I'd prefer a sort of adaptable roadmap. Example:

Ekopedia and Appropedia Projects are adopting a deep but adaptable partnership. Ekopedia and Appropedia Projects share the vision of a positive collaboration witch could leads to a projects merge. Both projects will walk, step by step in the direction of the merge.

Here is our projects collaboration roadmap proposal:

  1. Step 1: content sharing.
    1. We define a compatible licensing definition (like CC-BY-SA-3.0 + FAL).
    2. The French pages on Appropedia are ported to Ekopedia.
    3. The English pages on Ekopedia are ported to Appropedia.
  2. Step 2: links creation & taxonomy
    1. Interlanguage links are established between the wikis, in both directions.
    2. en.ekopedia.org is forwarded to Appropedia
    3. fr.appropedia.org is forwarded to Ekopedia
    4. we choose what do to with other languages
  3. Step 3: projects merge
    1. develop similar taxonomy.
    2. Project name choice.
    3. Legal issues (do we keep both organizations...)

We (contributors & founder of Appropedia and Ekopedia) agree that this is our common vision and will work all together in getting this vision done with this adaptable roadmap.

--Jlhenry 15:13, 2 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The adaptable roadmap looks really good. Sorry, I haven't had time to think about it more deeply. yet. --Chriswaterguy 19:48, 16 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Practicalities...[edit source]

Is it possible to create robots to transfer the content from Ekopedia to Appropedia and vise-versa?

What about the possible similar pages?

I am quite busy preparing a 3 month project in Israel Palestine but I am also really wishing to help so if you see anything I can do.

And I want also let you know that I am really happy that you are building so great on my small initiative to connect you.

Olivier C 11:22, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Transferring content is actually easy between MediaWiki sites (using Special:Export and Special:Import). I think it prompts when there are pages with the same name, but we can check that.
An approach I'm taking with the Appropedia:Stubs from Wikipedia articles project is to edit the exported XML file, to add (from Wikipedia) to each title. Then after importing, we can do a mass move (by bot) to remove the suffixes - the pages that fail to move because of an existing page will still have that suffix in the pagename, and need to be merged. That looks to me like a good process to use for the Ekopedia/Appropedia wiki merges - it makes it easy to keep track of groups of pages that need merging.
Your initiative to connect us was wonderful, and it has come so far! --Chriswaterguy 15:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments from the communities[edit source]

I'd like to invite anyone in the Ekopedia and Appropedia communities to express their thoughts. So far it's been largely a discussion between the foundations, but of course it's the communities that make the sites what they are. Please share any concerns, ideas and feedback here.

(E.terHorst from Appropedia and Olivier C from Ekopedia (who made the initial connection) have been very positive, but there hasn't been an active discussion in the broader communities yet.) --Chriswaterguy 15:37, 24 March 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ENGLISH: Hey everyone! I'm not sure that both communities have been fully aware of the whole merging thing... Maybe publish an official anouncement/opinion poll to get proper feedback?

FRANCAIS: Salut tout le monde! Je me demande si les 2 communautées sont bien au courant de ce projet de fusion... Peut-être faudrait-il les relancer en publiant une annonce officielle, ou un sondage d'opinion, bien visibles?

Sounds good to me. --Ethan (talk) 02:38, 4 March 2017 (PST)
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.