Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2017/Sources/Cycle 2/Italian Wikipedia



What group or community is this source coming from?

name of group Italian Wikipedia
virtual location (page-link) or physical location (city/state/country) w:it:Wikipedia:Strategia
Location type (e.g. local wiki, Facebook, in-person discussion, telephone conference) local wiki
# of participants in this discussion (a rough count) ~ 43



The summary is a group of summary sentences and associated keyword that describe the relevant topic(s). Below is an example.

Theme (refer to key) Question (refer to key) Summary Statement Keyword
1 A 2 I think that Healthy, Inclusive Communities is critical because without a welcoming environment for new readers and users, we will not have an impact in any of these other areas. Community Health
2 B 1 The Augmented Age is more important than the other themes because with improved technology and new ways to contribute information, we would be able to quickly produce more quality content in more languages. Technology

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
  1. Healthy, inclusive communities
  2. The augmented age
  3. A truly global movement
  4. The most trusted source of knowledge
  5. Engaging in the knowledge ecosystem
Questions key
  1. What impact would we have on the world if we follow this theme?
  2. How important is this theme relative to the other 4 themes? Why?
  3. 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?
  4. What else is important to add to this theme to make it stronger?
  5. Who else will be working in this area and how might we partner with them?

Line Theme (refer to key) Question (refer to key) Summary Statement Keywords
1 A 4 There is a virtual but also a real Public Domain: in the real world many volunteer with a "wiki spirit" (free, collaborative, etc.) and they could become truly wiki with a "Wikiworks" project. cf. images on Commons (Alex brollo). Real life
2 A 3 In order to have a healthy community we would have to make clear that haughtiness is not a behavior that pays and stop tolerating it from anyone. In the long run such a change of mind would benefit the projects. (Tino) Community Health
3 A 1 If we succeed in having beautiful, healthy, welcoming and inclusive communities we could also be a good political example for others. (Yuma) Community Health
4 A 2 Healthy, inclusive communities is the most important theme because it is the engine/hearth of everything Wikipedia was and should be. (Geoide) Healthy community
5 C 3 In order to become a truly global movement we should absolutely and showily invest more resources in emerging countries and less in rich countries. (Phyrexian) global movement
6 C 4 Some users are scared by empty articles: with help from Wiktionary and Wikidata articles from major Wikipedias could me imported on minor Wikipedias, then encouraging people to translate. (Alex brollo) minor languages
7 A 1? We should be ready to welcome those who come at our door without any discrimination, but we should not go around to recruit people what wouldn't think to contribute to an encyclopedia by themselves. (Bramfab) non-discrimination
8 A 3? The respect of all the five pillars of Wikipedia is to be pretended always. (Xinstalker) five pillars
9 A 3? We are here to write and defend an encyclopedia and nothing else. (Xinstalker) encyclopedia
10 A 3? The community of editors sometimes seems to be missing, particularly in wikiprojects. (Xinstalker) editors
11 A 3 We need to be more welcoming towards new users, by changing the mentality of experienced users. (Erinaceus) healthy community
12 A 3 We should remember that Wikiquette is a pillar, and - while some mistakes can be pardoned - we have to grant a relaxed working environment for our volunteers, so serious and repeated violations cannot be tolerated. (Gianfranco) Wikiquette
13 A 3 Users should stop talking by themselves and start really discussing. (Nickanc) consensus
14 A 3 Wikipedia should become an enjoyable and fun place again. We are here to write an encyclopedia, but it should be also a good social experience. (Yuma) social environment
15 B 4 Wikimedia projects are becoming glowingly more difficult for blind and visually impaired people: we need to work to solve this as best as possible. (Mizardellorsa) Accessibility of content
16 A 1? We should cooperate with well defined groups such as Lincean Academy, Italian Geological Society, Club Alpino Italiano and Doctors Without Borders. (Bramfab) cooperation
17 B 1 If we are able to improve the mobile interface, we could be used every day, not only as a source of information, but also as a tool exchange information and knowledge: from this point of view our first target should be becoming used as Facebook. (Yuma) mobile
18 B 4 There should be a Wikipedia mobile fever as there was a Pokemon go fever. (Yuma) mobile
19 B 4 Google Maps ask you if you want to take and upload photos of monuments around you: Wikimedia should do the same. (Yuma) mobile
20 E 3? There is no risk that other actors of the knowledge ecosystem (such as Britannica and Elsevier Press will close down in the short term because of the competition of Wikipedia. (Klaudio) competition
21 E 3 Generalist encyclopedias such as Britannica are in danger because of Wikipedia, specialist encyclopedias are more safe. (Anthos) competition
22 E 3 Scholarly publications often cites Wikipedia as a source and this is depressing and dangerous for us. (Anthos) citogenesis
23 E 3 Wikipedia should continue not to accept original research because there is not and editorial control which is capable of dealing with it. (Anthos) no original research
24 D 3 In order to become more reliable and trusted we would have to become less open, e.g. by introducing flagged revisions everywhere. (Yuma) reliability
25 B 3? More resources are need for filters and other tool to fight vandalism, so that users can spend less time fighting vandalism and more time working on content. ( counter-vandalism tools
26 B 4 We need to work on spoken articles and/or text-to-speech technologies for the visually impaired. (Mizardellorsa) ( visually impaired
27 B 4 There should more integration between OpenStreetMap, Wikidata and Commons. (Valepert) geodata
28 C 1 Making Wikimedia truly global would have a great impact and would well well received, especially where information is scarce. (ClaudioS.) global movement
29 C 3 Failed projects like Wikinews should not receive resources and should be closed. (Nicolabel) Closing projects
30 C 3 We should not waste human and financial resources on very minor projects. (Nicolabel) minor projects
31 C 3? We should encourage translation of good and notable content from English Wikipedia to big-but-not-so-big Wikipedias (such as Italian Wikipedia) (Nicolabel) translation
32 C 4 Translation tool is complex and should be improved. (Mickey83) translation
33 E 3? We can support the knowledge ecosystem by citing best sources but sometimes they are expensive and we do not have access. ( access to sources
34 E 3? In the end we are probably becoming substantially a primary sources. (Mickey83) original research
35 D 3 If we want to become more respected as a source of knowledge we should be less inclusive. (Mickey83) reliability
36 A 3 Consensus should be based on in-depth study of sources. (Xinstalker) consensus
37 D 4 We need more users to be more reliable. (Geoide) users
38 D 4 We need better tools to be more reliable. (Geoide) tools
39 D 5 We need to cooperate with research and education institutions to verify content, adding reliable and verifiable sources, monitoring and evaluating articles more severely. (Yuma) institutions
40 D 4 Wikidata should be more reliable: every statement should have a source, which should not be just Wikipedia. (Yuma) Wikidata
41 D 3 We should cooperate with schools and universities to develop critical thinking in readers. (Lucas) critical thinking
42 A 3 Nearly 10% of personal attacks seem to come from experienced users: in order to have a more welcoming community we need to stop this. (Marcok) personal attacks
43 A 3 We should include only those who come at Wikipedia to write articles by studying sources. Those who come to promote their unsourced ideas, sell their products or discuss without sources are here to destroy the project and should be removed, as well as those who defend them. (Xinstalker) user selection
44 E 3 Our competitors (such as Britannica) will stay relevant if they differentiate from us: by having complete, professional, stable, and balanced articles written by authoritative authors, guaranteed without vandalism. They could also become a portal for a critical mass of data from various sources. (Bramfab) competitors
45 E 3 If we fail our mission and become full of original research, fake news, non neutral point of views, recentism and little insight, then people would go back to traditional encyclopedias. (Bramfab) fail
46 E 2 Theme E is more important than theme A. This is the reason of the Wikimedia world. Wikimedia ecosystem, including readers, is far bigger than it community, which is just the 1%. Wikimedia projects have a place and a role and can start working involving schools, future users. (Ilario) schools
47 E 4 Wikimedia projects have a role in education which is not just to provide an already-done-research, but also regarding soft skills. (Ilario) schools
48 A 2 Theme A is not important. Users are not born already educated and capable of writing. This theme does not explain how to get new users. Wikipedia world is not just a place in which everyone loves each other. We do need to be inclusive but the sub-themes do not fit. (Ilario)
49 A 4 A problem of Wikipedia is that contributors don't put themselves in readers' shoes when they write. Since many of them write for more for personal motivations than for others, we give a lot of things for granted. (Windino) readers
50 A 4 We don't give much attention to readers, to the point that Italian Wikipedia "user" is used to refer to those who contribute to projects, and not to those who just "use" them readers. Many template messages are there for contributors but are of no interest for readers. We gave it for granted that it is easy for a reader to become a Wikipedian, and that when one clicks "edit" he's able to do everything and he knows all the rules. (Beatrice) readers
51 B 3 The community appreciates innovations if allows improvement of content. Innovation is not an end in itself, and new tools (e.g. media viewer) should not be imposed over the old. There should be different tools for reader and for editors. Software against vandalism would be useful but they need to have a very low percentage of false positives. We need to be able to create ebooks onwiki. (Bramfab) innovation
52 B 3 Users are not against innovation. If something that is good for contributors is developed they use it. If they do not use something (e.g. visual editor) it is because it is not useful for them. (Melancholia~itwiki) innovation
53 B 3 The fact that something is new does not necessarily mean that it is an advancement. ( innovation
54 B 3 Developers something don't understand the need of the community, but the community is "luddite". It is normal for websites to change the user interface without discussing it with the community and ignoring protests. There is a significant technological gap so that now it is difficult to innovate, because new features don't work with everything that exists, or work just for someone. (Una giornata uggiosa '94) innovation
55 A 4 Some message template could be hidden to the readers. Readers should be able to rate articles and easily comment them. We need readers to be healthy. Reading experience has to be satisfactory and enjoyable. (Yuma) readers
56 A 4 The possibility to rate articles (or similar) could give room to partisan people. (Bramfab) readers
57 A 4 If fighting vandalism and similar activities took less time thanks to better resources we would have more time to write articles readers look for. (Bramfab) time
58 A 4 We write for the readers but they have no right to pretend we right some particular articles: we write about what we want to write about. (Xinstalker) readers
59 A 4 If readers thinks an article is poor they can improve it; if they don't agree with it they can discuss it, but there is no point to allow them to criticize it in a potentially non neutral way and without sources. (Xinstalker) readers
60 A 4 If we find out that readers would like to have articles about topics for which we don't have editors maybe we can do something about it. (Yuma) readers
61 A 4 We need good statistics about readers. (Yuma) readers
62 A 1 Wikipedia is exclusive and it should remain so because you have to respect 5 pillars in order to participate. We have to continue to exclude people who want to damage the project, wasting less time on them. On the other side we need to dedicate more time to people who sincerely want to contribute but may have some difficulties. We need to proactively search for new users with targeted campaigns, not at random. Events like edit-a-thons and GLAM projects need to have experienced users involved. Wikimedia Foundation and chapters should be more integrated with the community of editors. (Phyrexian) exclusivity
63 A 4 Our readers is humanity. People can be interested in every topic. Every article deserves attention because it is a little part of knowledge. We need to write clearly and to make our project more readable. We need to make our project easy to use and search. We need to give our best both to the student and to the professor. While we need to be free to contribute in whichever way we prefer, we could work better with better coordination. (Beatrice) readers
64 B 4 Projects like Wikisource could make use of some sort of "time capsule" to host in some hidden way content which is now copyrighted. This content will be made available when copyright expires and it enters the public domain. (Silvio Gallio at Italian Wikisource Village Pump) time capsule
65 E 5 Projects with GLAMs (galleries, libraries, archives and museums) are great but there are some problems with images: they are not well categorized on Commons; search tools on Commons are scarce; no way to adequately to appreciate quality images on Wikipedia and thus really improve Wikipedia; sometimes images by GLAMs or WIRs are used in a random way in articles. (Bramfab) GLAM
66 C 3 Every wiki project is important and precious, has value and positive sides. We should not concentrate all our resources on some projects and abandon the others. We should not close projects but understand what can be improved. (Samuele2002) resources
67 C 3 Resources are scarce. (Nicolabel) resources
68 A 3 Users who make many personal attacks should be banned even if they are experienced users. (Bramfab) personal attacks
69 A 4 Some users are more interested in pursuing their idea of what Wikipedia should be than the idea of an encyclopedia for the readers, sometimes using our rules against their spirit. We should try to serve most readers possible, giving them high quality information on every topic they might be interested in. Without feedback from readers we don't know how we are doing this. Many changes to policies, help pages or content are done without considering readers. (Yoggysot) readers
70 A 1 Some outreach projects do not have great results from the quality point of view. We do not have to reach any particular target, so why should we be scared by the decline in users, articles and edits? Why do we do initiatives that promote an increase in quantity (and not in quality), sometimes allowing promotions? (Carlomartini86) decline
71 A 4 Some message template should not be visible to every reader but just to those who want to improve the article. The talk page should be more visible and more easy to reach for readers who want to comment. (Pil56) readers
72 A 4 Our way of considering the readers should be writing article of the best possible quality. We should ask readers their opinion whether small stubs are good articles or not. ( readers
73 A 4 A decline in the number of users is physiological and is not an emergency. (Carlomartini86) decline
74 A 1 We need valid Wikipedians, who have the sources and study them. (Xinstalker) users
75 A 3 It's not always easy to identify personal attacks from experienced users to newbies. (Marcok) personal attacks
76 A 4 Some template message are useful both to the reader and to the editor. Hiding them would damage the encyclopedia. (Bramfab) readers
77 A 3 We could use data mining techniques to identify and report personal attacks. (Bramfab) personal attacks
78 A 1 It's not easy to fight those who manipulate sources. We need precise discussion rules. (Bramfab) sources
79 E 5 GLAM partnerships take time. We should choose target institutions between those that work in topic for which we have content gaps. There should be "kits" to help WIRs and institutions to work in autonomy. (Archeologo) GLAM
80 D 4 Editing Wikidata could be limited with a dedicated flag. (Archeologo) Wikidata
81 B 3 If AI were able to write articles we should welcome them. The purpose here is sharing knowledge, not our personal satisfaction. (Retaggio) ( AI
82 B 3 Even if robots were able to write articles human intervention will still be needed to check notability, relevance, reliability of sources and NPOV. It is possible that human editors will spend more time in talk pages and less time writing articles. (Valepert) AI
83 E 5 Partnerships with cultural institutions will increase in number, improving content quality and reliability. Wikidata will probably be more directly involved than Wikipedia. Commons needs to be improved from the technical point of view. The community also needs to change the attitude towards cultural institutions, e.g. with simplified procedures, and to be more engaged. Contributors and experts/professionals from cultural institutions will both have to me more open and humble. Together we can become the greatest learning resource ever conceived. (Marcok) GLAM partnertships
84 B 3 AI improvements will result in great development for Wikisource. Archeologo AI
85 B 3 AI development will result in more uniformity between different language editions of Wikipedia, or we will just translate and adjust English articles.


86 A 1? Good faith does not pay. Good manners are interpreted as weakness. We need to be more welcoming towards anonymous user to make them stay. The community needs turnover. Geoide community health
87 A 1? We need to new contributors but also to defend existing content. New users who are not willing to study topics before contributing must first be put in condition not to damage existing content and then invited to contribute. The more is not always the better. The user decline is because some people don't want to study while those who have studied do not want to interact with less-studied people. (Xinstalker) community health
88 B 3 Old users often do not welcome technological innovation. (Alexmar983) innovation
89 B 3 We need to explain technological innovation also to users who write content but are not computer experts. (Geoide) innovation
90 C 3 Flagged Revisions should be adopted as in German Wikipedia. (Xinstalker) flagged revision
91 C 3 We need to deal better with innovation in the platforms. Many good ideas didn't succeed because they weren't handled in a good way or because of the opposition of the community (e.g. visual editor). As wikipedians we need be to more active and proactive in asking for technological changes taking into account the needs of new users. Developers need to be able to discuss and realize proposals in a short time. (Marcok) innovation
92 C 4 Mobile devices are an opportunity and not a threat, if we as a community are ready to face the challenge. (Marcok) mobile
93 B 3 Computers are better than us in repetitive tasks, they don't complain, don't sleep and should be easy to use. They will help us in contributing to Wikimedia projects. (Ilario) innovation
94 E 1 Academics are not motivated to contribute to Wikipedia because it doesn't add to their CVs. In order to engage more academics we should change this. (Ilario) academy
95 E 5 There will be more demand by GLAM for wiki-education, less demand for WIRs. (Ilario) GLAM
96 A? 1? Registration is easy and there is no real reason for people not to register. Most edits by IP are destructive. To give privilege to quality (as dewiki does) means to give privilege to the reader. If we don't favor quality over freedom to edit quality will fatally decline. (Xinstalker) quality
97 C 3 We should import (translate) content from small Wikipedias to big Wikipedias to fight cultural colonialism. (Marcok) translations
98 C 3 If we want a significant impact on global knowledge WMF should spend at least half its budget in developing countries. Remaining money would be enough for the others. (Marcok) resources
99 E 2 An encyclopedia is obviously part of the knowledge ecosystem: this is a fact, not a strategy or an end. The problem is how we are a part of it, and that depends on the other themes. (Bramfab) knowledge ecosystem
100 D 2 D is the most important theme: it is the reason why Wikipedia was born, developed, succeeded over other encyclopedias and people donate. If we stop being respected, experienced wikipedians would leave and readers would abandon us for other encyclopedias that will able to grant a certain quality, (Bramfab) quality

If you need more lines, you can copy them from Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2017/Sources/Lines.

Detailed notes (Optional)


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.