Strategi/Wikimediarörelen/2017/Process/Genomgång
Denna sida lägger fram förslag till en grundlig översikt om vad vi vet om framtiden och om vår rörelse idag. För mer information om ett givet ämne, följ de blå länkarna.
Se även undersidan för metainformation om genomgången själv.Den här page upprätthålls av historiska skäl. Policyer nämnda här kan vara föråldrade. Om du vill återuppta ämnet kan du använda diskussionssidan eller starta en diskussion på gemenskapens forum. |
Introduktion
Mål: Varför är vi här idag?
Våra mål (UTKAST):
Identifiera oss som en rörelse med en sammanhållen riktning som anpassar och inspirerar oss över de närmaste 15 åren.
- Bygga upp tillit och välvilja inom rörelsen. Delta i en legitim, transparent och öppna process byggd på delad makt, och inte en hierarki.
- Better understand the people and institutions that form our movement, those we are not yet reaching, and how their needs may change over the next 15 years.
- Build a shared understanding of what it means to be a movement, how others outside of us can take part, and what it will take to increase our movement’s impact. Unite around how to grow to achieve our vision.
- Build relationships to expand and enrich our movement and prospective partners.
Process: What are we doing today?
This discussion is one of many that will happen across different groups and channels. You will have several opportunities to share your thoughts and discuss the future of the movement with others.
We will first discuss general ideas, then converge on themes and their implications.
After Wikimania, we will discuss the roles and resources needed to implement what we have agreed on.
Vad är en rörelse?
Movements are purposeful & powerful ecosystems Mobilized groups, noticing inequity, organizing & taking action to seek change Some good examples include:
|
.jpg)
We're starting a movement-wide discussion. But what exactly is a movement? What are some examples of well-known movements of different types (political, social, local/global, empowerment-based)?
Transformative Movements v. incremental change
|
Collective Impact Framework
|
Social Movement Theory
|
Here are 3 different approaches for evaluating movements. They are each grounded in research and experience but with different lenses.
The 1st is from the Movement Strategy Center (Oakland, CA, USA) and has a very local, community-oriented approach; it is interested in inspiring participants to push for big transformative approaches (as opposed to smaller, more incremental activities) in order to disrupt and potentially eliminate systematic exploitation.
The 2nd is a very current approach among established organizations for looking at - and harnessing - the value of their separate (and potentially isolated) activities in order to coordinate efforts and have a much larger collective social impact.
The 3rd is a somewhat more academic approach for evaluating common aspects of social movements, with the notable political angle called out. All 3 of these “models” of movement evaluation can help us see important elements of our own “free knowledge” movement and help inspire ways to potentially optimize it.
Vad vi vet om framtiden: 2030 och längre fram
Probabilistic Population Projections based on the World Population Prospects: The 2015 Revision
Den tydligaste demografiska tendensen under det tjugoförsta århundradet kommer att vara den snabba befolkningsökningen i Afrika.
Till exempel förväntas Lagos (Nigeria) att öka till 24 miljoner invånare (2030), vilket motsvarar befolkningstalet för Shanghai, världens idag största stad.
I andra länder kommer befolkningen att öka långsammare, eller minska, och öka i medianålder.
Många länder kommer att ha en oproportionerligt stor andel pensionärer bland befolkningen.
Till exempel kommer Kinas befolkning med en ålder över 60 år att öka från dagens 16,1 till 25,2 procent 2030.
The 8.5 billion humans who will inhabit Earth in 2030 still have to live on the same planet. As a movement, we can't ignore our environment and larger ecosystem. We have to be conscious of the other challenges that we face as a global population, and how they impact our movement.
This isn't to say that the Wikimedia movement should try to solve global warming or social injustice; that is not our primary focus.
There is however an urgency in our quest to share free knowledge; complacency is a privilege that most of the human population can't afford.
The solutions are connected. According to the Movement Strategy Center, many movements seek to solve problems that are interconnected, with solutions that are connected as well: | ||
| Transition from systems based on: | to… | Systems based on: |
| Extraction | → | Regeneration |
| Control | → | Demokrati |
| Exclusion | → | Inkludering |
| Accumulation | → | Cooperation |
Experts in social movements recognize common symptoms of systems that serve to accumulate wealth and power in the hands of a few.
The Wikimedia movement exemplifies many of the solutions proposed to solve those problems. Sharing knowledge for free inherently shifts power from elites to the people. The way we currently create and disseminate free knowledge through wikis is radically inclusive and cooperative.
The wisdom, generosity, and kindness demonstrated across our communities can also be seen in other social movements that seek to improve our collective future.
5% more young people are enrolled in primary school than were enrolled in 2000 (89% and 84%, respectively).[e 1]
50% of out-of-school children of primary school age live in conflict-affected areas.[e 2]
85% of the global population is literate, up from 82% in 2000.[e 1]
- ↑ a b World Bank, 2014
- ↑ United Nations
15 years is an eternity in the world of technology; the always-connected, touch smartphone now ubiquitous in established markets didn't exist 15 years ago.
Predicting technology 15 years ahead is difficult, but some trends are likely to continue.
One such trend is the growth of internet penetration across the world, and in particular in emerging centers of high population.
,_2013-2016_-_From_Wikimedia_Readership_metrics_until_January_1,_2017.png)
Another strong trend is the continued rise of mobile access, devices, and practices. In 2015, mobile traffic surpassed traffic to the desktop Wikipedia site for the first time. Mobile significantly changes access for emerging countries. Many users are getting information online, then consuming and sharing offline.
Messaging platforms grow rapidly, evolving from simple conversations to expressive communication
Smartphone usage increasingly means sharing stories as they happen.
Our movement and ecosystem: Who are we today?
What do we mean by "movement" in the context of Wikimedia and its vision? There are many different perspectives on what the movement is.
We're a large and diverse group of people doing a lot of different things, playing a lot of different roles, at different levels of involvement.
Our movement is also part of a larger ecosystem of movements, organizations, and individuals. Some of them have interests similar to ours, and others work against our efforts.
Enskilda bidragsgivare idag
Närmare 75 000 skribenter gör för närvarande mer än fem redigeringar per månad. Av dessa gör ungefär 13 000 mer än 100 redigeringar.
Arbetet med att utveckla Wikipedia och dess systerprojekt är komplex. Bidragsgivare tenderar därför att specialisera sig. De uppgifter som antas sträcker sig från innehållsliga (faktiskt skrivande), support (mallar, verktyg och botar), administrativa till socialt (t.ex. medlande i dispyter) och kvalitetskontroll (patrullerande och klottersanerande).
Nybörjare börjar i regel innehållsligt och utvecklar sociala och tekniska roller sedan de blivit erfarna.
Bidragsgivare omfattar också utvecklare, designers och andra som skapar och förbättrar verktyg och mjukvaruplattformar för Wikimedia-projekten.
Organiserade grupper idag
Organiserade grupper och andra anslutna medlemmar tillhandahåller ett ramverk för grupper av andra individer att organisera aktiviteter för att driva rörelsen framåt. I mars 2017 fanns det 40 kapitel som fokuserade på specifika geografier, 75 användargrupper, samt 1 tematisk organisation.
Det finns en stor bredd i variationen mellan anslutna medlemmar med tanke på modeller, aktivitet, samt finansiell kapacitet. Vissa har anställda, medan andra opererar helt på ideell basis. Några kan bidra med stöd till enskilda medarbetare och andra kan fokusera på evenemang och att nå ut till folk.
Det finns ingen enskild modell för vad en affilial bör bli; allt beror på deras kapacitet och yttre omständigheter.
Wikimedia Foundation idag
Wikimedia Foundation är för närvarande den största organisationen inom rörelsen. Den bildades 2003 och har 290 staber och entreprenörer runtom i världen, med säte i San Francisco.
En av Wikimedia Foundations huvudsakliga uppgifter idag är att ge support till sajter och utveckla tekniska plattformar som stöder Wikimedia-projekt.
Stiftelsen driver också program och bidrag för att stödja individer, gemenskaper och filialer för hela rörelsen.
Denna rörelse-strategiprocess kommer bland annat att påverka vad stiftelsen kommer fokusera på under de kommande 15 åren.
Movement growth and tensions
Over the last 15 years, our movement has grown and become more complex. Along the way, there have been disagreements, mild and strong. There have been decisions involving power, money, and breaches of trust that have hurt relationships across the movement.
Many of us in the movement have felt wronged. Some have made mistakes that we might feel we can't ignore. Instead, we would ask that we acknowledge our shared history and learn from what we could have done better.
We can take a moment to reflect on the past, air any grievances, and heal before we can make plans for a future that we build together.
What do we do today in the movement?
We create content, we consume content, we support content creators and consumers
This section is currently Foundation-centric. Please help improve it to reflect finances across the whole movement, or propose improvements on the talk page.
More than 5 million readers around the world donated $77 million USD in the Wikimedia Foundation’s 2015–2016 fiscal year. Donations were about $15 USD on average.
While the Foundation raises funds all year long internationally, the bulk of the revenue (almost 50%) comes in during the December English campaign.
Wikimedia's email fundraising program continues to grow significantly, doubling email revenue for the second year running. Readers opt-in for future email communications when they make a donation, and a year later the fundraising team sends a few reminders to donate.
Narrative
Narrative
Varför är vi en del av denna rörelse?
Rationale: Show the diversity of motivations and also the common values shared across the movement. Understand what the members of these groups get out of being part of the movement.
Points to convey: See Research:Codex/Motivations of contributors and related links, Research:Necromancy, Studies on motivations of volunteer Wikipedians?, Research:Newsletter/2013/November#What drives people to contribute to Wikipedia? Experiment suggests reciprocity and social image motivations
Format:
Contact: Guillaume
- People are motivated by both personal and social factors. Group identity and perceived value of contribution to the group is critical beating social loafing.
- Fun, Learning and Social-seeking reasons seem to dominate high contribution editors. Ideological alignment seems to be less predictive of high contribution rates
- Feelings of self-efficacy and positive feedback are critical to sustained contribution
- The motivation of new editors is strongly negatively affected by negative feedback and the rate of negative feedback for good-faith newcomers has been rising.
Narrative
English Wikipedia is read in a wide variety of use cases that differ in their motivation triggers, the depth of information needs, and readers' prior familiarity with the topic.
[For more details about the study and results, please refer to https://arxiv.org/pdf/1702.05379.pdf. For a more detailed summary of results, please refer to section 4.3.]
Some interesting user behavior observations based on the Wikipedia reader study: Users who intend to use Wikipedia for work or school (19.5% of the participants, left table) are more frequently observed for specific topics of articles, namely war & history, mathematics, technology, biology & chemistry, and literature & arts.
For the first two of these topics, users are more than twice as often motivated by work or school motivations when compared to the average Wikipedia user. While these topics cover a wide range of different areas, all of them are more related to academic or professional activities than for leisure.
Additionally, this type of motivation is more often reported by users accessing Wikipedia’s desktop version. This could be expected since many work/school activities are performed in office settings.
Furthermore, we can see that this motivation occurs more often for users who are referred by external search engines multiple times in a session, and by users who stay longer on an individual page, which can be seen as a potential indicator for intensive studying.
By contrast, users who describe their motivation as bored/random (right table), are more likely to use internal navigation within Wikipedia and to spend only little time on the individual articles.
Also, they tend to switch topics between the individual articles more often (as indicated by the subgroup with a high average topic distance).
These are telltales for less focused browsing behavior. Bored users also view more articles on Wikipedia both within the survey session and overall during the study period.
Finally, this motivation can also be observed more frequently for articles that cover specific topics, such as sports, 21st century, and TV, movies, & novels.
Clearly, these topics are more leisure-oriented and are in stark contrast to the previously discussed topics favored by users who use Wikipedia for work or school.
Points to convey: See [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update - Japan - Focus Group and Survey Findings, File:Wikimedia Survey 2014 English Fundraiser.pdf , File:Report.WikimediaJapan.f.071916.pdf
A few quotes from donors
Some information from surveys: do people know we're a nonprofit, how much are interested in contributing content, etc.
Format:
Contact: Caitlin C., Lisa
Narrative
Narrative
A living movement: How we're evolving
Rationale: Build understanding of the dynamics of the main groups within the movement
Points to convey: Contributors to the wikis are the most visible part of the movement. What do we know about them? Wiki-wide trends e.g. Rise and Decline, different dynamics across wikis. A summary of Research:WMF Strategy document: Research about contributors. Community health, civility, metrics about harassment
Microcontributions, offline events
Gender bias on Wikipedia, Gender gap, Research:Gender gap
Diversity improves quality: it is important that some editors are highly experienced while others are more green. It's important that few editors contribute a lot to an article while most others contribute only a little.
To newcomers, the rules are complex and often non-intuitive. This causes difficulty and often leads to frustration for good-faith newcomers. It also results in power disparities where experienced editors are more empowered by their "process literacy" to "win" disputes.
Rationale:
Format: A few charts (if applicable) and a few sentences summarizing what we know (and possibly what we don't know)
Contact: Guillaume, Aaron
 |
 |
Alla större Wikipediaversioner fick en kraftig tillväxt under åren från 2004 till 2007 då det planade ut. Antalet aktiva skribenter har varit ungefärligen konstant sedan 2006, förutom för engelska Wikipedia som drabbats av en kännbar och ihållande minskning.
Anledningen till denna minskning verkar vara att nytillkomna skribenter tappar lusten pga den negativa attityd de möter både genom våra verktyg mot vandalism som tillämpar en allmän misstänksamhet mot nykomlingar.
Narrative
Trender i innehållet
Points to convey: Number of languages, levels of activity and growth rates. Comparison of the amount of content in languages. Map of geotagged articles.
Diversity of content. Place and dynamics of sister projects. Content gaps.
https://arxiv.org/abs/1501.06307
http://epjdatascience.springeropen.com/articles/10.1140/epjds/s13688-016-0066-4
Rationale:
Format:
Contact: Asaf, Leila, Katy/Chris S.
Narrative
Det finns stora kunskapsluckor i Wikipedia idag. Om du bara kan eller vill läsa på arabiska, modersmål för 467 miljoner, så kan du bara läsa om 87000 geografiska platser i Wikipedia.
Om du istället behärskar alla de språk som används i Wiki-projekt, så kan du då läsa om två miljoner geografiska platser. Detta som ett exempel på kunskapsluckorna bara inom specialfallet geo-taggade artiklar.
Stora luckor finns inom många områden, och framtida skribenter behöver fylla dessa för att alla ska kunna ta del av all kunskap.
Narrative
Trender och utveckling av läsvanor och hur innehållet inhämtas
Wikimedias webbplatser förser hundratals miljoner läsare med kunskap - Utan att de därför blir kartlagda för användningen.
En tredjedel av sidbesökarna kommer hit via Google, en tredjedel via interna länkar och den sista tredjedelen från andra söksidor eller länkar som publicerats i sociala medier eller andra platser.
Many readers consume Wikimedia content through indirect reuse, like syndication and knowledge panels. This audience is estimated to be in order of magnitude of one billion but it very difficult to measure.
Global north, global south. Wikipedia very well know in some parts of the world and not in others offline, education. Kiwix, Wiki Med
==
Så här följer vi upp framstegen ==
Placeholder for Suzie's updated metrics from the 2010-2015 strategic plan:
- Number of people served
- Number of Wikipedia articles
- Increase percentage of very high quality material
- Number of editors doing 5+edits/month
- Number of women and Global South editors
Vid en tillbakablick ser det ut som en framgång med avseende på prioriteringarna som 2010-2015 planarbete ledde till.
Men resultatet av de mätmetoder som användes, visar inte alltid de framsteg som kan konstateras.
Mäter vi verkligen det vi vill mäta? Finns det bättre sätt att mäta framstegen för Wiki-rörelsen som helhet, snarare än framsteg för vår organisation?
Framtiden för Wiki-rörelsen till år 2030
Frågor och utmaningar: Vilken framtid önskar vi bygga tillsammans de kommande femton åren?
- Vilken roll önskar vi få?
- Vad vill vi åstadkomma?