The policies of each project are different for a very good reason. e.g. If English Wikiquote was merged into English Wikipedia, the vast majority of the quote pages would be deleted very quickly, for good or ill. I know I would be the first to get out the sickle. :P
On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 2:22 PM, Carlos Felipe Antonorsi <carfel...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi everyone, I'm "new" on the list and this is my fist email, but I've been > reading for a while(I'm from es.wiki). I support what Jürgen said, Most of > the Wikimedia projects are not very popular (with the exception of > Wikipedia and maybe commons). I talk about what I've read and listened to > people totally ignorant about what the wiki is, If there could be a way we > could incorporate other projects to wikipedia it would be perfect. > > You've never heard in the news things about Wikiquote or Wikiversity, it's > always about Wikipedia. It would seem that the best thing we could do to > help improve the participation on those projects would be to merge them in > to the most popular project: Wikipedia > > On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Jürgen Fenn > <schneeschme...@googlemail.com>wrote: > >> Am 3. April 2012 22:22 schrieb Samuel Klein <sjkl...@hcs.harvard.edu>: >> >> > Ziko: >> >> what would a WMF evaluation of Wikinews or Wikispecies say? Should we >> shut down such >> >> a project... cease to mention it on Wikipedia main pages... or invest >> money in promoting it? >> > >> > Good questions, subtle answers. Those are not the only options; we >> > might help them merge with a similar project. For instance, >> > wikieducator and wikiversity have almost identical missions, and might >> > benefit from being merged; the question of 'who hosts the site' is >> > relatively minor compared to the loss of splitting energy and focus >> > across two wikis. >> >> I would like to add another option: Who not merge all projects into >> Wikipedia proper? The lack in participation in the sister projects is >> largely due to the fact that hardly anyone knows about them. Wikipedia >> is the only Wikimedia brand people know of. There is nothing you can >> do about it. If the sister projects were living in their own >> namespaces within Wikipedia this would be different. We would have, >> say, a Wikipedia dictionary. They would become part of Wikipedia and, >> hence, partaking in Wikipedia's popularity. Putting money in sister >> projects just means wasting funds. The future lies in integrating them >> into Wikipedia. Five years of experience is enough to tell. >> >> Regards, >> Jürgen. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> foundation-l mailing list >> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l >> > > > > -- > -cfa > > Carlos Felipe Antonorsi G. > 0416-6852535 > @antonorsi > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l -- John Vandenberg _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l