Hi,
On Saturday 26 September 2009 22:23:00 Kenneth Lavrsen wrote:
> I share the anger against Wikipedia. They are unfair.
Kenneth, try to see the stick from their side.
>From the Wikipedian's perspective they try very hard to be fair by applying the same
rules to every article in their monster database.
So some of these decisions - there must be millions of similar decisions pending -
are necessarily based on insufficient data.
What I tried to express is a bit of a different argument that tries to play their game
called "Wikipedia notability". That's important to see.
The question at hand is:
Does TWiki's success story - and it was one - carry over to Foswiki,
does it contribute to Foswiki's notability in the Wikipedian sense?
I've been thinking about this for quite a long time. Well sure we aren't TWiki
anymore. We are called Foswiki.
So if today someone says "TWiki is a notable piece of software that received
numerous official acknowledgements, that is well respected" and so on then there's
still a reason why I think that this does in fact carry over to Foswiki.
This is because it was *us* that made the success happen by working on this
software for 10 years of our life time.
It was *not* TWiki.net.
However, today the press media is full of appraisal about TWiki.net and their
great software.
*This* is unfair. Wikipedia does not know that this is unfair.
We have to debunk these lies. The addressee of this message - Wikipedia - is an important
one.
So what do we have:
(a) the Wikipedian concept of notability,
(b) lots of people that are not aware of the fork and
(c) TWiki.net exploiting TWiki's notability for their own benefit.
My argument is threefold:
First, Foswiki *is* notable in the Wikipedian sense because the people that made
TWiki notable are now called Foswiki. We rebranded more than we forked.
Second, if Foswiki is *not* notable in the Wikipedian sense, then TWiki.net now less than ever isn't
either. They don't deserve this honor because they didn't contribute to TWiki's merits.
Third, a TWiki as such without TWiki.net does not exist anymore.
That's the main point that might hit the vein of those Wikipedians that judged on the
deletion of the Foswiki article. They did not catch fire on anything else like
you mention below:
> Some keywords.
> More than 40 developers.
> 1000s of downloads.
> Business applications
> More than 200 plugins
*This* is totally irrelevant to Wikipedia. Try to look beyond your own nose and
look at other projects. For instance
http://extensions.joomla.org/ hosts
3350 extensions (some of these must be good ;) ). It's community is a lot bigger.
Just to mention one.
Notability is *the* only thing that counts for hop of flop on Wikipedia.
The only source of notability for Foswiki comes via TWiki. It is carried
over by *us* continuing on the *same code* but under a different name.
> Find external references to Foswiki. The latter is essential.
There won't be any references to Foswiki short term,
not if you don't help to debunk the TWiki.net marketing lies.
To do so, you have to call the baby with the T-word by its name.
Michael.
--
-- Michael Daum Consulting
-- Your Wiki Software Partner
-- WikiRing Consultant
--
http://michaeldaumconsulting.com-- Tel: +49 (0)40 21 99 27 51
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA
is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your
developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay
ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf_______________________________________________
Foswiki-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/foswiki-discuss