Vandalism and competition from Wikipedia in Arabic dialects is seen as a problem by some editors of Ar.WP (§Ar4) (§Ar10). Users have supported creation of multilingual projects such as Wikipedia (§Ar5) and Wiktionary (§Ar6), hiring of paid staff to verify content (§Ar7) and to form an editorial board (§Ar13). We should focus on neutrality (§Ar14), integrating with social media (§Ar17), content gap (§Ar18) and audio content (§Ar19).
On Bengali Skype and hangout discussions (14s) it was discussed that they should be both long term and short term plans (§Bn2.1), organizing at-least one regional conference every year (§Bn2.2) and promoting sister projects of Wikipedia as well. (§Bn2.3) We should focus on Wikidata (§Bn2.11), collaborating with educational institutions (§Bn2.7), neutrality of the content (§Bn2.8), reducing gender gap (§Bn2.9), building trust within the communities (§Bn2.8) organizing WikiCamps (§Bn2.13) and the promotion of Wikipedia. (§Bn2.10) In the social groups discussions stress was laid on doing more outreach (§Bn3.1), accuracy of our projects (§Bn3.2), engaging professionals to contribute in specific topics (§Bn3.3) and collaborating with other encyclopedias. (§Bn3.4)
The English Wikipedia discussion recommended focus on documentation (§En20), educational collaborations (§En21), fighting harassment (§En19) and increasing patience of the editors (§En26). We should improve our software (§En22) and be able to handle rich content (§En16) as well.
French supported focus on anti-vandalism mechanisms (§Fr1.67), training of Wikipedia spokespersons (§Fr1.68), partnerships (§Fr1.69), intensive outreach (§Fr1.71), conflict resolution (§Fr1.74), translations (§Fr1.75) and neutrality. (§Fr1.76) While on the French Wiktionary (16s) discussions stress was laid on making the movement more transparent (§Fr2.2) and on making the contributors feel valuable. (§Fr2.1) We should focus on mobile editing (§Fr2.4), emerging communities (§Fr2.3), multilingualism (§Fr2.5), new forms of knowledge (oral and sign language) (§Fr2.6), decentralization of the projects (§Fr2.8), inter-connectivity within projects (§Fr2.9) and diversity of readers. (§Fr2.10) We should also focus on bringing more editors to fill content gap (§Fr2.13), fostering partnerships with organizations (§Fr2.14), creating contribution guides (§Fr2.15) and ensuring security of wikimedia projects. (§Fr2.11)
German explored integration of tools with Wikipedia (§De2.38), usability of Categories (§De2.42), abolishing talk pages (§De2.43) and a central page for questions about article. (§De2.47)
While one person on Hebrew Wikipedia thinks we also think about the problem of paid editing, (§He13) another says that some work should be assigned to paid editors. (§He21) We should collaborate with other organizations (§He20), creating a healthy environment (§He22), improving mobile version (§He24) and becoming a social network (§He25). Our work should support differently able people as well. (§He26) We should also focus on text-to-speech (§He27), scanning technologies (§He28), printing Wikipedia by themes (§He31), bringing in youth (§He32) and fighting vandalism. (§He34) It was also discussed that we should lay more stress on neutrality (§He38), supervising edits of paid editors (§He40) and including more areas of knowledge (§He39).
Hindi urged the hiring of staff to empower local communities (§Hi1.27), educate about various grant programs (§Hi1.29) and give training to trainers. (§Hi1.30) During phone interviews (5s) participants discussed that we should focus on reaching villages and get people from diverse backgrounds to join the movement.(§Hi3.1) We should advocate the use of Wikipedia for education (§Hi3.2), creation of educational videos (§Hi3.3), tutorials and books (§Hi3.4), and usage of offline Wikipedia. (§Hi3.5)
The Italian Wikipedia discussed focus on quality (§It1.18), content gaps (§It1.20), innovation (§It1.21) and verifiability. (§It1.24) We should fight censorship (§It1.22), spams (§It1.27), fake news (§It1.28) and paid editing. (§It1.39) We should also focus on education (§It1.32), mentoring new users (§It1.37) and creating guides. (§It1.36). The Italian Wikiquote explored notability (§It2.7), NPOV (§It2.9), improving guidelines (§It2.10), improving the software (§It2.13) and collaborating with schools (§It2.12) as well as IMDb. (§It2.18) Wikiquote should be promoted more (§It2.16) and digitization should be encouraged. (§It2.15). On Wikisource, improving software (§It3.18), working with external partners (§It3.16) and focusing on quality were debated. (§It3.17). Wikiversity stressed minority languages (§It4.7), inter-connectivity within projects (§It4.8), partnering with institutions (§It4.11), reducing content gap (§It4.12), promotion of Wikiversity (§It4.13) and innovation. (§It4.15) We should promote kindness in the community (§It4.14) and Kiwix as well. (§It4.9)
Meta noted a focus on newbies (§Meta29), decentralization (§Meta34), improving mobile editing (§Meta35), outreach (§Meta42), cross-wiki collaboration and improving transparency. (§Meta61)
The Polish Wikipedia recommended a focus on newbies (§Pl1.20), outreach (§Pl1.21), content gap (§Pl1.22), emerging communities (§Pl1.23), other Wikimedia projects (§Pl1.25) and better communication between users and organizations. (§Pl1.27) We should focus on Wikipedia rather than Wikidata (§Pl1.28) and also we should improve the software to make it more user friendly. (§Pl1.29) WMF should remain financially independent (§Pl1.34), we should think about the problem of dead links (§Pl1.37) and also about the survival of Wikipedia. (§Pl1.49) We should encourage cooperation among projects (§Pl1.39), more openness in the community (§Pl1.40), user retention ( §Pl1.43), multilingualism (§Pl1.46) and neutrality. (§Pl1.46)
Spanish Wikipedia discussed partnering with local governments and institutions (§Es1.12), laying more stress on emerging communities (§Es1.16), not becoming endogamic and participating in other international forums as well. (§Es1.17) We should offer different versions of articles according to audiences (§Es1.18) and also engage experts to fill content gaps. (§Es1.20) The telegram group (9s) discussed about validation of articles by experts (§Es2.1), lack of flexibility of users and policies (§Es2.2). Foundation should better support affiliates (§Es2.4) and rethink the "impact" of projects (§Es2.3). We should promote diversity and fix the disconnection between the affiliates and the community (§Es2.5). Focus on Wikidata (§Es2.6), gender gap (§Es2.7) and improving edit-a-thons (§Es2.8).
Vietnamese Wikipedia focussed on promotion of Wikimedia projects. (§Vi15) While one person suggested mingling with social networks (§Vi17) another opposed the idea. (§Vi18)
Chinese Wikipedia discussed the possibility of having more outreach programs, such as Wikipedia Education Program and GLAM program. (§Zh6)The Chinese community in Mainland China expressed their concern about the relationship between the Wikimedia Foundation and the China government, as it is a bit intense right now and it is not beneficial to the development of the community. Some member suggested that the Foundation should work on their relationship with the government(§Zh1) (§Zh3), so that they can have the outreach program in the future. At the same time, they think it will be nice if the Foundation can work on the offline Wikipedia as well, which means that the Foundation can develop some devices that the people can access the articles on Wikipedia without the internet. The community in Taiwan wants to have more outreach programs. (§Zh6) As people in Taiwan are not really familiar with Wikipedia and the sister projects, such as Wikidata and Wikimedia Commons, the Wikimedia Taiwan believes that we can promote the projects to the public, in order to attract more newcomers. (§Zh12) (§Zh14) (§Zh3)Also, cooperating with the education institutes in Taiwan will be a main part of the strategic plan as well. For the community in Hong Kong and Macau, the Wikipedians in the region is planning to form the user group, as the start of the strategic planning.