Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2017/Sources/Cycle 2/Hebrew Wikipedia village pump
What group or community is this source coming from?
|name of group||Hebrew Wikipedia|
|virtual location (page-link) or physical location (city/state/country)||ויקיפדיה:התהליך האסטרטגי לשנת 2017|
|Location type (e.g. local wiki, Facebook, in-person discussion, telephone conference)||local wiki|
|# of participants in this discussion (a rough count)||12|
|Line||Theme (refer to key)||Question (refer to key)||Summary Statement||Keywords|
|1||B||1||Wikipedia is a product of technological development and technology promotion is the development of Wikipedia. This is the infrastructure of everything. The promotion of certain technologies will advance certain segments of the project: the promotion of technologies to identify the vandalists will enhance Wikipedia's immunity to vandalism, and the promotion of technologies to correct spelling errors will improve the standard spelling in Wikipedia.||Wikipedia, Technology, Development, Vandalism, Spelling|
|2||B||2||More than 50% of Wikipedia entries come from Mobile.
The use of Mobile apparently caused a decline in the number of editors. What is the basis for this assumption and what is the source?
Wikimedia's difficulty in dealing with this new technology has hurt it, and new technologies in the future may harm it further. In addition, Wikipedia is in competition with network giants for the attention of Readers, and without the support of Google it probably did not exist.
|Wikipedia, Mobile, Decline, Editors, Readers|
|3||B||3||The main resource needed for technological development is technological manpower, which usually requires the payment of high salaries.
As in politics, everyone will say to reduce things that are less important to Them.
We can cut projects funding aimed at directing Wikipedia content development, leaving the field to volunteers, and focus on budgeting for what volunteers usually can't do.
|Resource, Development, Manpower, Reduce, Volunteers, Budget|
|4||C||1||Many changes are being made in the world to make technology and information accessible to parts of the world where technology is not available (Global south). The media companies are planning huge constellations of satellites and balloons to make Internet and communications accessible to everyone.
Companies think of a smartphone that will cost $ 1 to distribute in Africa. How does Wikipedia see itself fit in? Perhaps enable offline editing, perhaps connect with media companies to make Wikipedia information available and accessible as part of the service plan. These are grandiose plans, but some of them will come into effect and should be taken into account.
|changes, Information-accessible, Global south, offline-editing|
|5||C||1||We should think about how we can extend and expand Wikipedia to include the diversity of opinions and information, and to preserve local culture in every language? As we can see, what was not uploaded on the Internet and Wikipedia, comes to less people and slowly disappear.||Diversity, Culture|
|6||D||1||The subject of fake News has recently hit headlines. Wikipedia must preserve knowledge and make sure knowledge is reliable. In addition, Wikipedia has the ability to be a bridge to information found in scientific articles, some of which are hidden behind a payment wall, and make them accessible to the general public.||Fake News, Reliable, Knowledge, Scientific Articles|
|7||D||1||If Wikipedia succeeds in positioning itself as a reliable source of high standards, which is acceptable to quote and use in the academy, we will also be able to promote information and knowledge, while simultaneously struggling with false data and truths.||Wikipedia, Reliable, Source, Academy, False news|
|8||D||1||In recent years, more and more scientific journals have removed the payment wall, while more and more journals and articles are published under an open license. In such a situation, Wikipedia can and should be the main body that mediates between scientific literature and the general public. The mediation should be reliable and accurate on the one hand, and accessible to the general public on the other.||Wikipedia, Free content, Scientific literature, General public|
|9||D||1||We need to recruit academic editors who are knowledgeable enough not only to understand the technical issues, but also to review an entire field. For this purpose, students who write articles in the framework of courses and seminar papers are not enough, and there is a need to increase the recruitment of senior editors (at the doctoral level and above)||Academia, Editors|
|10||D||1||There is a need for a friendly and automatic mechanism for standardized citations of articles in scientific databases such as Google Skuller and Pubmed||Citations, Standardized, Scientific databases|
|11||D||1||We need to create a friendly and automatic mechanism for importing free illustrations from scientific articles||Illustrations, Scientific articles|
|12||D||1||We have to decide on the criteria for selecting articles for a quote on Wikipedia, for example: Should we prefer more cited articles? Of authors more quoted? In more prestigious journals? Review articles? Open articles? Peer-reviewed articles?||Criteria, Articles, Quote, Wikipedia|
|13||D||1||Guidelines and mechanisms should be devised to ensure that sources cited in articles do contain the information quoted||Guidelines, Sources, Cited|
|14||D||1||We need to establish a way to ensure that all the articles cited do indeed fairly reflect the scientific consensus as well as the relevant scientific controversies.||Articles, Cited|
|15||D||1||Regarding citations, it is important to reflect to the readers what consensus is on each topic, as well as what are the different alternatives, and what is the source on which they are based. Even if we can not accurately reflect each one, we can faithfully reflect the sources within the text.||Citation, Consensus, Source|
|16||D||2||This is the most important issue. Cultivating the editorial community, expanding it and making technology accessible are important, but if the source of knowledge is not credible all articles will carry a suspicious label.||Credibility, knowledge|
|17||D||3||We have to stop relying on a single writer. There is no doubt that the purpose of every writer is good. But cases of bias (deliberate or not) and inaccuracies should be avoided. In my opinion, every page or update must be reviewed by another Wikiped, knowledgeable in the field, independent of the first.||Bias, Review|
|18||D||4||We should monitor the creation of new articles or updates to existing articles, the monitor will be done by another Wikiped, which is a focus of knowledge in the field.||Monitor, Updates|
|19||D||4||We need to add a control mechanism to each article that will bring the sources of information to the article||Control, Source, Information|
|20||D||4||We need to collaborate with wikipedia scholar - a summary of entries written there will be added to the general Wikipedia for wide use||Collaborate, Scholar, Wikipedia|
|21||D||5||It is worthwhile to collaborate with academic evaluation committees: their ability to validate the quality of information can lead them to remove reservations about using Wikipedia as an academic source||Collaborate, Academia, Evaluation, Validate|
|22||E||2||If the other issues are addressed and promoted well, this issue will require relatively little effort and resources. It is important that we nurture people who can interact with the knowledge system (institutions, etc.), but we do not have to make an effort to lead the system itself, we are supposed to be the gate to all its knowledge and its diverse forms of consumption that fit each person / community. Obviously. Knowledgeable entities will approach us in a variety of ways and we will just have to be there for them.||Interact, Knowledge system, People|
|23||E||5||I am in favor of joining colleges, universities, high schools and even divisions (under supervision and close monitoring) to Wikipedia. I think it will bring here regular editors who will enjoy the very act of doing + alternating editors who will donate their own and leave when they want.||Collaborate, Academia|
|24||C||2||This is the least important thing, because Wikimedia can't fix the world yet, and it does not have the resources to connect half of the world to the Internet, certainly not free internet. One should also be wary of exploiting free surfing in Third World countries, as happens in Angola and Morocco, where dozens of trolls exploit Wikipedia zero to share illegal files, including porn. In order to stop (or rather reduce) this phenomenon, a very large global range was required. Therefore, with experience from what happened, one has to be very careful about the subject.||Free internet, Exploiting, Wikipedia zero|
Taken together, all the summary sentences should provide an accurate summary of what was discussed with the specific community.
Fill in the table, using these 2 keys.
- Theme key
- Healthy, inclusive communities
- The augmented age
- A truly global movement
- The most trusted source of knowledge
- Engaging in the knowledge ecosystem
- Questions key
- What impact would we have on the world if we follow this theme?
- How important is this theme relative to the other 4 themes? Why?
- Focus requires tradeoffs. If we increase our effort in this area in the next 15 years, is there anything we’re doing today that we would need to stop doing?
- What else is important to add to this theme to make it stronger?
- Who else will be working in this area and how might we partner with them?
If you need more lines, you can copy them from Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2017/Sources/Lines.
Detailed notes (Optional) edit
If you have detailed notes in addition to the summary, you may add them here. For example, the notes may come from an in-person discussion or workshop. If your discussion happened on a wiki or other online space, you do not need to copy the detailed notes here.