Talk:Wikimedia COTW

Ideas

I have a couple of ideas that I won't propose right now because I'm not sure this is really the right place:

• First of all, I think there should be a Wikimedia push to get more Wikireaders published. Right now there are only german readers available. I think there's a lot of collaboration that could happen between different wikimedia projects. For example cooking books from wikibooks about japanese cooking together with articles from wikipedia about japanese cuisine, or shakespeare texts together with wikipedia articles about shakespear and his plays.

Maybe the plan could be to set up a dedicated wikimedia project like wikireader.org where people would collaborate from all media wiki projects to collect information from various projects to create readers. Jacoplane 02:43, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Also, I have watchlists on about six different wikimedia sites. Some kind of push from the community to enable users to check all these watchlists from a central location would save me (and i imagine others) a lot of headache. I know i would contribute more to sites like meta wiki if i checked my watchlist there as often as i check my watchlist on :en .... Jacoplane 02:37, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Having rss feeds on watchlists would be enough for me, then I could dump them into a folder in bloglines and i'd be happy. Jacoplane 02:38, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hebrew, Farsi, Arabic announcements

Hi,

Angela and I have had problems trying to post an announcement to the Hebrew, Arabic, and Farsi Wikipedias because of right-to-left text input issues. Perhaps someone else could try to post the announcement below, or translate it directly, to the respective community portal talk pages.--Eloquence 19:58, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

A new attempt to get the Wikimedia community to collaborate on multi-lingual tasks is the Wikimedia Collaboration of the Week. Please see the page on meta for details. It would be great if you could translate the following and add it to Wikimedia COTW. The text below is from en:Template:Wm-cotw and will be updated every week. Thanks.

The Wikimedia Collaboration of the Week is an attempt to get the Wikimedia community to join forces in tackling problems that affect all our projects. The current COTW is to create a standard multilingual manual for the MediaWiki software. The help pages should be linked from Help:Contents on Meta, our Wikimedia-wide coordination wiki. Please see the instructions for this COTW and help to make it happen!

Logo images

Is the logo available without the English acronym? It should be. Different languages have different acronyms for Wikimedia Collaboration Of The week, so the English acronym looks odd in other language text. -Hapsiainen 22:11, Apr 3, 2005 (UTC)

I just made a no-text version at Image:Wikimedia-cotw-notext.png.--Eloquence 00:28, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Language

Why is English the source language? It's a pain to translate English, better choice would be Esperanto!--Anonymous

More people understand English than Esperanto. Esperanto isn't more neutral language than English. Esperanto favours people using the languages from which it has loaned words. -Hapsiainen 20:07, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)

My dream project - making whole Wiki language transparent. We have Wikipedias in different languages, however the language used on Commons, Meta etc. not only for talks, but also for edits, is English. Of course we have some templates, but they are not that widespread and not that useful we would expect them to be. And they don't solve the matter of, for instance, article names on common projects.

Creating translations to particular articles and categories similarly to the main page on Commons etc. smartly adjusting to user's preferences - that would be nice. Let's say the structure would be alike in all languages. And the problem of disambiguation between languages different words may be solved through special mark-ups. Maybe further implementations and improvements would be needed... I think it's worth to think about it.

Best regards, Aegis Maelstrom 20:20, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Collaboration of the Month?

Certainly, we've started with an ambitious project. I'm glad that quite a bit of work has been done as a result of the first COTW, but we're now in the third week, and this raises the question of whether we should make the COTW last more than one week, especially in the beginning.

Yet, some COTWs will be much smaller than the current one, especially those related to increasing the exposure of individual projects. So my suggestion would be that a collaboration could be specifically proposed as lasting a month if it is deemed too big to be handled in a week. If it is voted for, then it would take a full month. Thoughts?--Eloquence 23:26, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

OK, this has been going on for 11 weeks now. This is getting ridiculous. 212.248.196.131 08:30, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)