I think that we should not overstretch ourselves in too many projects. Keeping those existing ones is already difficult enough. I know that creating new project has an immediate feel good perception and is positive for Public Relation but when you start looking at the unkeep to run that new project that another story altogether. So Wikipedia should commit sparingly its Key resource, the time & good will of its volunteers, into new project. Don't do it if you can't afford it and cant commit enough resources to make it a hit.
I'm rejoining Randomran position as Wikipedia should pick up "good fights" that no one else is taking while providing support to others groups/organizations doing well their job on their areas instead of entering in concurrence with them.
I'm not sure if we're in disagreement here.
There are a number of important initiatives out there (e.g. OpenStreetMap) which are doing perfectly fine on their own, and there's no point in us trying to replicate or absorb them.
There may be important initiatives that are struggling, which would like to be considered as official Wikimedia Foundation projects.
There may be existing Wikimedia Foundation projects that would be better off on their own, or even to be closed completely.
And there may be things that need to be free that currently nobody is making a serious effort to provide, and that should be of priority interest to the Wikimedia Foundation.
I'm not arguing that we should dramatically expand the scope of what we're doing. I think we should clarify our processes, and determine if WMF should specifically dedicate resources to any content areas that it currently isn't, in order to serve its mission.