Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On 04/08/11 5:55 PM, Mike Dupont wrote: On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 4:17 AM, Ray Saintongesainto...@telus.net wrote A fork could easily start with copied material which from that moment would evolve differently. They may choose to abandon NPOV. Having several sites that freely and independently do this would in fact put our own NPOV in a broader perspective. What do you think about having multiple consistent points of view on tricky subjects, on some things, for example my favorite kosovo topic, it is very very hard to find any neutral point of view and the articles on that subject are widely separated. Some like the main article are vaguely neutral, and most of the smaller articles are really not. There are not even any consistent policing of them or manpower to do it. I would like to see some way to identify and isolate fragments of things that are not neutral, but clearly mark on what point of view they represent. That would allow for a clear separation of the one side, Kosovo is serbia and marking and clearly giving them a say on the matter, and also another point of view, Kosovo is free with equal rights in speaking, at least that would give a way to manage the discussion. Right now you have a big mess where the two sides are just mixed up and each side is basically fighting on wikipedia. I like the idea, but even there you'll find varying degrees of support for each side with the moderates unable to accept any more extreme views. Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 11:53 PM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote: On 04/08/11 5:55 PM, Mike Dupont wrote: On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 4:17 AM, Ray Saintongesainto...@telus.net wrote A fork could easily start with copied material which from that moment would evolve differently. They may choose to abandon NPOV. Having several sites that freely and independently do this would in fact put our own NPOV in a broader perspective. What do you think about having multiple consistent points of view on tricky subjects, on some things, for example my favorite kosovo topic, it is very very hard to find any neutral point of view and the articles on that subject are widely separated. Some like the main article are vaguely neutral, and most of the smaller articles are really not. There are not even any consistent policing of them or manpower to do it. I would like to see some way to identify and isolate fragments of things that are not neutral, but clearly mark on what point of view they represent. That would allow for a clear separation of the one side, Kosovo is serbia and marking and clearly giving them a say on the matter, and also another point of view, Kosovo is free with equal rights in speaking, at least that would give a way to manage the discussion. Right now you have a big mess where the two sides are just mixed up and each side is basically fighting on wikipedia. I like the idea, but even there you'll find varying degrees of support for each side with the moderates unable to accept any more extreme views. You're reasonably likely to find content peace treaties among those on the same side but more or less extreme in their beliefs, in my experience. In some topics, the moderates band together against both extremes; those areas work well in Wikipedia now. Mike's idea would better cover the first case. -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia? Step 1 allow people to edit
Although, to be fair, the Wikipedia article on Kangaroos does fail to note the Aboriginal beliefs on where kangaroos come from, as well as the idea that they floated there from Mount Ararat on a log (and also fails to mention why the whole idea of arriving on logs is bloody stupid). On 11/04/2011, Ancient Apparition fridaesd...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry, good point MuZemike, that's what I meant. The world would benefit more if the kind folks at Conservapedia tore down the site. Andrew Schlafly is full of bull... Colbert's interview with him is... interesting, tch, yeah Wikipedia is biased Dream on Schlafly! -- -Ancient Apparition http://enwp.org/User:Ancient_Apparition** *English Wikipedia Abuse Response and Account Creations team member* ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l -- -Ian Woollard ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia? Step 1 allow people to edit
I think that the 404 might be the blocks Sarah was talking about. -James. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia? Step 1 allow people to edit
On 9 April 2011 13:00, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 9 April 2011 12:53, WereSpielChequers werespielchequ...@gmail.com wrote: Interestingly only Liberapedia and one of the conservative sites, http://www.astorehouseofknowledge.info/Main_Page are actually open for editing. Conservapedia http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page currently comes up as a 404 and http://conservapedia.wikkii.com/wiki/Main_Page allows you to create an account, but not to edit, not even to edit your own talkpage 404 or 403? Conservapedia user TK (TK-CP on Wikipedia) had a programme of doing huge rangeblocks on entire countries, keeping them from even *viewing* the site. He passed away in December and since then it's been unlocked slightly, but I believe most or all of the UK is still under a rangeblock ... I get this error: Forbidden You don't have permission to access / on this server. Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request. That looks like a 403, although it doesn't contain the number. The mention of 404 is a reference to the error page not being found (so using the server's default error page instead). Blocking whole countries from viewing your website seems very counter-productive to me... ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia? Step 1 allow people to edit
But Europeans might contaminate Conservapedia with *gasp* things that don't test your faith! That site's a mess. Better that the world /doesn't/ see it, really. They might start thinking conservative Christians (like myself) are all that ignorant. And according to the article on dinosaurs, I'm an atheistic liberal junk scientist because I believe in evolution. Last I checked, I'm a devout Catholic who values modern science as a supplement to my faith. And interestingly, theories that are commonly turned down by theists were actually developed by devout theists (heliocentrism, big bang, evolution). God bless, Bob On 4/10/2011 4:46 PM, Ian Woollard wrote: On 10/04/2011, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: I get this error: Forbidden You don't have permission to access / on this server. Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request. Blocking whole countries from viewing your website seems very counter-productive to me... Yes, it's such a shame that us heathens in Europe are denied the great knowledge of how the kangaroos managed to cling to logs after the great flood, as with all of the other marsupials, individually, so that they ended up only in Australia, and also how they managed to develop sufficient genetic diversity in such a short time to be a viable population. Instead, we have to put up with the drivel in the Wikipedia, based on *mere* observation, genetic analysis, fossils, biology, geology, physics, chemistry and mathematics. Something MUST be done to unblock this goldmine! I *would* suggest that the WMF mirror the Conservapedia, but, alas, after checking the Conservapedia license to use the work, unlike the more restrictive license the Wikipedia uses, it appears to be revokable at will(!) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia? Step 1 allow people to edit
Conservapedia seeks to rewrite history, it makes Convservative Christians look like uninformed idiots, most Christians ALREADY KNOW that man did land on the moon, the earth isn't flat, dinosaurs did exist, the earth CAN'T possibly be 6000 years old and that the earth revolves around the sun. I wonder what would have happened if scientists from the Middle Ages onwards were allowed to develop their theories, we MIGHT have solved most of the world's problems, or ended it early. Either way, it was the church's failure to accept change that held back the development of superior Western culture, the early Europeans were largely responsible for delaying the advancement of technology. The early Europeans did the will of God, was doing the will of God forcibly delaying technological advances and forcing your religious beliefs on another person? I'm fairly certain the New Testament is different to the Old Testament in that it doesn't encourage violence as the means for conversion... The assimilate or die behaviour was dismissed in the Old Testament. Instead Jesus preached love if I'm correct. Sure the NT says atheists and heathens will rot in eternal damnation, but it doesn't hold the assimilate or die belief.'' ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia? Step 1 allow people to edit
Not to be supporting Conservapedia (more like playing Devil's Advocate), but isn't rewriting history different from reinterpreting history? It's like interpreting The Bible; that is, there are different interpretations of the entire book that span the entire one-dimensional political spectrum. -MuZemike On 4/10/2011 9:21 PM, Ancient Apparition wrote: Conservapedia seeks to rewrite history, it makes Convservative Christians look like uninformed idiots, most Christians ALREADY KNOW that man did land on the moon, the earth isn't flat, dinosaurs did exist, the earth CAN'T possibly be 6000 years old and that the earth revolves around the sun. I wonder what would have happened if scientists from the Middle Ages onwards were allowed to develop their theories, we MIGHT have solved most of the world's problems, or ended it early. Either way, it was the church's failure to accept change that held back the development of superior Western culture, the early Europeans were largely responsible for delaying the advancement of technology. The early Europeans did the will of God, was doing the will of God forcibly delaying technological advances and forcing your religious beliefs on another person? I'm fairly certain the New Testament is different to the Old Testament in that it doesn't encourage violence as the means for conversion... The assimilate or die behaviour was dismissed in the Old Testament. Instead Jesus preached love if I'm correct. Sure the NT says atheists and heathens will rot in eternal damnation, but it doesn't hold the assimilate or die belief.'' ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia? Step 1 allow people to edit
Sorry, good point MuZemike, that's what I meant. The world would benefit more if the kind folks at Conservapedia tore down the site. Andrew Schlafly is full of bull... Colbert's interview with him is... interesting, tch, yeah Wikipedia is biased Dream on Schlafly! -- -Ancient Apparition http://enwp.org/User:Ancient_Apparition** *English Wikipedia Abuse Response and Account Creations team member* ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On 04/08/11 4:08 PM, Sarah wrote: On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 15:57, Bob the Wikipedian bobthewikiped...@gmail.com wrote: Already been done, Conservapedia. The most disgusting mockery of conservatives I've ever seen. Then again, isn't this one of the sites Jimbo runs? Definitely not. Conservapedia is not my cup of tea. Nevertheless, since I have a free speech and civil liberties frame of mind, I must support the right of conservatives to have such a site. Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia? Step 1 allow people to edit
There is a difference between hosting a site and running a site. Jimmy's company wikia hosts a number of sites including Liberapedia - http://liberapedia.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page None of the various conservative sites seem to use wikia, unless that is Wikia allows sites to use their own domain name? Wikkii is definitely a rival to Wikia. They all seem to use wiki technology. I wonder if they are deliberately avoiding the indirect connection to Wikipedia by doing business with our founder? Interestingly only Liberapedia and one of the conservative sites, http://www.astorehouseofknowledge.info/Main_Page are actually open for editing. Conservapedia http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page currently comes up as a 404 and http://conservapedia.wikkii.com/wiki/Main_Page allows you to create an account, but not to edit, not even to edit your own talkpage Has anyone done a study of these various sites to see if any have had a measure of success without allowing IP editing? As EN Wiki looks like rising the drawbridge to the extent of only allowing autoconfimred accounts to create new articles, it would be interesting to know if any successful sites are that restrictive. WereSpielChequers On 9 April 2011 00:08, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 15:57, Bob the Wikipedian bobthewikiped...@gmail.com wrote: Already been done, Conservapedia. The most disgusting mockery of conservatives I've ever seen. Then again, isn't this one of the sites Jimbo runs? Definitely not. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia? Step 1 allow people to edit
On 9 April 2011 12:53, WereSpielChequers werespielchequ...@gmail.com wrote: Interestingly only Liberapedia and one of the conservative sites, http://www.astorehouseofknowledge.info/Main_Page are actually open for editing. Conservapedia http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page currently comes up as a 404 and http://conservapedia.wikkii.com/wiki/Main_Page allows you to create an account, but not to edit, not even to edit your own talkpage 404 or 403? Conservapedia user TK (TK-CP on Wikipedia) had a programme of doing huge rangeblocks on entire countries, keeping them from even *viewing* the site. He passed away in December and since then it's been unlocked slightly, but I believe most or all of the UK is still under a rangeblock ... (Wiki failure mode: being so paranoid you block perceived enemies from *looking* at your site.) - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia? Step 1 allow people to edit
Sad indeed. I am not entirely convinced Conservapedia is even maintained by conservatives. Most of the stuff I've seen on there looks as though it was designed to poke fun at conservatives, rather than to represent us accurately. I've not heard of Liberapedia; I might check it out in a bit to see how awful it is. Bob On 4/9/2011 7:00 AM, David Gerard wrote: On 9 April 2011 12:53, WereSpielChequerswerespielchequ...@gmail.com wrote: Interestingly only Liberapedia and one of the conservative sites, http://www.astorehouseofknowledge.info/Main_Page are actually open for editing. Conservapedia http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page currently comes up as a 404 and http://conservapedia.wikkii.com/wiki/Main_Page allows you to create an account, but not to edit, not even to edit your own talkpage 404 or 403? Conservapedia user TK (TK-CP on Wikipedia) had a programme of doing huge rangeblocks on entire countries, keeping them from even *viewing* the site. He passed away in December and since then it's been unlocked slightly, but I believe most or all of the UK is still under a rangeblock ... (Wiki failure mode: being so paranoid you block perceived enemies from *looking* at your site.) - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia? Step 1 allow people to edit
On 9 April 2011 18:23, Bob the Wikipedian bobthewikiped...@gmail.com wrote: Sad indeed. I am not entirely convinced Conservapedia is even maintained by conservatives. Most of the stuff I've seen on there looks as though it was designed to poke fun at conservatives, rather than to represent us accurately. It and its founder, Andrew Schlafly, appear to be entirely sincere. However, they are far-outlying nutters - even other Fundamentalist Christian conservatives (e.g. the founder's rather more famous mother Phyllis) don't want anything to do with them. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia? Step 1 allow people to edit
Sad indeed. I am not entirely convinced Conservapedia is even maintained by conservatives. Most of the stuff I've seen on there looks as though it was designed to poke fun at conservatives, rather than to represent us accurately. And Glen Beck is a Stalinist intent on discrediting resistance to totalitarian communism? If they are that clever we are doomed. Fred ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On 04/07/11 11:37 AM, Sarah wrote: One of the key skills that Jimbo brought to Wikipedia was knowing when to be hands on, and when not. If you look through the early mailing lists -- not just the very early ones, but the first few years -- that's the thing that shines through again and again. If I had to point to one issue that made Wikipedia successful it was this ability to steer without micromanaging. This is an important observation. It contrasts with some of his later efforts at wading into controversial issues. These have often seemed as drive-by efforts by someone who was not completely up-to-date with the matter at hand. These would generate more controversy in an already dirfficult issue that just needed time to be worked through. Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On 04/07/11 2:29 PM, David Gerard wrote: On 7 April 2011 21:56, MuZemikemuzem...@gmail.com wrote: Perhaps I'm missing the point, but isn't that what we have been doing so far (i.e. with all the other sister Wikimedia projects)? Yes, but also other niches Wikipedia leaves. Wikia, for example, started to form wikis of any sort, but has rapidly taken over the niche of fansite wikis. An who can complain about that? The sister projects began by filling in important niches. The first, Meta, provided a way in which we discuss activities and ideas about ourselves and policy that was not inherently encyclopedic. Wiktionary was a response to Wikipedia is not a dictionary. etc. A fork could easily start with copied material which from that moment would evolve differently. They may choose to abandon NPOV. Having several sites that freely and independently do this would in fact put our own NPOV in a broader perspective. Another may choose to be more aggressive in the treatment of copyright. They would assume the risks at a level which makes them comfortable, but in the longer term we too would benefit from their efforts to free data. They need to be willing limit the growth of their projects to match their funding. A project that tries to duplicate everything on Wikipedia is dooming itself to starvation. Subject specialization is the most evident criterion for this. From the Wikipedia side we need to link to these projects for alternative views. They are not our enemies. Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On 04/07/11 4:13 PM, Fred Bauder wrote: On 7 April 2011 21:56, MuZemikemuzem...@gmail.com wrote: Perhaps I'm missing the point, but isn't that what we have been doing so far (i.e. with all the other sister Wikimedia projects)? Yes, but also other niches Wikipedia leaves. Wikia, for example, started to form wikis of any sort, but has rapidly taken over the niche of fansite wikis. That's what draws a crowd. A lesson there. I still think we should eat their lunch; I was never a deletionist. I confess that when my wife and I are sitting in front of the TV, and a question arises from whatever we are watching, Wikipedia's relevant articles become a first source of information on our laptops while we're watching. When we do that we seldom feel the need to follow the sources. Ec Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On 04/07/11 5:03 PM, Ian Woollard wrote: You should be careful what you wish for. It's not hard to make a 'viable competitor' encyclopedia that would be so corrupt and inaccurate it would make the Fox News network... look like a news network. And if it was glossy and facile enough, plenty of people would probably be dumb enough to use it. That would be great! Maybe Fox News itself can pick up the idea. Their accuracy and corruption is not our responsibility. If they're bad enough, that will make us look better. Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On 04/07/11 9:05 PM, Stephanie Daugherty wrote: IMO, the next best thing will be whatever can come along and solve our social and community problems technologically, while being easier to edit. Social and community problems cannot be solved technologically. Treat assholes like bugs in the software - code around them, figure out how you can make the experience downright painful for them while making it easier for the sort of people that you really want to attract. Build the software to guide people in the direction of correct behavior, and to inherently track sourcing, etc. If you approach an asshole directly you just get shit on your face. We do better by encouraging good behaviour than by spending time dealing with a handful if problem people. Do this right, and wikipedia will be pretty much dead, do it wrong, and we'll be laughing at you here in 6 months. :P Sure enough, Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On 07/04/2011 19:26, David Gerard wrote: snip Knowino (and Argopedia, and the survivors of Citizendium, and everyone in fact) needs to look at this and see what they can do. Is there room in the encyclopedia game? I sure hope so. How do you beat Wikipedia? Work like a startup. Wikipedia now changes at dinosaur pace and seems utterly unable to solve the problems it knows it has, let alone the ones it doesn't. If room to zip around it exists, something small enough to be nimble can find it. Of course the niches are there. The real question is more like this: you have to avoid the general encyclopedia market for the general reader. So what do you set out to do? One idea is to have a forum as front end, and a team of editors who collate material from the forum as back end. This was pretty much the theory of the first wiki I worked on (except the forum was a newsgroup). The Web is full of transient material, and specialised discussions, and all you really need is some working understanding of what kind of collation is worthwhile. Charles ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 4:43 AM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote: On 04/07/11 9:05 PM, Stephanie Daugherty wrote: IMO, the next best thing will be whatever can come along and solve our social and community problems technologically, while being easier to edit. Social and community problems cannot be solved technologically. I beg to differ here. While not every social or community problem has a technological answer, that doesn't mean we shouldn't seek one out where a suitable one exists. We've already been doing it successfully - things like the edit filter are applications of technology to social problems (in this case vandalism) that have been proven to have real world value. When you have a small community, the community itself tends to propagate and enforce certain standards of behavior, and distance themselves from those that don't follow them. As that community grows, it eventually reaches a point where people are added faster than they can be assimilated into the norms of the community, and the behavior of the community changes to follow the behavior of the masses that are joining it, rather than people changing their behavior to fit community norms. Making some of those norms part of how the system works - that is, inside the black box that is the software, takes the confrontations out of the equation, while keeping the pressure to adhere to community norms in place long after a handful of editors trying to enforce them would have been overran and given up. Obviously you can't code assume good faith into the software, but you can change the workflows and information flow, and communication structure, and even site permissions to encourage this, and to give someone a chance to stop unwanted behavior like [[WP:BITE]]ing before it actually has an effect. Not every technological answer is going to be direct either - when you are looking at fixing a people problem with a technological fix, you have to look at the whole workflow in question, with a mindset of what can I change to head this off what else will it effect... will it work It may take several rounds of that before a solution is obvious, and even then, it may not be the right one, or there may not even be one, but if you start thinking outside the box, oftentimes something will come out of it that does work :) Of course, it also works the other way -- look at how some templates are being used on Wikipedia - the technology is often used to create problems :) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 01:26:41 -0700, Ray Saintonge wrote: I confess that when my wife and I are sitting in front of the TV, and a question arises from whatever we are watching, Wikipedia's relevant articles become a first source of information on our laptops while we're watching. When we do that we seldom feel the need to follow the sources. One time I can recall that such a situation came up was during the Super Bowl halftime a couple of years ago; somebody I was watching it with started wondering how old Bruce Springsteen (the feature performer there) was, so I grabbed my iPhone and looked it up through a Wikipedia app. Unfortunately, the page had just been vandalized to alter his birthdate to be 10 years earlier than it really was, so I got a wrong answer. -- == Dan == Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/ Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/ Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/ ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Daniel R. Tobias d...@tobias.name wrote: On Fri, 08 Apr 2011 01:26:41 -0700, Ray Saintonge wrote: I confess that when my wife and I are sitting in front of the TV, and a question arises from whatever we are watching, Wikipedia's relevant articles become a first source of information on our laptops while we're watching. When we do that we seldom feel the need to follow the sources. One time I can recall that such a situation came up was during the Super Bowl halftime a couple of years ago; somebody I was watching it with started wondering how old Bruce Springsteen (the feature performer there) was, so I grabbed my iPhone and looked it up through a Wikipedia app. Unfortunately, the page had just been vandalized to alter his birthdate to be 10 years earlier than it really was, so I got a wrong answer. Probably another Superbowl watcher who's halftime entertainment was to vandalise articles about people he or she had just seen on the television. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
Already been done, Conservapedia. The most disgusting mockery of conservatives I've ever seen. Then again, isn't this one of the sites Jimbo runs? Bob On 4/8/2011 3:32 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote: On 04/07/11 5:03 PM, Ian Woollard wrote: You should be careful what you wish for. It's not hard to make a 'viable competitor' encyclopedia that would be so corrupt and inaccurate it would make the Fox News network... look like a news network. And if it was glossy and facile enough, plenty of people would probably be dumb enough to use it. That would be great! Maybe Fox News itself can pick up the idea. Their accuracy and corruption is not our responsibility. If they're bad enough, that will make us look better. Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 15:57, Bob the Wikipedian bobthewikiped...@gmail.com wrote: Already been done, Conservapedia. The most disgusting mockery of conservatives I've ever seen. Then again, isn't this one of the sites Jimbo runs? Definitely not. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
Good :) I'd be embarrassed for whoever does run that site. On 4/8/2011 6:08 PM, Sarah wrote: On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 15:57, Bob the Wikipedian bobthewikiped...@gmail.com wrote: Already been done, Conservapedia. The most disgusting mockery of conservatives I've ever seen. Then again, isn't this one of the sites Jimbo runs? Definitely not. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 4:17 AM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote: A fork could easily start with copied material which from that moment would evolve differently. They may choose to abandon NPOV. Having several sites that freely and independently do this would in fact put our own NPOV in a broader perspective. What do you think about having multiple consistent points of view on tricky subjects, on some things, for example my favorite kosovo topic, it is very very hard to find any neutral point of view and the articles on that subject are widely separated. Some like the main article are vaguely neutral, and most of the smaller articles are really not. There are not even any consistent policing of them or manpower to do it. I would like to see some way to identify and isolate fragments of things that are not neutral, but clearly mark on what point of view they represent. That would allow for a clear separation of the one side, Kosovo is serbia and marking and clearly giving them a say on the matter, and also another point of view, Kosovo is free with equal rights in speaking, at least that would give a way to manage the discussion. Right now you have a big mess where the two sides are just mixed up and each side is basically fighting on wikipedia. mike ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
Larry Sanger started Citizendium with a detailed plan for precisely how it would work, which he detailed in a Slashdot article in 2005 and kept firmly to. This produced the weird phenomenon where he treated user suggestions like they were *threats*. I just read a Paul Graham article which contains a line summing up the problem here: If you want a recipe for a startup that's going to die, here it is: a couple of founders who have some great idea they know everyone is going to love, and that's what they're going to build, no matter what. Knowino (and Argopedia, and the survivors of Citizendium, and everyone in fact) needs to look at this and see what they can do. Is there room in the encyclopedia game? I sure hope so. How do you beat Wikipedia? Work like a startup. Wikipedia now changes at dinosaur pace and seems utterly unable to solve the problems it knows it has, let alone the ones it doesn't. If room to zip around it exists, something small enough to be nimble can find it. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 12:26, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: Larry Sanger started Citizendium with a detailed plan for precisely how it would work, which he detailed in a Slashdot article in 2005 and kept firmly to. This produced the weird phenomenon where he treated user suggestions like they were *threats*. I just read a Paul Graham article which contains a line summing up the problem here: If you want a recipe for a startup that's going to die, here it is: a couple of founders who have some great idea they know everyone is going to love, and that's what they're going to build, no matter what. Knowino (and Argopedia, and the survivors of Citizendium, and everyone in fact) needs to look at this and see what they can do. Is there room in the encyclopedia game? I sure hope so. How do you beat Wikipedia? Work like a startup. One of the key skills that Jimbo brought to Wikipedia was knowing when to be hands on, and when not. If you look through the early mailing lists -- not just the very early ones, but the first few years -- that's the thing that shines through again and again. If I had to point to one issue that made Wikipedia successful it was this ability to steer without micromanaging. Sarah ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 3:26 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: in the encyclopedia game? I sure hope so. How do you beat Wikipedia? With more Wikipedias. This is my idea for Wikipedia: http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposal:Recognize_that_Wikipedia_is_more_than_an_encyclopedia_and_fork_it -- Fajro ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
on 4/7/11 2:26 PM, David Gerard at dger...@gmail.com wrote: Larry Sanger started Citizendium with a detailed plan for precisely how it would work, which he detailed in a Slashdot article in 2005 and kept firmly to. This produced the weird phenomenon where he treated user suggestions like they were *threats*. I just read a Paul Graham article which contains a line summing up the problem here: If you want a recipe for a startup that's going to die, here it is: a couple of founders who have some great idea they know everyone is going to love, and that's what they're going to build, no matter what. Knowino (and Argopedia, and the survivors of Citizendium, and everyone in fact) needs to look at this and see what they can do. Is there room in the encyclopedia game? I sure hope so. How do you beat Wikipedia? Work like a startup. Wikipedia now changes at dinosaur pace and seems utterly unable to solve the problems it knows it has, let alone the ones it doesn't. If room to zip around it exists, something small enough to be nimble can find it. You're right, David. And when the dust finally settles (if it were ever meant to settle :-)) the encyclopedic project that really works consistently, reliably and progressively will be one that truly knows how to work with those who create and maintain the substance of it: People. And I will be very happy to assist this endeavor when it is started. Wikipedia is at a standstill. The primary focus of the powers-that-be seems to be building a donor base. But, from the top down, none has a clue how to work, guide, collaborate, or motivate the persons who are these new donors; much less the incredible persons that make up the existing one. This has been pointed out time after time on this and other Lists. But the message seems to be falling on ears tuned to a different frequency. It's in the people, people! Marc Riddell ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
Perhaps I'm missing the point, but isn't that what we have been doing so far (i.e. with all the other sister Wikimedia projects)? -MuZemike On 4/7/2011 1:37 PM, Fajro wrote: On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 3:26 PM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote: in the encyclopedia game? I sure hope so. How do you beat Wikipedia? With more Wikipedias. This is my idea for Wikipedia: http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposal:Recognize_that_Wikipedia_is_more_than_an_encyclopedia_and_fork_it -- Fajro ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On 7 April 2011 21:56, MuZemike muzem...@gmail.com wrote: Perhaps I'm missing the point, but isn't that what we have been doing so far (i.e. with all the other sister Wikimedia projects)? Yes, but also other niches Wikipedia leaves. Wikia, for example, started to form wikis of any sort, but has rapidly taken over the niche of fansite wikis. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On 7 April 2011 21:56, MuZemike muzem...@gmail.com wrote: Perhaps I'm missing the point, but isn't that what we have been doing so far (i.e. with all the other sister Wikimedia projects)? Yes, but also other niches Wikipedia leaves. Wikia, for example, started to form wikis of any sort, but has rapidly taken over the niche of fansite wikis. - d. That's what draws a crowd. A lesson there. I still think we should eat their lunch; I was never a deletionist. Fred ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
You should be careful what you wish for. It's not hard to make a 'viable competitor' encyclopedia that would be so corrupt and inaccurate it would make the Fox News network... look like a news network. And if it was glossy and facile enough, plenty of people would probably be dumb enough to use it. On 07/04/2011, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: Larry Sanger started Citizendium with a detailed plan for precisely how it would work, which he detailed in a Slashdot article in 2005 and kept firmly to. This produced the weird phenomenon where he treated user suggestions like they were *threats*. I just read a Paul Graham article which contains a line summing up the problem here: If you want a recipe for a startup that's going to die, here it is: a couple of founders who have some great idea they know everyone is going to love, and that's what they're going to build, no matter what. Knowino (and Argopedia, and the survivors of Citizendium, and everyone in fact) needs to look at this and see what they can do. Is there room in the encyclopedia game? I sure hope so. How do you beat Wikipedia? Work like a startup. Wikipedia now changes at dinosaur pace and seems utterly unable to solve the problems it knows it has, let alone the ones it doesn't. If room to zip around it exists, something small enough to be nimble can find it. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l -- -Ian Woollard ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
Why does Conservapedia come to mind :) -MuZemike On 4/7/2011 7:03 PM, Ian Woollard wrote: You should be careful what you wish for. It's not hard to make a 'viable competitor' encyclopedia that would be so corrupt and inaccurate it would make the Fox News network... look like a news network. And if it was glossy and facile enough, plenty of people would probably be dumb enough to use it. On 07/04/2011, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote: Larry Sanger started Citizendium with a detailed plan for precisely how it would work, which he detailed in a Slashdot article in 2005 and kept firmly to. This produced the weird phenomenon where he treated user suggestions like they were *threats*. I just read a Paul Graham article which contains a line summing up the problem here: If you want a recipe for a startup that's going to die, here it is: a couple of founders who have some great idea they know everyone is going to love, and that's what they're going to build, no matter what. Knowino (and Argopedia, and the survivors of Citizendium, and everyone in fact) needs to look at this and see what they can do. Is there room in the encyclopedia game? I sure hope so. How do you beat Wikipedia? Work like a startup. Wikipedia now changes at dinosaur pace and seems utterly unable to solve the problems it knows it has, let alone the ones it doesn't. If room to zip around it exists, something small enough to be nimble can find it. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On 8 April 2011 01:03, Ian Woollard ian.wooll...@gmail.com wrote: You should be careful what you wish for. It's not hard to make a 'viable competitor' encyclopedia that would be so corrupt and inaccurate it would make the Fox News network... look like a news network. And if it was glossy and facile enough, plenty of people would probably be dumb enough to use it. One thing that should probably be considered is that from the competing POV wikipedia does 2 things. 1)It provides information to people on general interest topics (for broad values of general interest) 2)It provides a plece for people to write articles on general interest topics. We've received both competition and attempts at competition in both cases In case 1 competition comes from Britannica and the million and one aps for viewing wikipedia on your phone. In case 2 competition attempts include knol, citizendium and more successfully hoodong -- geni ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
On 08/04/2011, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: more successfully hoodong Yes, although on some articles it's interesting to read, translated back to me via google translate, what is clearly my own text, with the same images I selected, from an encyclopedia that claims they now own the copyright on it. ;-) -- geni -- -Ian Woollard ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] How to start a viable competitor to Wikipedia?
IMO, the next best thing will be whatever can come along and solve our social and community problems technologically, while being easier to edit. Treat assholes like bugs in the software - code around them, figure out how you can make the experience downright painful for them while making it easier for the sort of people that you really want to attract. Build the software to guide people in the direction of correct behavior, and to inherently track sourcing, etc. Do this right, and wikipedia will be pretty much dead, do it wrong, and we'll be laughing at you here in 6 months. :P On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 10:33 PM, Ian Woollard ian.wooll...@gmail.com wrote: On 08/04/2011, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: more successfully hoodong Yes, although on some articles it's interesting to read, translated back to me via google translate, what is clearly my own text, with the same images I selected, from an encyclopedia that claims they now own the copyright on it. ;-) -- geni -- -Ian Woollard ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
