2009/5/18 Nathan <nawr...@gmail.com> > > > I think if there was demand for this within the editing community, it would > already exist. The problem, then, is not what to do for the editors who > might like a "safe" option but for the readers who don't have an account > and > can't set preferences or add .js widgets. Maybe not right now, but I can > see > in the future shooting for a kids.wikipedia.org or safe.wikipedia.org - > perhaps Simple Wikipedia, which has had some criticism for its mission, > could be adapted for the purpose. > > Nathan > <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l> >
I'd prefer to take the OSM-approach here. Let others port our content and filter the relevant parts out if they wish to build a safe Wikipedia version, especially since there are (almost) unlimited possibilities to combine articles to suitability for usergroups. If someone wants to set up kiddopedia.org and mirror Wikipedia content there with the exception of sexual subjects, be my guest. It doesn't have to be Wikimedia who's doing that. We should limit ourselves somewhere in what we want to do, and what we would others to pick up if there is a need. Which is perfectly possible thanks to this wonderful license of ours. eia _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
