Steven Walling wrote: >It's really great to see Wikipedia highlighted as a source for news and >current events. It's rare that people fully recognize the degree to which >the "encyclopedia" is actually very good at trending news information. >That said, the report paints a rosy picture that, strategically speaking, >may not be cause for celebration.
Does the Knight Foundation disclose somewhere in this report that it's a donor to the Wikimedia Foundation? Comparing Wikipedia to sites like BuzzFeed and CNN seems to be a pretty classic case of comparing apples to oranges. >Neglecting to show people the value of the apps will help grow mobile web >traffic in the short term, but in the long run may leave us entirely >dependent on search (i.e. Google) or simply not growing readers, despite >millions of people still coming online via mobile. Can you elaborate on the value of the apps? HTTP is a free and open standard with very wide support. iOS is closed and proprietary. Maybe you can explain how investing resources into the latter aligns with Wikimedia's values? Personally, I say hasten the day that we abolish the horrible "m." from our URLs and MobileFrontend from our servers. MZMcBride _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
