be a start.
Thanks for the kind words. And the only thing that's stopping us from having that many sites in the movement is Trademark Law / Branding . The idea works and requires no resources, just a small campaign of communication offering up the possibility. But, if 1) we like the idea of "Part of the $x Movement" and 2) we don't want to use "Wikimedia" in the movement name, Then: We should _really_ ask the foundation professionals to use their non-profit magic to find the right name. Experts have gotten quite good at picking brand names, and our foundations' experts are quite... expert. These people put together fundraising campaigns with ever-increasingly head-explodingly-successful results. They have conducted journal-grade scientific investigations into our readership and our editor populations, diagnosing problem areas with pinpoint accuracy before the problems develop into diseases. If somebody's going to evaluate brand names based on their appeal to the wider population, I vote they be the ones to do it. :) Alec _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
