Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2017/Sources/Cycle 2/English Wikipedia
(Redirected from Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2017/Sources Cycle 2/English Wikipedia)
Information edit
What group or community is this source coming from?
| name of group | English Wikipedia |
| virtual location (page-link) or physical location (city/state/country) | w:en:Wikipedia talk:Wikimedia Strategy 2017 |
| Location type (e.g. local wiki, Facebook, in-person discussion, telephone conference) | local wiki |
| # of participants in this discussion (a rough count) | 36 |
Summary edit
- Summary for the discussion
- 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?
| Line | Theme (refer to key) | Question (refer to key) | Summary Statement | Keyword |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | A | 1 | We could lead the way in collaborative, online digital humanities. | collaboration |
| 2 | A | 2 | This theme is the most important, because the community is the critical success factor. | priority |
| 3 | A | 2 | With training and leadership, build self-sustaining teams to solve problems. | leadership |
| 4 | A | 2 | As long as some "old guard", real or imagined, refuses to cooperate or engages in behavior characteristic of ownership, improvements will be stifled and lost, and editors will be turned away. | clique |
| 5 | A | 2 | Acknowledge openly that people who are skilled at finding and synthesizing information are not always skilled in social interactions, and vice versa. | skills |
| 6 | A | 3 | Monitor and encourage troublemakers to cease and desist, set the entrenched wiki-culture aside, let other ideas to grow into prominence, make the community less rigid and static. | rigidity |
| 7 | A | 3 | Diversity will be more about diverse opinions, small cultures and backgrounds, not about gender gap. | diversity |
| 8 | A | 3 | Diversity is important, but articles written by people with different backgrounds aren't cohesive and easy to comprehend. | style |
| 9 | A | 4 | The word 'connected' should be added to the title of this theme, because a lot of communities remain very separate. | connections |
| 10 | A | 4 | The behavior of editors towards other editors may be more important than any edits they make to articles. | cooperation |
| 11 | A | 4 | Build tools to track changes and learn how various policies change the healthiness of our community. | polices |
| 12 | A | 5 | We could attract more retired scientists. | retired scientists |
| 13 | B | 1 | With automation, we could drive out inadequately sourced content, provide better sourced content, and be more reliable. | automation |
| 14 | B | 1 | Allow people from all dimensions to access, add, and change the information, don't let "someone" input information into a computer/program and pretend that such information is objective. | neutrality |
| 15 | B | 1 | In 2030, our projects may be able to revise and update themselves in real-time, with or without the help of human editors. | automation |
| 16 | B | 1 | Given that we're on a course of accelerating change, in 2030, our model of producing content, our editors and programmers could be obsolete. | change |
| 17 | B | 1 | If we don't keep up with the state-of-the-art, then some other organization will likely leapfrog Wikipedia. | vanguard |
| 18 | B | 1 | It'd be a bad idea to suggest that in possibly upcoming AI era, human contributors won't be needed, because for now, we're lacking manpower. | manpower |
| 19 | B | 1 | We should be reliable and free to all rather than state of the art. | reliability |
| 20 | B | 2 | Following this theme could allow us to be more effective in the other areas. | effectiveness |
| 21 | B | 2 | Now, the technology is the main driving factor, thus it will drive development in the other 4 areas. | development |
| 22 | B | 3 | Manual editing is obsolete in comparison with programming, and programming is obsolete in comparison to AI. | editing |
| 23 | B | 3 | Don't allow AI edit Wikimedia projects, because it can outsmart us. | outsmart |
| 24 | B | 4 | Automation will allow us to make massive quality improvements and drive our talent to where it can add the most value. | automation |
| 25 | B | 4 | Provide a place to talk about the issue and eliminate meaningless chatter from those who have no understanding. | communication |
| 26 | B | 4 | Better hardware more space for WikiBrain. | hardware |
| 27 | B | 5 | Tech giants, academic research leaders, and graduate students could help us. | scientists |
| 28 | B | 5 | Partnership is essential, because help from people proficient in AI would save a lot of our time. | partnership |
| 29 | C | 1 | Accelerate the development and coverage of areas on Wikipedia greatly deprived of such coverage | development |
| 30 | C | 1 | We'll be the light that shines in the Cosmos. | light |
| 31 | C | 2 | This should be the last priority, because there's too many people who don't know what Wikipedia is. | awareness |
| 32 | C | 2 | We should become a free web search engine and a free web host. | search engine |
| 33 | C | 2 | This should be the top priority, because exposing Wikipedia to more people around the globe is the single best way to attract greater coverage. | coverage |
| 34 | C | 4 | Make policies like OR more friendly to regions where oral tradition is much stronger than any publication coverage. | policies |
| 35 | C | 4 | Encourage editors in the Indian Subcontinent to create articles in their native languages. | Global South |
| 36 | C | 4 | Don't omit relevant geographic links so that our content could be more integrated. | overlinking |
| 37 | D | 1 | It would move the world towards the dream of a universal library of information. | access |
| 38 | D | 1 | Wikipedia will become an acceptable, respectable form of tertiary literature, and its editing will be prestigous. | respect |
| 39 | D | 1 | Trying to chase after the top position will demoralize us, when simply providing the best information that we can will get us acceptably close. | respect |
| 40 | D | 1 | Wikipedia could be sorted into topics, because many times pages can get overlapped. | tools |
| 41 | D | 1 | We need to improve the quality and reputation of Wikipedia so that Wikipedia will become accepted as a cited source. | reputation |
| 42 | D | 1 | By 2030, the whole world should understand the value of Wikipedia's role in the alleviation of thorny topics. | understanding |
| 43 | D | 1 | Our societies are increasingly divided and they need a source of unbiased knowledge. | bias |
| 44 | D | 2 | Something must be changed for our audience to admit that they use Wikipedia as a useful jumping-off point for research. | jumping-off point |
| 45 | D | 2 | This theme may impinge upon the themes of "Healthy, Inclusive Communities" as the demand for prestige shuts out less educated or capable editors. | editors |
| 46 | D | 2 | Wikipedia must be reliable, that's why people read it. | reliability |
| 47 | D | 2 | This the highest priority, however, many of the five themes are interlinked. | priority |
| 48 | D | 2 | This is the most important theme, and ff our information is useless, then we are useless. | priority |
| 49 | D | 2 | This is by far the most important theme, because it proves our legitimization and effectiveness. | priority |
| 50 | D | 3 | Invest less in mobile search. | mobile |
| 51 | D | 3 | Less openness towards editors, more protectionism, vet editors more scrupulously. | openess |
| 52 | D | 3 | Lack of contribution is more of a problem than low-quality contribution, which causes the patchy and inconsistent coverage that can be bad for our reputation. | quality |
| 53 | D | 3 | Create a workflow for new users so that they feel welcome and get acclimated to Wikipedia. | newbies |
| 54 | D | 3 | Openess and reliability are incompatible, so we need to stop anonymous edits and review first edits before we let a newbie to edit articles. | reliability |
| 55 | D | 3 | Some types of bad articles are worse than no article, that's why we should be more liberal in semi-protecting and let only extended autoconfirmed to create articles. | reliability |
| 56 | D | 4 | Collaborate more and expand partnerships with GLAM. | GLAM |
| 57 | D | 4 | Focus on educating the common man to be a better editor. | education |
| 58 | D | 4 | Welcome and encourage new editors more regularly, give them attention of more people. | newbies |
| 59 | D | 4 | There's no easy path to the learning path, getting to the documentation is more of a random discovery. | documentation |
| 60 | D | 4 | Encourage using open-access high-quality peer-reviewed sources, and discourage unsourced or "self-sourced" information as much as possible. | sources |
| 61 | D | 4 | Encourage short quotations in footnotes, which will give readers much greater confidence on controversial topics, and will make verification easier. | verifiability |
| 62 | D | 5 | Collaborate more with GLAM institutions. | GLAM |
| 63 | D | 5 | Collaborate more with academic institutions. | academia |
| 64 | A | 2 | The concept of "consensus" is at odds with inclusion of new views, because established cliques of editors can make their own overriding "consensus" on any particular decision | consensus |
| 65 | A | 2 | Incivility is difficult to define in a way that allows us to draw a clear line; it is better to stay well clear of gray areas | incivility |
| 66 | A | 3 | "Oppportunity is what we should go for, not equality." Demographic diversity for diversity's sake is pointless. | opportunity |
| 67 | A | 3 | De-prioritize pseudonymity in favor of real names associated with accounts (even if those names are only visible to trusted Checkusers, etc), to prioritize accountability. | anonymity |
| 68 | A | 3 | If we want to change the situation, we have to try something differently. Any particular thing might not help, but nothing will change if we try nothing. | change |
| 69 | A | 4 | Research whether allowing unregistered users to edit helps or harms the community, then consider disallowing unregistered access if the answer is "harm" | research |
| 70 | B | 1 | "It is important to be aware that algorithms are not inherently less biased than human editors." | AI |
| 71 | B | 1 | Given the speed of computational and AI innovation, a 15-year plan is impossible; we need to focus 1-2 years into the future on this issue instead. | time |
| 72 | B | 2 | Not engaging with AI progress would be nearly impossible given the state of the world's focus on it. | AI |
| 73 | B | 4 | Make sure to give adequate support and PR attention to AI projects like ORES | attention |
| 74 | B | 4 | Improve site design so it fits better within the modern era | site-design |
| 75 | C | 1 | China wants global collaboration with more countries | China |
| 76 | D | 3 | "Stricter controls are now urgently needed, not only to maintain quality and standards, but to reinforce and retain the very reputation for quality and accuracy that Wikipedia imagines for itself." | standards |
| 77 | D | 3 | Article creation should be made as hard as possible, to ensure that only those able to produce good articles can produce articles. | standards |
| 78 | D | 4 | Provide optional identity verification, so it is clearer who is responsible for an account's work | identity |
| 79 | D | 5 | "How can we persuade universities to recognize editing Wikipedia as a high status public service contribution?" | contributions |
| 80 | E | 5 | We should direct resources to developing nations that probably want to collaborate with us | developing-countries |
| 81 | E | 5 | Focus on micro non-profits such as Partners in Health and the American Refugee Committee | non-profit |
| 82 | E | 5 | Wikipedia needs to create partners out of its user base | partners |
| 83 | C | 4 | We should look into revisiting the oral citations project User:Sky Harbor | oral citations project |
| 84 | A | 1 | If we follow this, we will be able to cover many projects effectively and on time. | cover |
| 85 | A | 1 | The community can only stay healthy, if we stop separating information based on language, and build one wiki. | multilingual |
| 86 | E | 1 | The impact might be negative if we are not careful to keep the democratic principles of Wikimedia projects. User:Leowikardo | danger |
| 87 | A | 2 | All cases of incivility the user encountered were attempts to avoid existing policies and consensus. If one can write an article, one can write a comment explaining the reason for one's edit. | incivility |
| 88 | B | 1 | Far better to talk about "smart tools" to assist users to be at their most productive/accurate etc., instead of talking about AIs that could allegedly "write Wikipedia". | smart |
| 89 | B | 2 | We need more smart tools today and, unless we can grow our community of active contributors, we will doubly need smart tools in the future. We need to have better tools and more upskilling of willing contributors. Without a massive increase in tools, Wikipedia articles will descend into a morass of out-of-date information citing deadlinks. | must |
| 90 | B | 5 | Definitely no major tech companies. More transparent (and smaller) companies or non-profits who would not seek to harm the project would be better. | small entities |
| 91 | C | 2 | This theme is the most important themes of all because it is the best way to cover more articles from around the world. | cover |
| 92 | E | 2 | It encourages the new gen to help the world, and as our youngsters are very much into gadgets, why not use it for a better cause? Also, it is an all rounder promoter more than just focusing on one thing User:Supdocious | young generation, good cause |
| 93 | D | 1 | Our challenge is how to maintain this status, rather than achieving it. Readers should have a way to tell us about missing content. | achieved |
| 94 | D | 3 | A way to gain credibility used in academia is to publish unanonymously. We could eliminate anonymous editing, and restrict article creation (along with discussions like AfD). | namely |
| 95 | D | 3 | Restrict some sort of editing to those who passed a relevant training (e.g. how to cite). Wikipedia skills could have pre-requisite structures and people can choose which directions they will follow. Restrict editing of higher quality articles to higher certified users while allowing lower certified users to work on lower quality articles. | micro-trainings |
| 96 | D | 4 | Educate re-users on how to re-use (cite) Wikipedia. | reuse |
| 97 | E | 4 | Thinking academics will take time out of their working life to write on Wikimedia is naive. First, academic institutions should take Wikipedia contributions into account in their internal processes. Retired academics are more achievable. However, Wikipedia does not operate in a way academics understand. | academics |
| 98 | D | 5 | There is a shortage of volunteers for GLAM projects because of - among others - motivation issues. We need to have a way to apply for funds to pay people to do the boring stuff. | motivation |
| 99 | E | 4 | Wikipedia has developed a bizarre operating culture which tolerates mediocrity, supports bullying and militates against people with expertise. User:BronHiggs | harassment, expertise |
| 100 | D | 5 | The News Integrity Initiative and related efforts, like the Trust Project and the International Fact Checking Network. User:Cnewmark | partners |
| 101 | D | 1 | Wikipedia needs trustworthy information to survive and thrive, and to further become "where facts go to live" for the benefit of our entire species. User:Cnewmark | trust |
| 102 | D | 4 | Work with partners who are already facing the challenges of trustworthy sources and information. User:Cnewmark | partners |
| 103 | A | 1 | If Wikimedia follows the "healthy inclusive communities" theme it can create the utopia that the internet was originally intended to be;(…) more and more people will be drawn into the safe haven of its community, growing stronger and stronger, and together we will be able to tackle whatever the future holds. Together we can help fix the internet. User:Powertothepeople | Fix the Internet |
| 104 | A | 2 | The most important. Any tool is only as good as those who wield it; if the community is not healthy, Wikimedia will be poisoned from within. User:Powertothepeople | priority |
| 105 | B | 2 | The technology theme is a third priority - as a support role to the Community and Knowledge themes - to help us achieve these primary goals. User:Powertothepeople | low priority |
| 106 | E | 1 | This theme is not a "goal" in of itself so much as a support action to achieve those other goals User:Powertothepeople | goal |
| 107 | E | 2 | I have prioritised this theme as fourth (after Community, Knowledge, Technology) because I see it as a "support" theme rather than a primary goal in it's own right. User:Powertothepeople | support theme |
| 108 | E | 3 | There's the risk of attempting too much change at once, and spreading Wikipedia resources too thin. Better to do one thing well than lots of things poorly.User:Powertothepeople | risk,changes |
| 109 | E | 3 | Potential conflicts of interest when working with governments and other organisations. User:Powertothepeople | conflicts of interest |
| 110 | E | 5 | The 'ecosystem' is vast so there are countless potential partners! Khan Academy, MIT OpenCourseWare, FutureLearn, university of the 3rd age, publicly funded government bodies (in countries where governments aren't corrupt), hackathons, etc. User:Powertothepeople | partners |
| 111 | E | 5 | Minority rights organisations: Wikipedia can actively address diversity issues by reaching out to organisations that stand for underrepresented groups User:Powertothepeople | partners, minority rights |
| 112 | E | 5 | Government organisations may have funds for a team of wikipedia professional editors to create high quality pages rather than always relying on volunteers. User:Powertothepeople | partners, governments |
| 113 | E | 5 | Research institutions - many are already aware of an issue related to dissemination of the research knowledge to professionals and the greater public, and wikipedia could help with this. User:Powertothepeople | partners. research institutions |
| 114 | C | A | This theme should be last in priority. If we can't get these basics right amongst the current editors who at least primarily all use the same language and have some similarity of culture, how is Wikipedia going to handle the additional complexity of hundreds of languages, cultures, ideologies, etc? User:Powertothepeople | low priority |
| 115 | C | 5 | Oral history organisations and projects which may partner to capture and translate information from around the globe and put the information on wikipedia. User:Powertothepeople | Oral knowledge |
| 116 | E | 1 | Under this Ecosystems banner we need to think about how we persuade more organisations to be more "open knowledge" friendly, whether that be CC licensing, being archivable, mproviding Wipedia citations, or whatever. Kerry Raymond | changing practices, open knowledge |
| 117 | A | 4 | We really need to put some kind of protective fence around new good-faith users, and restrict those who can react to them to people who are willing to commit to "not biting" newcomers and try and help them rather than just revert them. Kerry Raymond | welcoming users, newbie biting |
| 118 | A | 1 | This is '''the most important''' of all [themes]. Wikipedia, like all Wikimedia projects, was conceived as a free, open, decentralized encyclopedia that was, and still is, fully dependent on the community to run it. CreationFox | community, high priority |
| 119 | ||||
| 120 |
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.