Delphine wrote:
>1) The slogan "Wikipedia is a non-profit" sounds weird to me...
Well, Wikipedia itself isn't a nonprofit, the Foundation is. But "is
nonprofit" and "is a nonprofit" are both acceptable in English (1st is
an adjective, 2nd is a noun) so I don't see an issue with those words.
>2) While I understand the necessity and the advantages of pushing
>Wikipedia over the other projects in terms of "return on investment",
>I really think it would make sense to find a slightly different
>wording/message for the notices on other projects. It doesn't mean
>that we shouldn't use Wikipedia's name, but if the Foundation is ever
>hoping to push other Wikimedia projects forward, it should probably
>start to include them more prominently in its own communications to
>start with.
I agree - Wikipedia has brand recognition, but the other projects need
to develop some - that means co-branding with Wikipedia and/or the
Wikimedia Foundation. This is one prominent example of an area where
Wikipedia's sister projects are notably absent. We should try to
emphasize on Wikipedia's notices that donations will help Wikipedia and
these other cool things. On other projects, something like "Wikibooks,
like Wikipedia, is a project of the WMF, and we need money" might make
more sense. I don't know whether we can currently do different notices
on different projects, but I think it will be very strange to have a
"Wikipedia needs money" at the top of a Wikibooks page. For projects
struggling to gain their own notoriety, some support from the Foundation
would be nice.
-Mike
--
Mike.lifeguard
mikelifeguard@fastmail.fm
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>1) The slogan "Wikipedia is a non-profit" sounds weird to me...
Well, Wikipedia itself isn't a nonprofit, the Foundation is. But "is
nonprofit" and "is a nonprofit" are both acceptable in English (1st is
an adjective, 2nd is a noun) so I don't see an issue with those words.
>2) While I understand the necessity and the advantages of pushing
>Wikipedia over the other projects in terms of "return on investment",
>I really think it would make sense to find a slightly different
>wording/message for the notices on other projects. It doesn't mean
>that we shouldn't use Wikipedia's name, but if the Foundation is ever
>hoping to push other Wikimedia projects forward, it should probably
>start to include them more prominently in its own communications to
>start with.
I agree - Wikipedia has brand recognition, but the other projects need
to develop some - that means co-branding with Wikipedia and/or the
Wikimedia Foundation. This is one prominent example of an area where
Wikipedia's sister projects are notably absent. We should try to
emphasize on Wikipedia's notices that donations will help Wikipedia and
these other cool things. On other projects, something like "Wikibooks,
like Wikipedia, is a project of the WMF, and we need money" might make
more sense. I don't know whether we can currently do different notices
on different projects, but I think it will be very strange to have a
"Wikipedia needs money" at the top of a Wikibooks page. For projects
struggling to gain their own notoriety, some support from the Foundation
would be nice.
-Mike
--
Mike.lifeguard
mikelifeguard@fastmail.fm
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l