Wikimedia: Difference between revisions

Wikimedia (edit)

Revision as of 15:52, 28 April 2004

1,234 bytes added , 28 April 2004

no edit summary

Matterhorn

6

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-'''Wikimedia Foundation''' is a private tax-exempt corporation (IRS 501) in the US founded by Jim Wales aka Jimbo. It has an independent board that makes the decisions as required by law.
+'''Wikimedia Foundation''' is a private tax-exempt corporation (IRS 501) in the US founded by Jimmy Wales aka Jimbo. It has an independent board that makes the decisions as required by law.
-Wikimedia spends most of it's money it receives as donations on providing hardware for [[MediaWiki]] sites such as [[Wikipedia]]s and [[Wiktionary|Wiktionaries]].
+Wikimedia is funded by donors, and spends virtually all of it's money it receives as donations on providing hardware for [[MediaWiki]] sites such as [[Wikipedia]]s and [[Wiktionary|Wiktionaries]].
+There are no salaried employees at the present time, and no immediate plans to have any.
-Many longstanding participants in the [[Wikipedia]] project have serious problems with the people and processes employed by the '''Foundation'''.  As a volunteer organization, it probably has growing pains, and it's unclear if it will outgrow these. Most of the criticisms have to do with [[wiki management]] problems on which there is little well-understood practice.
+Most longstanding participants in the [[Wikipedia]] project have greeted the formation of the nonprofit with great enthusiasm, and plans are in the work to set up nonprofit organizations in European countries to complement the global foundation.  Jimbo has given all rights and ownership in the
+Wikipedia name(s) and websites, as well as some hardware, freely and permanently.
-Specific issues which have raised concerns amond some people:
+One of the greatest difficulties that Wikipedia has faced is in maintaining an open and
+welcoming culture in the face of repeated attacks from vicious trolls, such as the ones now beginning to plague Consumerium.  Wiki management issues are complex and difficult, and there are many lessons yet to be learned.
+The incredible success of Wikipedia shows that it is an excellent model for any community organization.  Wikipedia faces far greater challenges than any single-purpose community such as consumerium, because by design, it draws from a very broad range of ideological backgrounds, and must be welcoming to them all.  Consumerium, or other narrow-purpose projects, will likely find a more homogeneous user base, thus making governance decisions much easier.  By applying the lessons learned at Wikipedia, great success is likely.
 *Refusing to release [[Most Clicked Links]] information on any [[Wikipedia]], even the small ones, where tracking this information would be quite simple, and would assist authors in supporting real end user interests.
 ::They are in no way obliged to reveal this information. If you have a problem with this go create a [[fork]] of [[Wikipedia]]. Some have tried it.
+:::Actually, this claim is completely and totally false.  There has been no refusal of any kind to release any data of this kind.  Additionally,  I can find no evidence that anyone is even asking for this, or
+that any one has ever been critical (except here on this page) of us for this imagined fault.
 *Releasing only very limited page visit information - maybe due to the performance cost it adds
+::: Again, completely false.  There is no truth to this at all.
 *Treating use of [[ISO]] language codes in [[mediawiki]]'s [[interwiki link standard|interwiki link conventions]] as if they are invocations of Wikipedia in that language, not simply references to "that page in that language".
 ::But the interwiki links point to the page in another language
+:::This complaint is completely incoherent.  If the original complainant could explain himself, I'm sure that any such problem would be eagerly addressed.
 *Banning, harassing, [[outing|attempting to "out"]] and permitting (if not deliberately attempting) [[framing]] users who point out any of the above.  This sometimes reaches the bizarre extreme of [[echo chamber]] assertions being cited in Wikipedia articles as if they were true.
-*Promoting its own [[community point of view]] as if it were actually a [[neutral point of view]], ignoring [[systemic bias]] questions, and letting [[sysop vigilantiism]] and [[sysop vandalism]] occur freely against outsiders.  This sometimes reaches the bizarre extremes of assuming that the '''Wikipedia mailing list''' consensus on legal issues overrules the best legal advice of actual qualified legal experts
-It is a classic [[insider culture]].  It is not a good model for [[Consumerium Governance Organization]] or any other nonprofit entity that is actually trying to serve users and disadvantaged people and other living things.
+:The most common criticism of Wikipedia is that the community is too open and welcoming and tolerant of people who have no willingness to work together in a healthy way with others.  Such people are indeed angered when, after months of agonizing deliberations and attempts to find ways to
+compromise, they are eventually banned.  Most wikipedians seem to feel that Jimbo has always been too lenient about such matters.