Hoi, The big problem with Wikipedia and particularly Wikipedians is that they drown any argument that does not fit them. I find it really telling that some things are researched as they confirm what we already know and at the same time when for political reasons decisions are made that lead to the end of important projects like Wikipedia Zero there is no research in the consequences to the use of Wikipedia in the face of the absense of it.
The same is true for the support Google gives to Wikisource for the digitisation of books in the Indian languages. In the political world the argument is that it is self serving of Google and the benefits are not seen/considered. There are many more examples, suffice to say that Wikipeidia and particularly English Wikipedia is overrated. Thanks, GerardM On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 at 09:05, Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemow...@gmail.com> wrote: > Bodhisattwa Mandal, 08/02/19 05:19: > > I think, the recent blog in the Foundation site is the first step to do > > such things. > > Yeah, in general the WMF is always ready to give up all the good things > in favour of the easy ones. The recent blog post is especially > facepalm-worthy in that it tries to sell as useful some "findings" that > don't add anything to the conversation we already had some ten years ago. > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_brand_survey > > Federico > > _______________________________________________ > Wikisource-l mailing list > Wikisourcefirstname.lastname@example.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l >
_______________________________________________ Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisourceemail@example.com https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l