On 16/07/11 13:19, Alec Conroy wrote: > On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 12:30 AM, Keegan Peterzell > <[email protected]> wrote: > > In reply overall-- I definitely agree that Wikipedia is, by far, our > strongest brand-- and a very different brand than the one that would > be served by a wider unnamed movement. > > I haven't been anywhere near as ambition to think we could get a brand > anywhere as good as Wikipedia. Its brand is so off-the-charts it's > a little unfathomable. > > I'd be happy with something in the neighborhood of Wikimedia-- if > donors and editors communities can easily understand it means > "Wikimedia Movement on other servers", I'm good. > >> Now, how can we expand this into another name? >> Simple answer: we can't. > Well... we certainly do it as well as Wikipedia. But we can > "piggyback" off the Wikipedia name in ways, as the name Wikimedia > does. > ... >
"Wiki" is the key word: for good or ill, the word "wiki" now means "wikipedia-like collaborative things" to the general public. Perhaps the "Wikiknowledge movement"? -- Neil _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
