<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Wikipedia Weekly 5 &#8211; Arbcom, WP 0.5 and &#8220;Wiki&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://wikipediaweekly.org/2006/11/15/wikipedia-weekly-5-arbcom-wp-05-and-wiki/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://wikipediaweekly.org/2006/11/15/wikipedia-weekly-5-arbcom-wp-05-and-wiki/</link>
	<description>The only podcast for Wikimedians! Covering the news, policies, controversies and interviews with the people of Wikipedia and Wikimedia in general.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Feb 2010 02:02:30 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Isaac</title>
		<link>http://wikipediaweekly.org/2006/11/15/wikipedia-weekly-5-arbcom-wp-05-and-wiki/comment-page-1/#comment-79</link>
		<dc:creator>Isaac</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Nov 2006 21:31:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wikipediaweekly.com/2006/11/15/wikipedia-weekly-5-arbcom-wp-05-and-wiki/#comment-79</guid>
		<description>About the advertisements:
I agree that the Google Search box holds the most promise and is the most useful. But I think the text ads could work as well, you can find a proof-of-concept &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.calacanis.com/2006/11/03/wikipedia-proposal-part-5/#c1210058&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.

But I think there is something that is a lot more exciting than ads, namely &quot;Crowd Funding&quot; (like &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.sellaband.com/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;SellaBand.com&lt;/a&gt; for example), read my comment on Jimmy Wales&#039; Blog &lt;a href=&quot;http://blog.jimmywales.com/index.php/archives/2006/10/31/advertising-and-wikipedia/#comment-6286&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;.  I later found out that Larry Sanger had already written a good article on this subject &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.citizendium.org/contentbrokers.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;The Role of Content Brokers in the Era of Free Content&lt;/a&gt;. (Maybe you could do another special with Larry Sanger on this subject). 

But to come back to the subject of ads, I thought that maybe advertisement revenue could be used to jumpstart a crowd funding initiative. Once it gets going and more people see how it works and join in then I think there won&#039;t be a need for ads anymore. Wikipedia could be funded by taking a small part from the &quot;crowd fund&quot;, the rest would be used to free up content, like eBooks, music, software, etc. However this might be better suited for Citizendium instead of Wikipedia, because buying content from the &#039;elite&#039; might be seen as a bad thing by some Wikipedians? Maybe it is good to discuss the issue of crowd funding first, because there might be other options to jumpstart this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>About the advertisements:<br />
I agree that the Google Search box holds the most promise and is the most useful. But I think the text ads could work as well, you can find a proof-of-concept <a href="http://www.calacanis.com/2006/11/03/wikipedia-proposal-part-5/#c1210058" rel="nofollow">here</a>.</p>
<p>But I think there is something that is a lot more exciting than ads, namely &#8220;Crowd Funding&#8221; (like <a href="http://www.sellaband.com/" rel="nofollow">SellaBand.com</a> for example), read my comment on Jimmy Wales&#8217; Blog <a href="http://blog.jimmywales.com/index.php/archives/2006/10/31/advertising-and-wikipedia/#comment-6286" rel="nofollow">here</a>.  I later found out that Larry Sanger had already written a good article on this subject <a href="http://www.citizendium.org/contentbrokers.html" rel="nofollow">The Role of Content Brokers in the Era of Free Content</a>. (Maybe you could do another special with Larry Sanger on this subject). </p>
<p>But to come back to the subject of ads, I thought that maybe advertisement revenue could be used to jumpstart a crowd funding initiative. Once it gets going and more people see how it works and join in then I think there won&#8217;t be a need for ads anymore. Wikipedia could be funded by taking a small part from the &#8220;crowd fund&#8221;, the rest would be used to free up content, like eBooks, music, software, etc. However this might be better suited for Citizendium instead of Wikipedia, because buying content from the &#8216;elite&#8217; might be seen as a bad thing by some Wikipedians? Maybe it is good to discuss the issue of crowd funding first, because there might be other options to jumpstart this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tawker</title>
		<link>http://wikipediaweekly.org/2006/11/15/wikipedia-weekly-5-arbcom-wp-05-and-wiki/comment-page-1/#comment-78</link>
		<dc:creator>Tawker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Nov 2006 19:29:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wikipediaweekly.com/2006/11/15/wikipedia-weekly-5-arbcom-wp-05-and-wiki/#comment-78</guid>
		<description>True, it&#039;s making edit count a almost trivial figure, AntiVandalBot itself gets around 5K reverts a day when it&#039;s running full tilt.  Of course, with the site being more popular, we get more silly vandals and its just boom, more bot work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>True, it&#8217;s making edit count a almost trivial figure, AntiVandalBot itself gets around 5K reverts a day when it&#8217;s running full tilt.  Of course, with the site being more popular, we get more silly vandals and its just boom, more bot work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: j</title>
		<link>http://wikipediaweekly.org/2006/11/15/wikipedia-weekly-5-arbcom-wp-05-and-wiki/comment-page-1/#comment-76</link>
		<dc:creator>j</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Nov 2006 21:46:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wikipediaweekly.com/2006/11/15/wikipedia-weekly-5-arbcom-wp-05-and-wiki/#comment-76</guid>
		<description>i think that the decrease in article count per month and a &#039;deletionist attitude&#039; is in part due to some vandal tools becoming more honed; for instance, over at #wikipedia-spam LinkWatcher will let you know when anything with an http:// is added. this clearly shows articles, for instance, named [[The Band Kids]], added by [[User:TheBandKids]] who added http://www.thebandkids.com . Boom, gone. VP1.3 and VP2.0 are making it really easy to spot and ban vandals before they can create beaucoup cruft. I can rack up over 500 vandal edits towards this in half a day with VP1.3.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i think that the decrease in article count per month and a &#8216;deletionist attitude&#8217; is in part due to some vandal tools becoming more honed; for instance, over at #wikipedia-spam LinkWatcher will let you know when anything with an http:// is added. this clearly shows articles, for instance, named [[The Band Kids]], added by [[User:TheBandKids]] who added <a href="http://www.thebandkids.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.thebandkids.com</a> . Boom, gone. VP1.3 and VP2.0 are making it really easy to spot and ban vandals before they can create beaucoup cruft. I can rack up over 500 vandal edits towards this in half a day with VP1.3.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
