Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage: Chance, bore, or hazard

[Ziko van Dijk]

Am Sonntag, 13. Januar 2013 schrieb Craig Franklin :

>
> the Siegenthaler incident and the Essjay controversy.  With a relatively
> clean slate upon which to write, the Wikivoyagers can consider the
> structure of their project in a holistic way, being proactive in thinking
> about how they will manage such incidents before they actually arise, and
> avoid choking their project up with hundreds of rules created as a reaction
> to unfortunate incidents that could have been avoided by deciding on a
> simple set of rules to start with, and then consistently enforcing them.
>
>
Yes, that would be great. Hard cases make bad law.
Ziko






> 



> ilman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>


-- 

---
Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland
dr. Ziko van Dijk, voorzitter
http://wmnederland.nl/

Wikimedia Nederland
Postbus 167
3500 AD Utrecht
---
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

[Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage: Chance, bore, or hazard

[Craig Franklin]

Ziko,

Thanks for these thoughtful posts, it's always good to consider the long
term and what we might learn from our experience on other projects.  Of
course, it's up to the Wikivoyagers themselves to decide how they want to
run their project, but a bit of advice and insight never hurts!

The Australian businessman Kerry Packer once quipped that before Parliament
made a law, they should be required to first repeal one.  While we cannot
make this a requirement on Wikimedia projects, it's a good rule of thumb to
live by.  On English Wikipedia, we have a dense tangle of rules, policies
and essays that has raised the bar for entry to new users.  This tangle has
developed over the years as a result of kneejerk reactions to things like
the Siegenthaler incident and the Essjay controversy.  With a relatively
clean slate upon which to write, the Wikivoyagers can consider the
structure of their project in a holistic way, being proactive in thinking
about how they will manage such incidents before they actually arise, and
avoid choking their project up with hundreds of rules created as a reaction
to unfortunate incidents that could have been avoided by deciding on a
simple set of rules to start with, and then consistently enforcing them.

Not being a travel writer, I don't have the foggiest on where the lines
should be drawn, that should be left to the experts on the projects (with
input and assistance from the WMF legal department, ideally).  But it
sounds like they're already off to a good start if the project "still a
rather limited set of rules, and wishes to remain so."

Kind Regards,
Craig Franklin
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage: Chance, bore, or hazard

[Yaroslav M. Blanter]

On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 14:45:52 -0800, Steven Walling wrote:
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Ziko van Dijk 
wrote:




As one step toward properly welcoming Wikivoyagers... are many of 
them on
this list? It would be cool to get some replies and short 
introductions

from those that are. :)

It might also be good to cross-post this to the Traveller's Pub in 
English,

German, and others we can.

Steven
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Well, some of us, yes.

The best place to forward it would be the Wikivoyage mailing list. If 
nobody does it before, I will try in the morning European time.


Cheers
Yaroslav

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage: Chance, bore, or hazard

[Steven Walling]

On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Ziko van Dijk wrote:

> Dear colleagues,
>
> Since November 2012, Wikivoyage is a part of the Wikimedia movement. I
> have come to some thoughts about this old/new project, both from the
> perspective of a collaborator and from the perspective of the
> movement.
>
> Chance:
> Wikivoyage has a huge potential; it may open the movement for new
> collaborators who were not attracted enough by Wikipedia. There is
> still low hanging fruit, and there are working chapters - and the WMF
> - to support the new family member. Integrating Wikivoyage is also a
> challenge for the movement, it has to prove that it is capable to do
> so. (And recommend itself for other wikis to join.)
>
> Bore:
> But, if Wikivoyage fails to make use of its potential, it will be one
> more Wikimedia wiki rather small and limited in range, such as
> Wikiquote or Wikinews. A community grown over the years may be good in
> binding (linking the existing members to each other), but less in
> bridging (being open for new members and contacting others). We see
> the same phenomenon (that new people find it difficult their way, or
> are even expelled more or less explicitly) also with Wikipedia, but on
> a much higher level. Also Wikipedia loses community members slowly,
> with difficulties acquiring new ones.
>
> Hazard:
> Wikipedia developed a lot of rules over the years, often after heavy
> debates and scandals. For example, the Seigenthaler incident and other
> cases of calumny led to the policy about Biographies of Living People.
> Wikivoyage has still a rather limited set of rules, and wishes to
> remain so. Wikipedia is neutral, Wikipedia uses references, while
> Wikivoyage allows to criticize e.g. a restaurant and does not require
> a source. But where is the limit between exercising one's freedom of
> speech and libel? Scandals can backfire to the whole movement.
>
> In my humble opinion, this is a good moment for Wikivoyagers (old and
> new ones alike) to engage in discussions about style, limitations,
> good practices, and improve the site to make it newbies easier to
> join. With the good will from all sides, Wikivoyage should become a
> chance for the movement rather than anything else.
>
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
>
Thanks for the thoughtful commentary Ziko.

As one step toward properly welcoming Wikivoyagers... are many of them on
this list? It would be cool to get some replies and short introductions
from those that are. :)

It might also be good to cross-post this to the Traveller's Pub in English,
German, and others we can.

Steven
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

[Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage: Chance, bore, or hazard

[Ziko van Dijk]

Dear colleagues,

Since November 2012, Wikivoyage is a part of the Wikimedia movement. I
have come to some thoughts about this old/new project, both from the
perspective of a collaborator and from the perspective of the
movement.

Chance:
Wikivoyage has a huge potential; it may open the movement for new
collaborators who were not attracted enough by Wikipedia. There is
still low hanging fruit, and there are working chapters - and the WMF
- to support the new family member. Integrating Wikivoyage is also a
challenge for the movement, it has to prove that it is capable to do
so. (And recommend itself for other wikis to join.)

Bore:
But, if Wikivoyage fails to make use of its potential, it will be one
more Wikimedia wiki rather small and limited in range, such as
Wikiquote or Wikinews. A community grown over the years may be good in
binding (linking the existing members to each other), but less in
bridging (being open for new members and contacting others). We see
the same phenomenon (that new people find it difficult their way, or
are even expelled more or less explicitly) also with Wikipedia, but on
a much higher level. Also Wikipedia loses community members slowly,
with difficulties acquiring new ones.

Hazard:
Wikipedia developed a lot of rules over the years, often after heavy
debates and scandals. For example, the Seigenthaler incident and other
cases of calumny led to the policy about Biographies of Living People.
Wikivoyage has still a rather limited set of rules, and wishes to
remain so. Wikipedia is neutral, Wikipedia uses references, while
Wikivoyage allows to criticize e.g. a restaurant and does not require
a source. But where is the limit between exercising one's freedom of
speech and libel? Scandals can backfire to the whole movement.

In my humble opinion, this is a good moment for Wikivoyagers (old and
new ones alike) to engage in discussions about style, limitations,
good practices, and improve the site to make it newbies easier to
join. With the good will from all sides, Wikivoyage should become a
chance for the movement rather than anything else.

Kind regards
Ziko





-- 

---
Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland
dr. Ziko van Dijk, voorzitter
http://wmnederland.nl/

Wikimedia Nederland
Postbus 167
3500 AD Utrecht
---

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l