> I was thinking particularly of ... Wikifamily (Rodovid), If you're thinking of _this_ Rodovid http://en.rodovid.org/ (frontend is http://rodovid.org/) I would strongly vote for that.
It's really is > useful for significant audiences, and > implementable in an > elegant way In fact it's implemented already though development is going on (as never ending process). I would say that there is great synergy (between Rodovid and Wikipedia) opportunity as there is a lot of genealogy information to be described for Wikipedia. As of > ... if they > still need support of any kind, but their proposals for Wikimedia > hosting remain. I don't know (and never new) the team that is not in need of help. On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Samuel Klein<meta...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 9:09 PM, Erik Moeller<e...@wikimedia.org> wrote: >> 2009/7/31 Samuel Klein <meta...@gmail.com>: >>> On critical complex topics, the Foundation could benefit from more >>> discussion and better planning. Why have we made it so hard to start >>> new Projects? >> >> I would suggest that we use the strategy call for proposals to >> re-surface some of the most important project ideas that people would >> like to bring attention to. >> >> http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Call_for_Proposals > > Yes. > >> IMO there's simply a lack of community support for a lot of ideas, >> either because people feel they are bad ideas, out of scope for our >> mission, already covered within the scope of existing projects, or >> hard to make work with the existing software. That said, I think there > > I was thinking particularly of Wikikids and Wikifamily (Rodovid), > which are useful for significant audiences, implementable in an > elegant way, about creating and sharing collections of free knowledge, > and have existing multilingual communities. I don't know if they > still need support of any kind, but their proposals for Wikimedia > hosting remain. > >> are definitely many ideas that are worth exploring further. >> >> My personal favorites: >> * a shared repository for structured data, the equivalent to Wikimedia >> Commons for data (some coherent synthesis of ideas from FreeBase, >> OmegaWiki, and Semantic MediaWiki); >> * a wiki for the global community of makers to share designs and >> prototypes for both functional and entertaining objects, which is >> becoming increasingly important as fabbing facilities become >> commonplace; >> * a wiki for annotated source code examples, similar to LiteratePrograms.org; > +1 > >> * a wiki for standardization; >> * a dedicated public outreach / evangelism wiki. > > What would this look like? > > Also... > *A wiki for book metadata, with an entry for every published work, > statistics about its use and siblings, and discussion about its > usefulness as a citation (a collaboration with OpenLibrary, merging > WikiCite ideas) > > Sj > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
