On 9/9/09, Michael Peel <em...@mikepeel.net> wrote:
>
> On 2 Sep 2009, at 12:35, David Goodman wrote:
>
>> There is sufficient missing material in every Wikipedia, sufficient
>> lack of coverage of areas outside the primary language zone and in
>> earlier periods, sufficient unsourced material; sufficient need for
>> updating articles, sufficient potentially free media to add,
>> sufficient needed imagery to get; that we have more than enough work
>> for all the volunteers we are likely to get.
>
> I apologise for taking this slightly out of context, but it touches
> upon something I've been wondering about recently, which is: do we
> have a complete set of WMF projects?
great topic :-D
in my personal vision, it is rather obvious we should consider the
work of the wmf as "perpetually unfinished" just as wikipedia or any
of its other projects: an ongoing process, never ever {{done}}
completely.
to just do a little brainstorm, let me share some ideas as well:
* a compendium to wikipedia, collecting each and every complete older
encyclopedia (which is no longer copyrighted), thus also giving a peek
into the history of knowledge and of encyclopedias (does this really
belong in wikisource? maybe)
* a wikimusic including a musical dictionary, where one can e.g. look
up themes and melodies, find sheet music and recordings, searching by
notes etc
* i also thought of wikimaps, somebody mentioned this already, imnsho
including "all maps" in detailed resolutions also historical maps,
thus also giving a peek into the history of geography and of
cartography as well as leaving room for original creations under a
free license (new maps)
just my 2 cts ;-)
all the best,
oscar
--
*edito ergo sum*
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
