Hi all, I’m on the other side of things - I think it would be good to simplify our branding, and ‘Wikipedia’ is the obvious brand to go with. I’d love to see us talking about ‘Wikipedia Data’, and ‘Wikipedia Media, etc. (maybe with obvious cross-wiki tabs at the top of the projects!), without the confusion of ‘Wikileaks’, ‘Wikia’, etc. I don’t think that a yes/no Meta RfC on this project right now would help, as there would be an obvious knee-jerk reaction.
I also don’t think that the ‘brandingwikipedia’ website helps, though. If you want to ask the general public about Wikipedia branding, it makes sense - you can just click ‘like’ to the suggested tags and maybe leave a comment, and that’s it. However, that’s not how the Wikimedia community works, and that’s the population that you need to convince. If you want this to work, then I think there’s two ways to go: start discussions on-wiki about the pros and cons, provide data in response to questions and emotional responses, and help the community reach a consensus with you about the way forward; or just go ahead and make the change, weather the reactions, and see what happens. I suspect only one of those approaches would work in the long-run, but either would be better than having off-wiki processes and then claiming that they have consensus. Of course, you can try an approach with one Wikimedia project at a time, and see how it goes. Thanks, Mike > On 13 Mar 2020, at 18:12, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello, > > First, a disclaimer that these comments aren't directed personally at > you, Essie. > > Even if money was unlimited, I thought that Snøhetta deserved the > community's trust, and I felt that WMF was a good steward of resources > (all of which are questionable), I don't think that this project is a > good idea. Wikidata is an increasingly important component of the > Wikiverse, and there are a some problems with WMF rebranding itself as > the Wikipedia Foundation including the risk to the communities and > affiliates from WMF's political adventures, governance problems, and > occasional high profile clashes with the community. I don't think that > the costs or the risks here make sense, I wouldn't involve Snøhetta > given its apparent block evasion on English Wikipedia, and I've been > unimpressed with WMF's handling of this process during the past few > months. > > I am fine with discussions about branding, but not with this program > in its current form. > > Given the choice, I would freeze this project and spending associated > with it pending a Meta RfC regarding the community's view on whether > this project should continue. If the community wants a branding > project to continue, I would let the community decide on the project's > parameters and budget, and what if any consultant should be involved. > > Pine > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine ) > > _______________________________________________ > 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: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.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: Wikimediaemail@example.com Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>