Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Should Wikipedia ask WMF to join the American Library Association on its behalf?

Potential implications of membership
As I was proposing this, I was thinking that ALA membership might have some implications:

1) It sends a message that we no longer think of the project solely as an encyclopedia. This makes sense: there are only so many library stacks you can fill with volumes of an encyclopedia before the encyclopedia is a library unto itself.  We also provide library services such as a reference desk and interlibrary loan.  We have an extensive collection of images and multimedia, even within Wikipedia proper.  We are a resource for learning and teaching worldwide.  And we are at risk of being affected by the same problematic laws and regulations that affect libraries.

2) Membership expands our opportunities to coordinate advocacy efforts. Both the WMF and ALA engage in advocacy.  It is difficult for Wikipedia to engage in advocacy due to its neutral point of view, yet the SOPA blackout was an instance where we felt the need to do so directly.  The need to balance advocacy and neutrality is shared by libraries across America, many receiving public support, which need to remain neutral, yet cannot remain neutral on the question of whether they exist at all.  The ALA tracks a wide range of issues and provides criticisms of bill text in relation to library activities (e.g. for SOPA).

My thought is that this RFC does not look so far ahead, and should not be taken as a vote on whether Wikipedia should call itself a library or put up notices or schedule events in coordination with the ALA. It only opens a path by which we might develop closer ties with community libraries, and get a better sense that our advocacy is not the ad hoc decision of a few editors, but well founded and professional. Wnt (talk) 03:56, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you can get someone from the ALA to discuss what opportunities and benefits may arise from membership, as well as challenges? I think a lot more information about the ALA is needed for the community to make an informed decision. isaacl (talk) 00:34, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Concur w/isaacl. It's fine to have the merits enumerated but we need some understanding of potential drawbacks. Saffron Blaze (talk) 06:44, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Potential team issues
I'm all for coordinating efforts on both counts with the ALA and such, but should we really set it in stone? Wikipedia and the ALA are pretty big on their own, each with it's own regulations, how are the by-laws for each going to affect the other? Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 03:57, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, membership doesn't compel us to do anything. After all, libraries are subject to their own bylaws and funding restrictions - often more severe, since they frequently receive public funds. Wnt (talk) 04:02, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay. I wasn't entirely sure how the ALA deals with its affiliates/members. Thanks! Supernerd11 :D Firemind ^_^ Pokedex 04:16, 12 February 2014 (UTC)