Alec Conroy | 1 Jul 2011 04:22
Picon

Re: It Is not Us

It looks like we understand the potential risks of adding social
features,  but I don't know that the merits have sunk in.

==Don't call it a Social Network, don't think of it as a revolution==
Th first thing to do is banish the word "Social Network" from the
discussion.  "Social Network" evokes "Myspace and Facebook", which
aren't exactly popular around here, a sentiment I share.    When we
talk about adding social features to Wikimedia, you must delete all
your preconceptions about what a 'social network' is, and break it
down into the most fundamental concept-- socializing on a network.
Nobody here wants us to just become 'another' Facebook, shudder at the
thought.

We want to learn from social networks and keep the usable bits-- we
don't want to literally become one.
If that sound scary, remember changes around here are either optional
or gradual or both--  never dramatic, unforeseen, controversial, and
imposed.

We wouldn't just make a facebook host on Wikimedia

Instead, we'd start by little tiny things--    Extension:Wikilove on
prototype's a great example.  We saw a feature of social networks that
WAS consistent with our values-- the per-user "thumbs up".   We
wouldn't just feed that global social space straight into en.wp, we'd
put it on incubator and probably start off with very boring projects
like "Copy your home-project user page here and we'll help you
translate it".    Rules might eventually loosen, but a good starting
point would be 'the kind of content projects routinely allow in user
space or meta space"-- but in one single unified space, the logical
(Continue reading)

Alec Conroy | 1 Jul 2011 05:11
Picon

Re: It Is not Us

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 11:37 PM, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen@...> wrote:
> As we did not know the extend to which we generally edit in many languages,
> we have not considered the needs of this majority. Our view has always been
> on single projects. We can do better and we should do better for our
> majority.
> Thanks,
>      GerardM
>
> http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.com/2011/06/in-defence-of-social-networks-ii.html

I can second this massively-multilingual finding--  going through the
language data, it's very clear that we do not have hundred of separate
populations, we populations that are highly interconnected and full of
overlap, in really interesting ways.

Early in the last election, I had an instinct that our lack of
discussion was being caused by a lack of communication skills.  This
instinct turned out to be dead wrong-- glad I actually looked.
Certainly there are language barriers, but they are smaller than I
expected.    The untapped potential for a viable a global community IS
in fact here-- we just have to rally that nascent community.
Alec

See: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Alecmconroy/Language_study#Visualizing_our_languages

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
(Continue reading)

Nikola Smolenski | 1 Jul 2011 08:58
Favicon

Re: No tail-lights. What do we do now? (was Call for referendum)

On 06/30/2011 07:35 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> Further to your idea: people developing little specialist wikis along
> these lines, and said wikis being mergeable. This makes such wikis
> easier to start, without having to start yet another wiki-based
> general encyclopedia that directly competes with Wikipedia. Disruptive
> innovation starts in niches, not in a position where it'll just end up
> a bug on Wikipedia's windscreen.

Some things I believe could be easily programmed:

* Ability to surf through multiple wikis. For example, you could be 
reading article on a specialist wiki such as 
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Darmok_%28episode%29 ; upon clicking the 
link Gilgamesh, you would be taken to 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilgamesh ; when you further browse 
Wikipedia and click on Star Trek you would go not to Wikipedia's article 
but back to http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Star_Trek .

** This could be more easily applied to multilingual wikis. For example, 
you could select which languages you know; and when you click on a link, 
you would be taken not to the current language but to the best article 
available in any of your languages.

* Ability to view diffs between two articles on two wikis. I believe 
this would be very easy to do.

* Ability to edit from diff (when you view a diff, you could select 
which differences do you want to insert into the article, and which 
differences do you want to discard). This could be very useful even 
within a single wiki.
(Continue reading)

David Gerard | 1 Jul 2011 09:15
Picon
Gravatar

Re: No tail-lights. What do we do now? (was Call for referendum)

On 1 July 2011 07:58, Nikola Smolenski <smolensk@...> wrote:
> On 06/30/2011 07:35 PM, David Gerard wrote:

>> Further to your idea: people developing little specialist wikis along
>> these lines, and said wikis being mergeable. This makes such wikis

> Some things I believe could be easily programmed:

Per HaeB's link, this is a perennial proposal. People like the idea,
but in eighteen years - back as far as the Interpedia proposal, before
wikis existed - no-one has made one that works. Why not? What's
failing to go on here?

- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Nikola Smolenski | 1 Jul 2011 09:21
Favicon

Re: No tail-lights. What do we do now? (was Call for referendum)

On 07/01/2011 09:15 AM, David Gerard wrote:
> On 1 July 2011 07:58, Nikola Smolenski<smolensk@...>  wrote:
>> On 06/30/2011 07:35 PM, David Gerard wrote:
>>> Further to your idea: people developing little specialist wikis along
>>> these lines, and said wikis being mergeable. This makes such wikis
>
>> Some things I believe could be easily programmed:
>
> Per HaeB's link, this is a perennial proposal. People like the idea,
> but in eighteen years - back as far as the Interpedia proposal, before
> wikis existed - no-one has made one that works. Why not? What's
> failing to go on here?

Per HaeB's link, IMO no proposal was specific enough, and no proposal 
was actually done.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Alec Conroy | 1 Jul 2011 10:27
Picon

Re: No tail-lights. What do we do now? (was Call for referendum)

On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Nikola Smolenski <smolensk@...> wrote:
> On 07/01/2011 09:15 AM, David Gerard wrote:
>> Per HaeB's link, this is a perennial proposal. People like the idea,
>> but in eighteen years - back as far as the Interpedia proposal, before
>> wikis existed - no-one has made one that works. Why not? What's
>> failing to go on here?
>
> Per HaeB's link, IMO no proposal was specific enough, and no proposal
> was actually done.

I don't know why it took so long, but here's my guess.   It hasn't
worked for the past 18 years because prior to wikipedia, nobody ever
got anything like this to work.   It took a Jimmy to look at patent
absurdity of 'anyone can edit' encyclopedias and somehow see that it
was working in an amazing and world-changing way.

Making just one Wikipedia was crazy enough in 2002-- distributed
revision control was only developed years later.

We've only had git  for 6 years, and for at least the first 2 years,
you'd still talk to people who would swear on intuition that git
couldn't work on sheer principal.   It was pure insanity--   and kinda
like wikipedia, it took one of those handy charismatic genius
community-builders to believe in such a silly system.     I was a
skeptic of both wikipedia and git the first time I heard them
described (inaccurately).

At the end of the day, I think the only reason it hasn't happened yet
is really simply that nobody has gotten it together and decided to do
it, and it's the sort of thing that no for-profit entity can really
(Continue reading)

KIZU Naoko | 1 Jul 2011 12:35
Picon

Re: It Is not Us

Well, respectfully I disagree, Gerard, on your view, or analysis of
the stats. Edit is used vague on our community: from writing a FA
almost alone to doing a WiiGnome task. We need both, but those two
activities require not a same amount of communication skills as well
involvement to wiki editing commuity lives.

We have a certain number of people who edit several languages. I edit
English Wikiquote and Japanese (even most of those edits are on talks
or project name spaces). I know some translators who edit several
languages - but I'm not sure we assure every those "multilingual"
editors edit main namespace of each projects mainly. I was honored to
be called Aphaia on all wikis once by a certain editor who visited
#wikipedia.ja, but it didn't mean I was then active as writer of
articles - rather it may have meant I created interlang links
aggressively.

So I'd like to ask in which way we keep and assure our community as
multilingual? Honestly I have been thinking this for years seriously.
Even on meta, it was not once I was accused just because I left a note
in Japanese - when I had a hardship to express my opinion enough in
English. I remember still how I was accused then - I was accused
because I didn't write in English "the language everyone can read".

How then can such a community multilingual? Or in other words, what
have we been doing for making our community multilingual? We have
devout translators - and always I thank them and feel honored to
collaborate with them,  but, or because I have been working with them,
I feel we need more other ways to assure and empower multilingual
aspects of our Wikimedia community.

(Continue reading)

Yaroslav M. Blanter | 1 Jul 2011 13:16
Picon
Favicon

Re: It Is not Us

> So I'd like to ask in which way we keep and assure our community as
> multilingual? Honestly I have been thinking this for years seriously.
> Even on meta, it was not once I was accused just because I left a note
> in Japanese - when I had a hardship to express my opinion enough in
> English. I remember still how I was accused then - I was accused
> because I didn't write in English "the language everyone can read".
> 
> How then can such a community multilingual? Or in other words, what
> have we been doing for making our community multilingual? We have
> devout translators - and always I thank them and feel honored to
> collaborate with them,  but, or because I have been working with them,
> I feel we need more other ways to assure and empower multilingual
> aspects of our Wikimedia community.
> 
> Cheers,

I believe that in this context the multilingual community means that the
source of information can be in any language, and the information is
created and stored in as many languages possible. This is in my opinion the
most important. The rest - what language we use for communication in the
projects, whether there is any coordination of the policies of different
projects, or whatever - may be important by itself but not the core of our
business. 

Cheers
Yaroslav  

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@...
(Continue reading)

Yaroslav M. Blanter | 1 Jul 2011 13:24
Picon
Favicon

Re: Languages and numbers

Milosh, thanks for your work. Just to correct: Moksha, Erzya, Yakut
(=Sakha), Komi-Zyrian (=Komi) and Lak all have Wikipedias (though
admittedly for Lak I am the only active contributor). Adyge is almost
identical to Kabardino-Circassian, and Adyge speakers probably will never
have their own Wikipedia. Balkar is a part of Karachai-Balkar which has a
Wikipedia.

Cheers
Yaroslav

> Russian Federation
> 783720 Lezgi
> 696630 Erzya
> 614000 Moksha
> 516490 Dargwa
> 499300 Adyghe
> 460090 Mari, Meadow
> 422550 Kumyk
> 413000 Ingush
> 363000 Yakut
> 264400 Tuva
> 217000 Komi-Zyrian
> 164420 Lak
> 128900 Tabassaran
> 113710 Balkar

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@...
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
(Continue reading)

Amir E. Aharoni | 1 Jul 2011 13:41
Picon
Picon
Gravatar

Re: Languages and numbers

2011/7/1 Yaroslav M. Blanter <putevod <at> mccme.ru>:
> Adyge is almost
> identical to Kabardino-Circassian, and Adyge speakers probably will never
> have their own Wikipedia.

From what i hear about this, Adyge and Kabardian may be two varieties
of a Circassian [[macrolanguage]]. Maybe someone who cares about it
will submit a request to ISO to consider redefining their codes
accordingly.

The recently created Kabardian Wikipedia ( kbd.wikipedia.org ) is
developing quite nicely. It already has contributors in both varieties
of this language and they get along well.

--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
"We're living in pieces,
 I want to live in peace." - T. Moore

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l <at> lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Gmane