I would say that (as Erik said) in some cases it's a good idea. I doubt that we could have done the work we did on Strategy wiki, had it been housed on meta. Some wikis wish to set different standards for what can be included, and that's difficult to do if you have an extant wiki that has its own standards and rues.
pb _______________________ Philippe Beaudette Head of Reader Relations Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. pbeaude...@wikimedia.org Imagine a world in which every human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! http://donate.wikimedia.org On Jan 31, 2011, at 7:47 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > The milk has spilled so it is time to mop up. As we gain more experience, we > learn that having new wikis is often a bad idea in the long run. > > We live we learn.. > Thanks, > GerardM > > On 31 January 2011 14:25, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dal...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 28 January 2011 20:33, phoebe ayers <phoebe.w...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Such a solution would make it easier to fold separate wikis >>> (such as a conference wiki) back into Meta when we were done with >>> them, too. >> >> Why fold them into meta afterwards rather than just use Meta from the >> beginning? Isn't the whole point of the proposal that we stop creating >> new wikis for everything? >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
