On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 10:14 PM Zack McCune wrote:
> :: Apologies for cross-posting to multiple mailing lists. We want to ensure
> we spread the word about this opportunity to as many people as possible. ::
>
> Hi all,
>
> We are writing today to invite you to be a part of a community review on
Well, that Wikidata problem happens on English Wikipedia. Some Wikipedias
(Basque, Catalan, even French) are embracing Wikidata extensively.
And there's the branding issue. Maybe Wikipedia is not THE future.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 2:29 PM Rebecca O'Neill
wrote:
> I agree Galder!
>
> I would like to respond to Phoebe's comment on not wanting to draw people
> to the *Wikimedia* movement is not true of the Irish experience. We have
> some idea of an editing community that aren't interested in getting
Hoi,
Wikipedia is indeed clearly the core global brand. The notion that Wikidata
will "never match Wikipedia whatever its future success" is a sad argument.
Use some hindsight and compare Wikipedia and its impact with Wikidata at
the same age, do the same for Commons. It is also a useless argument
On Sat., Apr. 13, 2019, 2:27 a.m. Gerard Meijssen, <
gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Wikipedia is indeed clearly the core global brand. The notion that
> Wikidata will "never match Wikipedia whatever its future success" is a sad
> argument.
>
You misunderstand me. I do not mean in
I agree Galder!
I would like to respond to Phoebe's comment on not wanting to draw people
to the *Wikimedia* movement is not true of the Irish experience. We have
some idea of an editing community that aren't interested in getting
involved in our user group (and probably never will be), so we are
To be honest, Wikidata does have serious vandalism issues which have not
yet been solved. It is unlikely the English Wikipedia will have a more
close integration with Wikidata until they have been solved. For the
record, I am administrator on both projects.
Cheers
Yaroslav
On Sat, Apr 13, 2019
In our community (Swedish) we embrace Wikidata wholeheartedly and we
have found solution to take care of vandalism. Literialist, show changes
on Wikidata on Wikipedia etc.
I believe it is more an attitude issue then a technical one.
I agree with earlier comments that English Wikipedia is not
Hoi,
The basic assumption of Wikipedia is the article. When we are truly to
reach out and take a next step, it has to be more than Wikipedia, more than
obsessing with articles. People are not looking for articles, they are
looking for information on subjects. Information on subjects may be
Hoi,
When I worked on Ottoman history in Wikidata (I will get back to it again)
Catalan was one of the best resources. Thank you :) If you want me to I can
share my work/your work on your wikipedia.
Thanks,
GerardM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GerardM#Ottoman_Turkey
On Sat, 13 Apr 2019
Hoi,
Thank you for your well argued point of view. I followed the statistics as
provided by Erik Zachte for a long time and the trend was slowly but surely
where based on the statistics of Wikipedia alone English Wikipedia traffic
moved slowly but surely from over fifty to under fifty percent.
On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 12:42 PM phoebe ayers wrote:
>
>
> Dear all,
> I haven't weighed in before. But it seems to me there's a simple question
> underlying all of this: do we actually want, or need, to increase public
> awareness of the Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia chapters/affiliates
> We know our statistics and English Wikipedia is not 50% of our traffic. It
> is where over 50% of our resources are spend.
>
Do we?
Based on what?
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Seeing this "brand" discussion eat up all the limited available unpaid
volunteer oxygen on wikimedia-l makes me sad.
If the WMF's biggest strategy topic this year is to enter into navel
gazing about its brand, then the WMF looks like it has a problem with
setting meaningful work for its senior
14 matches
Mail list logo
