Archive:Founder letter: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
LincolnBot (talk | contribs) m →top: subst old templates to prepare for deletion |
||
| (12 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Archived}} |
|||
''By Jimbo Wales - september 2004'' |
|||
{| align="center" width="90%" |
|||
<center><font face="Palatino,Verdana,Arial" size=4>Letter from the Founder</font></center> |
|||
|- style="font: 90% Verdana,Arial,Helvetica;" |
|||
<br> |
|||
| align="center" width="12%" | |
|||
<a href="/wiki/Wikimedia_Quarto/3/En-1" title=""><img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/thumb/4/42/Welcome.png/40px-Welcome.png" alt="Welcome"></a> |
|||
<br />[[Wikimedia_Quarto/3/En-1|Welcome]] |
|||
| align="center" width="12%" | |
|||
<a href="/wiki/Wikimedia_Quarto/3/En-2" title=""><img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/thumb/6/64/Founder.png/40px-Founder.png" alt="Founder"></a> |
|||
<br />[[Wikimedia_Quarto/3/En-2|Founder]] |
|||
| align="center" width="12%" | |
|||
<a href="/wiki/Wikimedia_Quarto/3/En-3" title=""><img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/thumb/9/97/Reports.png/40px-Reports.png" alt="Reports"></a> |
|||
<br />[[Wikimedia_Quarto/3/En-3|Reports]] |
|||
| align="center" width="12%" | |
|||
<a href="/wiki/Wikimedia_Quarto/3/En-4" title=""><img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/thumb/a/ac/Projects.png/40px-Projects.png" alt="Projects"></a> |
|||
<br />[[Wikimedia_Quarto/3/En-4|Projects]] |
|||
| align="center" width="12%" | |
|||
<a href="/wiki/Wikimedia_Quarto/3/En-5" title=""><img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/thumb/1/17/Interview2.png/40px-Interview2.png" alt="Chapters"></a> |
|||
<br />[[Wikimedia_Quarto/3/En-5|Chapters]] |
|||
| align="center" width="12%" | |
|||
<a href="/wiki/Wikimedia_Quarto/3/En-6" title=""><img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/thumb/9/99/Press2.png/40px-Press2.png" alt="Press"></a> |
|||
<br />[[Wikimedia_Quarto/3/En-6|Press]] |
|||
| align="center" width="12%" | |
|||
<a href="/wiki/Wikimedia_Quarto/3/En-7" title=""><img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/thumb/3/31/International2.png/40px-International2.png" alt="International"></a> |
|||
<br />[[Wikimedia_Quarto/3/En-7|International]] |
|||
| align="center" width="12%" | |
|||
<a href="/wiki/Wikimedia_Quarto/3/En-8" title=""><img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/thumb/6/65/Endnotes2.png/40px-Endnotes2.png" alt="Endnotes"></a> |
|||
<br />[[Wikimedia_Quarto/3/En-8|Endnotes]] |
|||
|} |
|||
<!-- {{WQ-3-header-en}} --> |
|||
<div style="border:1px solid #2A7E54; padding: 0.5em; padding-top:0em; background-color: #ffffff;"> |
|||
<center>[[Wikimedia Quarto/3/En-2|en]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Wikimedia Quarto/3/Fr-2|fr]] <nowiki>|</nowiki> [[Wikimedia Quarto/3/Pl-2|pl]] <!-- {{WQ-3.x-langs|2}} --></center> |
|||
<center><font face="Palatino,Verdana,Arial" size="4"> |
|||
'''Letter from the Founder - April 2005'''</font></center> |
|||
<br /> |
|||
[[Image:Jimbo-wales---fosdem-2005.jpg|thumb|300px|Jimbo Wales speaking at FOSDEM 2005 in Brussels, Belgium.<br><small>By [[w:en:User:Chrys|Chrys]].</small>]] |
|||
<font size=6 color="#7E0000">W</font >ikimedia's mission is to give the world's knowledge to every single |
|||
[[Image:Jimbo_Wales_in_France.jpg|right|150px]] |
|||
person on the planet in their own language. As part of that mission, |
|||
Wikipedia is first and foremost an effort to create and distribute a |
|||
free encyclopedia of the highest possible quality. Asking whether the |
|||
community comes before or after this goal is really asking the wrong |
|||
question: the entire purpose of the community is this goal. |
|||
I don't know of any case where there is a genuine tension between |
|||
<div align=right>'''In Focus & In Love'''</div> |
|||
these two things, either. That is to say, the central core of the |
|||
community, the people who are really doing the work, are all |
|||
passionate about this point: that we're creating something of |
|||
extremely high quality, not just building an online community for its |
|||
own sake. |
|||
The community does not come before our task, the community is |
|||
<font size=6 color="#7E0000">O</font>ur mission is to give freely the sum of the world's knowledge to |
|||
organized '''around''' our task. The difference is simply that decisions |
|||
every single person on the planet in the language of their choice, |
|||
should always be made, not on the grounds of social expediency or |
|||
under a free license, so that they can modify, adapt, reuse, or |
|||
popular majority or traditional credentials, but in light of the |
|||
redistribute it, at will. And, by "every single person on the planet," I |
|||
requirements of the job we have set for ourselves. |
|||
mean exactly that, so we have to remember that much of our target |
|||
audience is not yet able to access the Internet reliably, if |
|||
at all. |
|||
I do not endorse the view, a view held as far as I know only by a tiny |
|||
We are an astounding global project that continues to grow at a |
|||
minority, that Wikipedia is anti-elitist or anti-expert in any way. |
|||
staggering pace. Some statistics already widely known in the |
|||
If anything, we are '''extremely''' elitist, but we are |
|||
community are worth repeating: we see 2,000 new wikipedians each month; |
|||
anti-credentialist. Attracting and retaining academic specialists is |
|||
2,000 new articles and 40,000 article edits every day -- almost twice |
|||
one of our goals. That is, we seek thoughtful intelligent people |
|||
as many pages and page-edits if you include discussion and meta-pages -- |
|||
willing to do the very hard work of collaborating with others to be |
|||
and this is only counting Wikipedia. |
|||
both accurate and balanced, and we don't accept anything less than |
|||
that. A PhD is valuable evidence of that willingness, but it is not a |
|||
substitute for these qualities. |
|||
There may be cases of PhDs who think that no one should edit their expert |
|||
As we continue to grow at this rate, we will face some challenges of |
|||
articles, or who can't stand seeing their point of view challenged, |
|||
scaling. Old ways of doing things sometimes begin to break down as |
|||
and have no patience for discussion. In these cases, their expertise |
|||
we become a community with ever larger numbers of people. We want to |
|||
is of limited value; if someone is unable to work in a friendly, helpful way |
|||
maintain and improve our quality standards, while at the same |
|||
in a social context, and feels that their credentials entitle them to |
|||
time remaining open, friendly, and welcoming as a community. This is |
|||
the last word on a subject, this is a problem for them and for us. We |
|||
a challenge. |
|||
will always have to make complex judgments about how to handle such |
|||
situations. |
|||
I'm 100% committed to a goal of a "traditional encylopedia or better" quality for |
|||
To meet that challenge will require a lot of analysis and thoughtfulness. |
|||
Wikipedia, and all of our social rules should revolve around that. |
|||
I also always like to talk about another ingredient that is absolutely |
|||
Openness and inclusiveness are indispensible for us, but these are our |
|||
essential: love. It's not so common in technological, academic, and |
|||
'''radical''' means to our radical '''ends'''. |
|||
scientific circles to talk about love within a community, but for us it |
|||
is, and has to be, common and explicit. |
|||
Our community already comes from a huge variety of backgrounds, and over |
|||
time the variety will only increase. The only way we can coordinate our |
|||
efforts in an efficient manner to achieve the goals we have set for |
|||
ourselves, is to love our work and to love each other, even when we |
|||
disagree. Mutual respect and a reasonable approach to disagreement are |
|||
essential, and both of those are helped along enormously when we feel |
|||
favorably towards each other just as a natural result of being |
|||
volunteers together on this incredible ridiculous crazy fun project to |
|||
change the world. |
|||
None of us is perfect in these matters; such is the human condition. |
|||
But each of us can try each day, in our editing, in our mailing list |
|||
posts, in our irc chats, and in our private emails, to reach for a higher |
|||
standard than the Internet usually encourages, a standard of rational |
|||
benevolence and love. |
|||
We've come a long way already, and to really achieve our goals, we |
|||
have to remain in focus and in love. |
|||
==Archives== |
==Archives== |
||
*[[/Founder letter Sept 2004]] |
|||
*[[/2005]] |
|||
*[[/Founder letter January 2005]] |
|||
*[[/2004]] |
|||
Latest revision as of 07:22, 16 March 2024
|
This page has been archived.
Its content is no longer being maintained, is likely out of date, and may be inaccurate. This page can be relocated to Meta-Wiki. |
By Chrys.
Wikimedia's mission is to give the world's knowledge to every single person on the planet in their own language. As part of that mission, Wikipedia is first and foremost an effort to create and distribute a free encyclopedia of the highest possible quality. Asking whether the community comes before or after this goal is really asking the wrong question: the entire purpose of the community is this goal.
I don't know of any case where there is a genuine tension between these two things, either. That is to say, the central core of the community, the people who are really doing the work, are all passionate about this point: that we're creating something of extremely high quality, not just building an online community for its own sake.
The community does not come before our task, the community is organized around our task. The difference is simply that decisions should always be made, not on the grounds of social expediency or popular majority or traditional credentials, but in light of the requirements of the job we have set for ourselves.
I do not endorse the view, a view held as far as I know only by a tiny minority, that Wikipedia is anti-elitist or anti-expert in any way. If anything, we are extremely elitist, but we are anti-credentialist. Attracting and retaining academic specialists is one of our goals. That is, we seek thoughtful intelligent people willing to do the very hard work of collaborating with others to be both accurate and balanced, and we don't accept anything less than that. A PhD is valuable evidence of that willingness, but it is not a substitute for these qualities.
There may be cases of PhDs who think that no one should edit their expert articles, or who can't stand seeing their point of view challenged, and have no patience for discussion. In these cases, their expertise is of limited value; if someone is unable to work in a friendly, helpful way in a social context, and feels that their credentials entitle them to the last word on a subject, this is a problem for them and for us. We will always have to make complex judgments about how to handle such situations.
I'm 100% committed to a goal of a "traditional encylopedia or better" quality for Wikipedia, and all of our social rules should revolve around that. Openness and inclusiveness are indispensible for us, but these are our radical means to our radical ends.