[Foundation-l] Do we have a complete set of WMF projects?

Wed Sep 9 15:45:52 UTC 2009

On 9 Sep 2009, at 00:42, Yann Forget wrote:

> Michael Peel wrote:
>> ** A few of my favourite examples: WikiJournal, publishing scholarly
>> works;
>
> These works are welcomed on Wikisource, if they are under a free
> license, of course.
>
>> WikiReview, providing in-depth reviews of subjects;
>
> I think this can be hosted on Wikibooks or Wikiversity for the most  
> part.

There's a big difference between starting a new section of something,  
and starting something completely new and fresh. With the former, you  
get all of the baggage of that project so far - e.g. if you want to  
start something slightly different on the English Wikipedia, then you  
have to modify huge numbers of policies, argue with many thousands of  
people, etc. Sometimes it's easier to split something off and do it  
seperately - as WikiSpecies has been doing, for example.

There's also a big difference between testing a project and launching  
a project. Tests are normally small-scale, aimed at just trying  
something out, rather than actually doing a project. It's very  
difficult to establish critical mass with that approach. Launching a  
project involves announcing it loudly to the world, and getting the  
attention of lots of people. As long as the basic idea is sound, you  
then get a large influx of people who want to try it out. Perhaps  
they don't all stick around - but some of them will.

Of course, you can't do either very often, otherwise people will stop  
paying any attention. But for some projects, it could work very well.  
Especially if there's the backing of e.g. a funding body, which could  
easily be attracted now that Wikimedia is so large and popular.

Mike