France Didgeridoo

great.

so...

are you able to find three or four guys they work together to write down or translate some articles?

you could also extract some text from this forum (but previously i would need a permission from the owner and comunity).

let me know

Hi Andrea (well let's speak in English),

I think the power of Wiki is that anybody who subscribes can create and edit articles.
Why then ask and wait for a French team to organise ? It's not necessary, is it ?
Just create a French section, post here the URL and tag every non-French article as "waiting for translation"... Time and individual participations should do the rest naturaly.

Cheers

nice idea... but difficult to realize...

moreover... I don't know how to say in a really polite way...
but...

You risk to have lot's of people they only want to promote their job an so on...
really few nice article and lots of advertisment...

hope you can understand

Of course... didn't see this side of the problem.
It all seemed way too easy :6:
I'll let you in charge then, you know better than I do !

Yep, the yidakipedia is a very interesting project, but it's not intented to be a wiki. In my understanding, it is closer to a magazine, maybe a web based successor of didgeridoo magazine, with a redaction comitee and so on, im i right?

So who's creating the Wikiridoo then ?

In my mind, a wiki is the best form for a didgeridoo encyclopaedia website.

You told about the risk of people who only want to promote their job, but if you moderate the wiki, we won't see useless article.

So you can make a wiki, where everyone can be part of it, but with a check before publishing any article.

I would say...
if we want to make a real wiki enciclopedia, we should use wikipedia and update it with new stuf.

how many of you pass throught the "didgeridoo" english page of wikipedia?
if you did it every month, you should have noticed that lots of people added their names on the players list (even if they were pretty unknown) and so on.

moreover if we continue to use wikipedia, we can have a free space and lots of people they already work to update the structure.

moreover in a real wiki eciclopedia you can not use articles, interviews etc. because they are often protected by copyright... and, if not, nobody is allowed to modify them

these are the main differences that I see.

I agree, the easyest way to do a wiki is to implement and correct wikipedia. there is lot of work here if we want to.

Des nouvelles ?
Any news ?

Bin... y'a plus de news car le problème est réglé :

Titou a écrit :I agree, the easyest way to do a wiki is to implement and correct wikipedia. there is lot of work here if we want to.

Soit :
"Je suis d'accord, la façon la plus facile de faire un wiki est de faire évoluer et corriger la page didgeridoo de Wikipédia, il y a beaucoup de taff là, si on veut s'y mettre !"
Plus qu'à s'ouvrir un compte Wiki et venir régulièrement poster de petits ajouts...

Ok autant pour moi ( ne suis pas bilingue snif )

Bonne idée même si je trouve ça moins envoutant qu'un wiki dédié au didg.

Et une dernière chose, si quelqu'un du forum venait à modifier cette page ( ou en rajouter une autre sur tel ou tel technique ) ne serait il pas intéressant qu'il fasse un petit post ici histoire de suivre l'évolution du wiki. ( pour ceux qui n'ont pas forcement le réflexe digeridoo sur wikipedia )

l'avantage de wikipedia c'est que c'est monstrueusement bien référencé, que quelqu'un qui cherchera des infos tombera bien plus facilement dessus que si un wiki dédié etc...

ce qui serait bien par contre ce serait de faire évoluer en priorité la page anglaise (pour ceux qui peuvent) et en parallèle dupliquer l'info sur la page française (ou autre nationalité).

par contre c'est clair que poster ici les ajouts (ou même ceux qui remarquent des ajouts d'autres personnes) ce serait pas mal.
en fait faudrait presque un wiki pour conduire le projet :7:

ouach...elle est geniale cette idée...
bon courage aux participants... :8:

>> Hop hop !