On Thu, 26 Feb 2004, Jimmy Wales wrote:
I've been approached by a major publisher about
the possibility of
working with us to producing and publish a print edition of Wikipedia.
The concept that they are most interested in at the moment is a single
large volume, something similar to the Columbia Encyclopedia (a
desktop encyclopedia, 3200 pages) or Britannica Concise Encyclopedia
(2067 pages).
The Britannica Concise has 28,000 entries. The Columbia has 51,000
entries. I have no idea of estimated word or byte counts for those.
One goal would be to have something ready for market by October 1st,
in time for the holiday gift season. I'm unsure of how early before
that *we* would need to be ready.
I've only begun talking to them about it, which is why I won't say who
it is just yet. But they understand our license and want to work with
us.
The question was asked of me, and I ask of the community: can we have
something like that ready in time? Or should we shoot for next year?
I've been toying with the idea of creating my own "Geoff's 0.9"
snapshot
of Wikipedia, just as a proof-of-concept. Unfortunately, the work would
involve a lot more than one person can do in a few days, but here are
the steps I considered, after getting a complete dump of the Wikipedia
database:
1. Compile a list of articles, organized by links. This would include
non-existant articles. From this list, decide that only the top 30,000
to 50,000 articles will be included.
2. Comb through all of the articles that have been the subject of
great disagreement, read the arguments in the Talk: pages, & make a
final decision on which side is right, & make the edit.
3. Finish any stub articles that appear in this listing.
4. Review every article that has either not been edited for a year or
has hed less than, say, 5 edits. If more work needs to be done, do it.
5. Monitor the New Articles list, to fill in any non-existant articles.
6. Write non-existent articles, using public domain material, or material
from Talk: pages. (I actually consider this would be the least pleasant
step.)
7. Remove all Talk: pages, User: pages, unlinked Disambiguation pages,
history pages, & other material that can be considered housekeeping.
(Although the Wikicivics pages should be kept.)
8. Verify that all external links work.
9. Offer for review. Yes, it will be uneven, biassed & widely criticised --
but at least it will offer everyone concerned a high-level view of what
needs to be done, & those of us more interested in a finished product
can devote themselves to that -- & leave the current version of Wikipedia
to those who want to deal with certain contributors.
Of course, the first step after 1.0 would be to figure out how to
integrate that version into the pre-1.0 Wikipedia material. (In other
words, if you thought dealing with certain contributors was a pain, this
would be even worse. :-()
Geoff