Help Wikitravel grow by contributing to an article! Learn how.

Difference between revisions of "Wikitravel talk:Cooperating with WikiOutdoors"

From Wikitravel
Jump to: navigation, search
(Sounds good, but a caveat)
(community viability)
Line 12: Line 12:
 
::Yeah, the "non-commercial" clause rules that out, because Wikitravel material ''may'' be used commercially. Unless WikiOutdoors switches to the same license (which would still be feasible at this early stage), the "cooperation" between the two would have to be limited to reciprocal linking.  I do think the two projects are for the most part mutually complementary. - [[User:TVerBeek|Todd VerBeek]] 21:35, 4 December 2006 (EST)
 
::Yeah, the "non-commercial" clause rules that out, because Wikitravel material ''may'' be used commercially. Unless WikiOutdoors switches to the same license (which would still be feasible at this early stage), the "cooperation" between the two would have to be limited to reciprocal linking.  I do think the two projects are for the most part mutually complementary. - [[User:TVerBeek|Todd VerBeek]] 21:35, 4 December 2006 (EST)
 
:In principle, I am very much in favor of this cooperation.  However, is WikiOutdoors really a viable commodity?  If it was founded in February 2006 and still only has 60 articles as of today, it's not clear that the site is gaining any traction with the on-line community.  (Heck, I could write that many articles there myself, and still not talk about the ''really'' obscure/interesting places.)  I don't think that's a show-stopper, but we will have to think about expectations and check back now and then to make sure it's viable.  When I get a minute, I'll take a crack at the what-goes-where issue; it's fair to say that the [[Santa Fe (New Mexico)]] example used on the project page hits close to home ... -- [[User:Bill-on-the-Hill|Bill-on-the-Hill]] 09:55, 5 December 2006 (EST)
 
:In principle, I am very much in favor of this cooperation.  However, is WikiOutdoors really a viable commodity?  If it was founded in February 2006 and still only has 60 articles as of today, it's not clear that the site is gaining any traction with the on-line community.  (Heck, I could write that many articles there myself, and still not talk about the ''really'' obscure/interesting places.)  I don't think that's a show-stopper, but we will have to think about expectations and check back now and then to make sure it's viable.  When I get a minute, I'll take a crack at the what-goes-where issue; it's fair to say that the [[Santa Fe (New Mexico)]] example used on the project page hits close to home ... -- [[User:Bill-on-the-Hill|Bill-on-the-Hill]] 09:55, 5 December 2006 (EST)
 +
 +
::FYI: [[User:Kirasw|Kirasw]] was on hiatus the last couple of months-- her daughter was born in September, but it looks like the outreach to Wikitravel is part of a effort to get things going again. I think we'll see it pick up speed over the next few weeks. [[User:Maj|Maj]] 17:34, 5 December 2006 (EST)

Revision as of 22:38, 5 December 2006

Any thoughts, concerns or suggestions about cooperating with WikiOutdoors? Also, any feedback for the WikiOutdoors folks would be greatly appreciated! Kirasw 17:25, 4 December 2006 (EST)

Hi, Kirasw. So, I think this sounds like a really good idea. Detailed trail guides and such have been one of those subjects that we've wrestled with and which some (most?) people think falls out of scope for Wikitravel. If WikiOutdoors turns out to be the right partner here, this could be really good for us.
I think there are a lot of pluses: WikiOutdoors is a wiki, and it's got a Creative Commons license. However, it's a NonCommercial license, which I think might rub some people the wrong way. In particular, we couldn't move content from Wikitravel to WikiOutdoors, or vice versa. I'm not sure how important that is to other Wikitravellers; I've learned to live with it with wikiHow, but I know they'd change their license if they could.
I'll try to solicit some input from other Wikitravellers here. I think the best option for us is to have a TwinPages link on related pages, so that, say, Yosemite National Park might have a link to your Yosemite page at the same place it has a Wikipedia and Open Directory link. --Evan 19:58, 4 December 2006 (EST)
This page contains legal errors since it claims that WikiOutdoors' CC-byNC can be copied into Wikitravel. It can't. -- Colin 20:59, 4 December 2006 (EST)
Yeah, the "non-commercial" clause rules that out, because Wikitravel material may be used commercially. Unless WikiOutdoors switches to the same license (which would still be feasible at this early stage), the "cooperation" between the two would have to be limited to reciprocal linking. I do think the two projects are for the most part mutually complementary. - Todd VerBeek 21:35, 4 December 2006 (EST)
In principle, I am very much in favor of this cooperation. However, is WikiOutdoors really a viable commodity? If it was founded in February 2006 and still only has 60 articles as of today, it's not clear that the site is gaining any traction with the on-line community. (Heck, I could write that many articles there myself, and still not talk about the really obscure/interesting places.) I don't think that's a show-stopper, but we will have to think about expectations and check back now and then to make sure it's viable. When I get a minute, I'll take a crack at the what-goes-where issue; it's fair to say that the Santa Fe (New Mexico) example used on the project page hits close to home ... -- Bill-on-the-Hill 09:55, 5 December 2006 (EST)
FYI: Kirasw was on hiatus the last couple of months-- her daughter was born in September, but it looks like the outreach to Wikitravel is part of a effort to get things going again. I think we'll see it pick up speed over the next few weeks. Maj 17:34, 5 December 2006 (EST)

Variants

Actions

Destination Docents

In other languages