Thread history

From Talk:Task force/China
Viewing a history listing
Jump to: navigation, search
descTime User Activity Comment
15:36, 6 November 2009 Dzlot (Talk | contribs) Comment text edited  
15:29, 6 November 2009 Dzlot (Talk | contribs) New reply created  
01:13, 26 October 2009 Mountain (Talk | contribs) New reply created (since deleted)  
00:36, 26 October 2009 Philg88 (Talk | contribs) New reply created (since deleted)  
03:55, 25 October 2009 Mountain (Talk | contribs) New reply created (since deleted)  
01:23, 25 October 2009 Philg88 (Talk | contribs) New reply created (since deleted)  
12:32, 22 October 2009 Mountain (Talk | contribs) New reply created (since deleted)  
14:04, 21 October 2009 Tangos (Talk | contribs) New reply created (since deleted)  
03:13, 14 October 2009 Mountain (Talk | contribs) New thread created  

During the block of Chinese Wikipedia, several other website related with knowledge sharing had been founded. Most famous ones of them are

Their idea is similar to Wikipedia: volunteer-ism, knowledge sharing, focus on qualities; but with other kind of software support.

The two website absorb a significant number of skilled writers. I think we should study them also.

And since the value are similar, we may consider potential cooperation with them.

--Mountain 05:32, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Another website should be mentioned is Douban.com( http://www.douban.com , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douban ). In general, it provide user review and recommendation services for movies, books, and music, and it is also the largest online Chinese language book, movie and music database and one of the largest online communities in China.
Based on my experience, the Douban community have huge number of well-educated users, their reviews on books can reflect this points. They have SNS elements to improve the interaction among users.
The style of this website is very fancy, and people gathered there just for relax. The value of Douban is different from us. --Mountain 02:10, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Mountain03:13, 14 October 2009

I agree with you on cooperation with other websites to build a wikipedia alliance. For example, if we can develop a convenient tool, such as a Wordpress plugin (is there any?), when Songshuhui's editor publish an article, he/she can add tags about the article, all tags link to the page on Wikipedia. If we have such tools, we can build partnerships with many well-selected websites.

Tangos14:04, 21 October 2009

Yes, for the 5-year strategy planning, I think we should give some outline of the alliance, list some potential partners or area.

  • Knowledge-oriented website
  • Education
  • Geo-based website
  • (maybe) Music: in fact, the introduce of artist in emusic.com was from Wikipedia
  • etc...

The wordpress plugin is helpful, we had discussed such kind of tools before, but did not implemented it.

Mountain12:32, 22 October 2009

Mountain, I would add online dictionaries (aside from Wiktionary) to your list since I think that the Chinese/English bridge is very important.

Philg8801:23, 25 October 2009

Yes, Phil, agree with you. I am not very familiar with online dictionary in China, I only know http://www.zdic.net/ , are there any others? Could you introduce this area to us?

Mountain03:55, 25 October 2009

Mountain,

I am quite familiar with many of the online dictionaries in both China and elsewhere through my work with the CC-EDICT free online Chinese/English - English/Chinese Dictionary (http://usa.mdbg.net/chindict/chindict.php). When I have finished the current translation of the Wikipedia/Baidu Baike comparative analysis I will put together a list of online dictionary sites together with some comments.

Philg8800:36, 26 October 2009
 
 
 
 

(I thought you were afraid of their possible competition at first sight = =)

Well, as for cooperation or learning, I think it may be quite hard.

The spirit is hard to change. WP, YY, SSH and DB are all totally different things, like horse and zebra. So it'll be weired for WP editors to just translate passeges, or to write thesis focusing only on one point, or to express their view as if they were in a forum. No, none of them are WP. WP is very formal, with strict format rules and copyright rules and strateges. It is free, but not as free as them. Of course the not-so-free spirit keeps many new WP editors out, but if you're not going to change the 3 main strategy, I think it have to.

And it may be hard for people of YY, SSH and DB to give a hand to WP, because there is no time. Time is already too little to focus on one website, not to mention two.

Dzlot15:29, 6 November 2009