But it won’t be. Wikipedia does a fine job of documenting a great deal of
news: in an encyclopedic fashion.
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 11:48 AM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
jennifer.pryorsumm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Strainu,
>
> Simply leaving the world of news to others is not really an option for the
> Foundation. Recall that its vision is that
>
> > By 2030, Wikimedia will become the essential infrastructure of the
> ecosystem of free knowledge, and anyone who shares our vision will be able
> to join us.
>
> It can't achieve that by abandoning news.
>
> JPS
>
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 6:29 PM Strainu <strain...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > În mar., 16 apr. 2019 la 12:38, Dan Garry (Deskana) <djgw...@gmail.com>
> a
> > scris:
> > >
> > > Splitting off the Wikinews discussion from the branding discussion...
> > >
> > > On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 at 07:52, Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > > jennifer.pryorsumm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Compared to Wikitribune it is! But more importantly, if Wikinews is
> > not
> > > > thriving, then why not? Does it lack resources? What could or
> should
> > the
> > > > WMF do to revive it?
> > >
> > >
> > > In my opinion, nothing. Wikinews was a nice idea, but it didn't work
> out,
> > > and I don't think the Wikimedia Foundation investing resources into
> > trying
> > > to bring it back to life is really worth it. In fact, I think the
> > Wikimedia
> > > Foundation isn't the right group to try to breathe new life into the
> > > project anyway—we, as a volunteer community, could invest our time in
> > > bringing new content into it. That doesn't happen though. Why is that?
> > For
> > > me, I'm voting with my actions rather than my words—it's because it
> just
> > > isn't important enough compared to other things. It's okay to think
> that.
> >
> > I personally believe the law of the hammer [1] had a very significant
> > contribution to the launch of Wikinews (as well as Wikiversity,
> > Wikispecies and Wiktionary): "we have a wiki, what else can we use it
> > for?" Stated differently ("we have a mission and an idea aligned with
> > that mission, what kind of wiki would we need for that?") the outcome
> > might have been radically different. Some projects might have never
> > happened, others might have been years ago where they are now and
> > again others might have happened later (e.g. a wiki does not seem a
> > great fit for University courses, but Wikiversity might have happened
> > anyway as part of the OpenAccess movement. Or not).
> >
> > It's a bit late to change history, but it's not too late to admit some
> > of the projects are a failure in the current form and start again - or
> > just drop them. As somebody else in the conversion put it "we must
> > have ways to try and fail fast".
> >
> > Strainu
> >
> > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_instrument
> >
> > >
> > > Also, I'd prefer to see the Wikimedia Foundation trying to do fewer
> > things
> > > but do them better rather than taking more on; I think the annual plan
> > > reflects that it is trying to do so.
> > >
> > >
> > > > Perhaps some of the money spent on rebranding would
> > > > be better spent on the projects that are not doing so well as the
> big
> > > > Wikipedias -- or perhaps the WMF should cut its losses and close them
> > down,
> > > > on the principle of reinforcing success instead.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I suspect that significantly less money is being spent on this
> rebranding
> > > effort than people might think. A short engagement with an external
> > > consultant, and some staff time to think about it and publish some
> pages
> > to
> > > solicit comment, is a relatively small investment compared to what it
> > might
> > > take to bootstrap improvements to breathe life into a mostly dead
> > project.
> > > I don't think it's really helpful to guess about the cost of things...
> > yes,
> > > I broke my own rule right at the start of this paragraph. ;-)
> > >
> > > Dan
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > 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>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > 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>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> 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>
--
Philippe Beaudette
phili...@beaudette.me
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
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>
