Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia Foundation/2015/Community consultation/2015-03-11

Active discussions
Warning! Please be aware that new comments posted on this page may not be seen or tracked by Wikimedia Foundation staff. If you have new comments or thoughts and would like to share those with staff, please open a new section on the main consultation page. Thank you.


Response by RookTorre

RookTorre's thoughts on question 1Edit

Hi all

Current portable formats are not a big bet, there is a tendency to limitations be overcome soon. A good example is the constant movement toward the non-mobile format, cell increased the size of screens and larger formats although uncomfortable to carry gaining ground, such as e-books and tablets. Mobile devices will also be modified in the coming years, they have data and visualization interface limitations, portability currently undertakes the use restricting the user experience. Why is this important? This shows that will occur in a short period of time significant changes in these interfaces:

  • Screens will be replaced by glasses and allow a view of 30 "to 2 meters.
  • The contact controls are replaced by contactless technologies in virtual reality.

If there is doubt about it just follow the development of games are always a step ahead of other applications.

Following this reasoning any bet to improve the presentation of information is not in the mobile format but in multimedia format tending to virtual reality. Paper pages (even digital) are replaced by virtual classes in iTube links. Are widely accessed and whether or not containing errors are used to learn about mathematics, physics and others. I believe that a future strategy should be based on expanding the information of pages of e-paper by spoken text (bolts? Maybe) and videos explaining at least the basic items in add to the plain text. In this context it is important to make a warning: the basic scientific texts continue with low value, the information contained seems to refer the college classes, or worse to specific professional areas, it seems to me that this is natural as the average of the editors has this knowledge. Yet for an encyclopedic text believe the wiki should make a great and profound reversal of this situation, for me it is unpleasant to see so many mistakes, confusion and simplify basic information of the scientific areas, is much worse than my poor english (IMO)

RookTorre (talk) 15:13, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

@RookTorre: Thanks for your comments! Are there examples you can think of that utilize multimedia formats really well for teaching complex subjects? I agree we need to be mindful of quality of the core encyclopedic content as we expand into new formats.--Erik Moeller (WMF) (talk) 02:16, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
@Erik Moeller (WMF):They are not really new formats, are just gaining importance and enhancements. Today there is easier (more) to create virtual models and other forms of presentation that facilitate the experience of knowing, learning and understanding. But even just presentations can be more interesting for the presentation of knowledge content.
An example is a simple explanation of the formation of the Einstein rings, the plain text of the wiki and the lecture excerpt of Patricia Burchat - Dark matter - TED, for the same topic utilized on Dark matter explanation.
Compare both. It's just a simple lecture, without means of three-dimensional visualization, see that it is necessary to stop and explain that the light are shifted in space, not in the plan! But moreover impeccable.
I should point out that this wiki article is well written IMO.
Another example is the series on mathematics and related of the khan academy. Big issues, divided and explained in concise lessons.
But that's just the tip of the iceberg, new ways of informing, are not new are just underutilized, but if properly inserted into an encyclopedic context can help transform information into knowledge with an understanding of the reach of a larger number of users, in any device mobile or not.
Finally it is important to remember that before investing efforts into something more, it is important to review the content, especially scientific for it to be of better quality. RookTorre (talk) 23:29, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

RookTorre's thoughts on question 2Edit

Hi all

I have no idea formed of it, I do not see these differences, perhaps some care with cultural clashes known. In this context the wiki in english (which is a known multicultural basis for other languages) must have the ability to not close and allow new editors can add information.

RookTorre (talk) 15:13, 27 February 2015 (UTC)


Response by Chewbacca2205 21:17, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Chewbacca2205's thoughts on question 1Edit

  • Cleaned-up interface: A default editor's interface is filled with a bunch of buttons of which usually a few are needed. Easy customization options to add or remove links would help
  • A script which is able to get basic information (title, author) from a external reference page. The extracted information are inserted into the corresponding template (i.e. cite web). Difficult but a basic code construct that can be optimized by authors for the sites they work with most would be enough.

Chewbacca2205's thoughts on question 2Edit

  • More Images: A lot of articles are lacking proper images due to the free content idea. One example can be found here. In German Wikipedia, this is a severe problem in all articles about proprietary software, films etc. since German law doesn't have fair use. Cooperation with major companies, governments etc. to convince them to release content under a free license would help.
I appreciate these comments, especially from an experienced Wikimedian. Thanks for taking the time. Many of these ideas resonate with me, especially freeing up copyright proprietary laws (i.e. expanding fair use, for example). Our strategy must not only fight censorship but also promote free use of information through free licenses, shorter public domain dates, and expansion of exceptions, like fair use and freedom of panorama GeoffBrigham (WMF) (talk) 02:20, 6 March 2015 (UTC)


Response by DheepakG 04:59, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

DheepakG's thoughts on question 1Edit

The next-billion-user will be connecting through handheld devices. Especaially, low-end Android/similar non-apple phone. Also, the majority will be either students or parents of grown-ups to connect with their child, age group falling under 8-21 and 35+. Need for Wiki* sites in Vernacular language is highly needed. For enabling them we need to create awareness especially through TV commercials(still a mass medium), tie-up with some non-profits and providing access to wiki* sites.

DheepakG's thoughts on question 2Edit

Imparting all the Academic topics to Wikipedia will be too good. Or WikiCademy (akin wikiversity) but should cover more rudimentary concepts. Imagine a 11 year old getting help from wiki to solve his homework. He will recommend it to his peers. Wiki gets popular. Schools should give free access to Wiki sites.

Many thanks for these thoughts. We will be discussing them. GeoffBrigham (WMF) (talk) 01:50, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Response by 12:15, 3 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

I believe that as technology and software becomes more accessible small and larger companies will have rafts of employees pushing their boundaries and often a first port of call is Wikipedia as a gate way into a new line of knowledge.

Thanks so much for your thought here. GeoffBrigham (WMF) (talk) 01:53, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 2Edit

An area worth promoting is the learning aspect of Wikipedia, in particular engineering (my profession), science and maths cannot appease all users in one style of presentation. Potentially having 2 tears one for the hardened expert and another aimed at an aspiring researcher would be a good idea so that both needs for knowledge can be quenched. Possibly linking into self learning areas could also be of benefit so that you can cover the ground work of what you need to know before you can understand the page you are on, a simple point in case would be to understand Newtons law of motion you need to grasp algebra.

To help the world proliferate the opening up of all knowledge and understanding is crucial in all aspects of life a demystifying of the language of industries and subjects so that we all have access to information we require to go forth and create.


Smart ideas. Understanding our communities and their needs must be part of the strategy ... and then we can build product with better user interfaces depending on the audience. There will be trade-offs and compromises. We have resource constraints and competing priorities, but your point is well made and needs to be part of any strategy discussion. GeoffBrigham (WMF) (talk) 01:55, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

A genuine individual's take on people's hunger for automatic newsEdit

Response by 16:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

Quick news. People want to understand the issues but in bitesize chunks. Possibly a page summarizing the most visited pages and then one summary of a 'random' article which is trending on a different continent.

I hear what you are saying. And thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts. There is the main page of Wikipedia, which includes "In the News." And we do have Wikinews. What else would you like to see in addition to these? Thanks again. GeoffBrigham (WMF) (talk) 02:02, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 2Edit

A clear personal viewpoint of neutrality. You should allow the posting of biased interpretations or no-one will understand them but these need to be clearly marked as what they are. Contentious issues should not be shied away from, they should be focused on. Not simply issues covered by mainstream media too, articles need to be encouraged to come from various continents to give a greater understanding to people of the problems of other people.

Thanks for asking our opinions

Many thanks for your well-reflected thoughts. Appreciate your taking the time. GeoffBrigham (WMF) (talk) 02:05, 6 March 2015 (UTC)


Response by Langchri 17:07, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Langchri's thoughts on question 1Edit

I think advances in machine intelligence is a relevant trend. Not only will intelligent machines be able to edit Wikimedia projects and translate content between languages, but they will also be able to use content from Wikimedia projects such that end-users do not realize that Wikimedia is the source. As an example, the world Jeopardy champion, IBM's Watson computer, leveraged the Wikipedia project. Automated assistants like Siri might likewise answer questions based on content in Wikimedia projects, or use content from Wikimedia projects to interpret content they find elsewhere. At this point, Wikimedia becomes a major part of the infrastructure of a global brain, and people who seek global power will be motivated to manipulate that brain. Thus, the popularity of Wikimedia projects sets them up for corruption.

Trends in Cognitive Science has also identified a trend in interest in evaluative diversity. John Hibbing described the trend here [1]. The bottom line is that humans have immutable genetic biases towards different values (which would lead us into conflicting behavior as editors of Wikimedia projects), these biases impact us at a subconscious level (so our behavior is irrational and not correctable through deliberation), and currently produce greater discrimination than racism does. This is an opportunity to get a scientific understanding of what happens in collaborative editing. It may also represent another source of funding because Wikimedia projects offer a fantastic tool for studying this kind of diversity (e.g., people who think political polarization threatens a nation may want to use Wikimedia projects as their petri dish)

@Langchri: For better and for worse, Siri and Google Now both already answer questions based on "our" content, and we know we are part of the "global brain" - or at least Google en:Knowledge Vault :) But I agree our strategy must acknowledge and deal with this. A normal project would simply change the license, but that is not (generally speaking) an option for us.
I definitely agree that we should be thinking about evaluative diversity and other sources of cognitive bias. It'd be very interesting to see some of the work Google's HR team has done on unconscious bias translated into Wikimedian training tools, for example. —Luis Villa (WMF) (talk) 03:22, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Langchri's thoughts on question 2Edit

If people who seek global power are motivated to manipulate Wikimedia projects, then security becomes a huge issue. We cannot count on the community of humans to prevent vandalism because mechanical vandals will be so much faster and smarter in winning ideological wars. Even before we must deal with mechanical vandals, we will need to deal with organized groups of humans who will easily out-compete individuals at controlling Wikimedia projects. A thriving project would be secure against manipulation--it would actively identify and protect ideological minorities (or ideas that come from majorities which lack the power to protect those ideas), much as ecosystem managers try to protect endangered species.

Interesting idea - could you elaborate on how that kind of "ecosystem" protection might happen? —Luis Villa (WMF) (talk) 03:22, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
I spoke with the head ecosystem managers in my state about this and they had good ideas. Rather than trust me to figure-out the solution all by myself, I recommend you do the same thing.
The first strategy is "adaptive management" which means every policy has an expiration date after which it will be reassessed. It also means an active program of trying to improve one's understanding of what is going on--form strategic alliances with researchers who will study your ecosystem.
The second strategy is monitoring. You can't count the frequency of every idea in your community anymore than ecologists can count the frequency of every species, so you have to use proxies like they do. They monitor things like pH and CO2 as proxies. Where the proxies shift significantly, you go searching for what caused that shift to determine whether it was appropriate. Notice that ecosystems are often deeply interconnected, so even monitoring a few key proxies (if localized) can detect a world of threats.
Ecosystem managers also recommended consulting with the community (like you are doing now) to get a sense of what diversity mixes would be desirable. Unlike what you are doing now, however, these meetings start with experts creating a report, and presenting it to the community (e.g., What consequences might we expect if we shift a policy? What if we leave it alone?). I nominated "evaluative diversity" for Wikipedia's list of essential articles (like Racism is an essential article). I thought it made sense for Wikimedia projects to cover topics that are strategic to their own success, but the Wikipedia community determined that the topic is not even notable (and deleted the article)--if you think your community ought to consider this topic strategic, then you have an education opportunity.
All of this is to generate the will to shift policies. I don't know what those policy shifts should be, but deletion criteria and dispute-resolution processes might be related. Langchri (talk) 23:16, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
I like the idea of regular policy reassessment. It'd be easy(ish) for WMF to do it for WMF policies; harder for the community; hardest for WMF to impose it on community :) Any thoughts on how that might happen? (Or were you thinking about how that might happen some other way?)
We're definitely into monitoring. What I'd really love is to find proxies that are forward-looking, not backward looking: i.e., how can we see things that will drive positive/negative changes in user counts, edit counts, article counts, etc.? Because currently all we're looking at, really, is those lagging changes.
It is always a little tricky for us (either as individuals or WMF) to get into the substance of articles related to our work (see, for example, this). But I do agree we could do more to present framing research when we do things; we do some of that in legal consultations but not always so much in other contexts. (Of course, that also gets us in trouble with some contributors, but such is life ;)
Thanks for the thoughtful comments, Langchri- much appreciated. —Luis Villa (WMF) (talk) 01:46, 6 March 2015 (UTC)


Response by CA2payitforward 17:52, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

CA2payitforward's thoughts on question 1Edit

First: A layered wikipedia structure. What I mean is that detailed and complete explanations and documentation are great, but may clog up the message. For some topics it is hard for a non-expert to get an idea of what is described. Therefor I'd suggest a layered wikipedia page with a "layman's" version, say in the top part of the page and an "expert's" version with all the gori details etc. below.

SUGGESTION: wikipage with laymens version in the top and expert version in the bottom.

Second: Authored sections. I have tried to make friends/colleagues write on wikipedia, but encountered the argument from an expert in the field that he/she didnt feel like writing up a section if it could be messed up by anybody with a web browser. Likewise in some cases having no author means that the expertise (basis for the statements made) of the author is unknown. Expert authors may be invited or be inserted only after certification i.e. when their identity has been verified. The section should then be accredited to the named author alongside their credential. Having authored a section I'm sure would also make people take more ownership and care for their section and as a consequence also the wikipage where it appears.

SUGGESTION: Authored sections within a wikipage, where only author can edit. Reader may suggest changes/removal to author/wikipedia team.

CA2payitforward's thoughts on question 2Edit

There are many projects, which in my mind, would blossom if they could use the WikiMedia infrastructure/platform. Education of kids would in my mind be an important area:
1) Kids encyclopaedia
2) Sharing platform for teaching material, structured as teacher packs.
- Meta-info: Age group, duration, teacher preparation, student workload.
- Material: student handouts, 'laboratory material' for hands one activities discussions.
- Review: Teacher and student feedback and score.
3)Sharing and discussion platform for teaching methods and approaches.
Teachers are in my mind reinventing the wheel and spending most of their precious time redoing the basics. While if they had, say 1000 teacher's packs, then they could select the one they need and add their twist or improvement. WikiMedia is about sharing and learning, so supporting a project of this kind could have an impact on millions of kids (hoping to reach a billion i.e. virtually all ;-)

Thanks @CA2payitforward: as you are talking about expanding the forms of contributions, what do you think about allowing users to create instructional content that relates to articles? LilaTretikov (WMF) (talk) 01:31, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi @LilaTretikov (WMF):
To me it sounds like a great idea to add an "instructional content" feature to a wikipage. A big problem though is how to make it easy to add stuff there from a "technical" point of view. I have been programming for more than twenty years, but had to fight with this editor to get a couple of paragraphs come out reasonably. Teaching material also needs to be appealing, could using the Open Data Format be an option?

What do you think about the kids wikipedia?

Best greetings CA2

Response by 18:59, 3 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

Public sourced news with bullet point style facts. As media becomes more biased, in one direction or another, it seems likely that the desire for factual news will increase. Wikipedia already acts somewhat like a news site - information is posted very quickly. I would like to see this more explicitly.

What do you think of Wikinews and "In the News" on the Wikipedia main page? Does that address your point or would you like to see more? Thanks for taking the time for sharing your ideas. GeoffBrigham (WMF) (talk) 02:12, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Dealing with people's different perspectives is difficult. Many adhered to perspectives are directly opposed. However, I think if any group of people can present a balanced view of the news, it is the people of Wikipedia.

Appreciate the thought. GeoffBrigham (WMF) (talk) 02:12, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Sebastian WallrothEdit

Response by Sebastian Wallroth 19:07, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Sebastian Wallroth's thoughts on question 1Edit

The major trends in addition to mobile and the next billion users are without doubt

  • the enabling of the users to share their knowledge and
  • the sharing of knowledge beyond the borders of an encyclopedia.
@Sebastian Wallroth: With regard to "beyond the borders of an encyclopedia" -- what kinds of content/projects do you think are the most promising, either existing or proposed?--Erik Moeller (WMF) (talk) 01:38, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
@Erik Moeller (WMF): Thank for the list of proposed project. I haven't seen it before; it is a fascinating read. My ideas are:
  • enable mobile editing
    • edit/comment per SMS
  • add oral sources
    • speak to wiki (call a number, say some text/a word, add to wiki)
    • audio/video comments per online tool/per video upload
--Sebastian Wallroth (talk) 18:20, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
@Sebastian Wallroth: We do have mobile editing -- on the web and in apps. Are you referring to something else, or is the design not noticeable enough? I do like the idea of easy voice recordings -- it's perhaps the kind of thing that could be best prototyped in a small tool. I've poked our Labs community to see if someone's already taken a crack at this.--Erik Moeller (WMF) (talk) 02:01, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Sebastian Wallroth's thoughts on question 2Edit

Thriving and healthy Wikimedia projects have users teached in

  • Free licenses,
  • how to use online collaboration tools, and
  • how to get involved in content creation communities.

These Wikimedia projects would have powerful and clever tools to support contributors in their daily work, like checking articles for common errors, creating dynamic charts, and adding geo data and descriptive information to images.

I'm curious about the second category -- have you seen approaches that work really well for teaching people how to edit? In my experience, beyond making the tools easy to use, one-on-one mentorship (facilitated through technology) seems the most promising.--Erik Moeller (WMF) (talk) 01:38, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
One-to-one help should be available everywhere in Wikipedia like the chat windows on commercial pages. Another idea is to provide walkthroughs like on --> after login click on Edit in iD (in-browser editor) --> hit H --> click on "Start the Walkthrough"; the current help pages are very helpful but could be flanked by other tools --Sebastian Wallroth (talk) 18:40, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
@Sebastian Wallroth: The OSM tour is very nice & clean indeed! We do have a system for Guided Tours -- it's not as nice, but every new account gets a tour nowadays (including article edit suggestions).--Erik Moeller (WMF) (talk) 02:06, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Response by 20:08, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Your list of classical pianists (dead and alive!) is missing at least two excellent young pianists, both top winners of the Arthur Rubinstein Piano Masters Competition in Israel, although you do list one or two others such winners. The ones I feel should be there are 1) Kirill Gerstein and 2) Roman Rabinovich. Each has won other prestigious prizes as well, and both are scheduled for solo recitals in Carnegie Hall's Zankel Hall.

Eva Rubinstein (my father, the late Arthur Rubinstein, is listed.)

There are articles at the English/Finnish/Japanese/Russian Wikipedias for w:en:Kirill Gerstein, and at English for w:en:Roman Rabinovich. Everyone is encouraged to write articles in any language they're comfortable in. If you just mean the list at w:en:List of classical pianists, please, be bold! :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:44, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Done, as per request. Thank you for the tip! --Djembayz (talk) 23:17, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

John CarterEdit

Response by John Carter 00:11, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

John Carter's thoughts on question 1Edit

I think we will see a much greater increase in material and articles which will be perhaps sourced from material which might be inaccessible or poorly accessible in the largely English language community that currently exists, although much of it will be nominally written in English (or at least included in the English language WMF entities). I also believe that there is likely to be an unfortunate increase in the number of edits and editors engaged in what might be nationalist or ethnic POV pushing of a kind not widely known or understood in the English language community, as well as greater use of sources whose basic reliability is less well determinable by the existing English language community, and that there will be significant problems addressing these concerns.

Thank you for this thoughtful comment, John. In my own personal editing I've run across situations where English-language sources are poor (on the subject of Cuban sodas ;) and that's in a (relatively) wealthy/well-connected community and language. I know that some smaller wikis have adjusted their standards to reflect these changes, and I suspect the larger wikis might eventually have to shift as well if we want to cover all the world's knowledge. Do you have any thoughts or suggestions on what guidelines we might adopt, or alternate approaches we might take? (For example, in Telugu, we've funded work to improve accessibility of library information about Telugu-language books.) Do you think WMF should do anything in particular to shift or nudge this discussion? —Luis Villa (WMF) (talk) 02:14, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
I can and have been trying to find some of the better reference works out there, in whatever language. They would be helpful, at least up to the time of their writing. And I am also aware, although I haven't had the guts to try to tackle it myself, of the Gale directory of periodicals and other such works which can at least help some people find at least acceptable sources which relate to specific local or regional topics. I know the ARBA annual listing of reference books comes out every year, and I suppose, as a baseline effort, keeping an updated list of reference works which relate to specific topics would be possible. A hell of a lot of work, unfortunately, but possible. John Carter (talk) 00:01, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Forgot to respond to this yesterday - we're somewhat addressing this problem with Wikipedia Library and with targeted grantmaking, but it might be interesting to work with partners like Internet Archive's book project to do even more. —Luis Villa (WMF) (talk) 01:08, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
There are some good smaller projects here for library school students, as part of their coursework learning about reference sources. Also, without digitization of collections of Africa-related content in the US and Europe, there isn't enough material available to develop articles to existing standards of citation. If it is possible to identify stakeholders with an interest in Africa-- such as the World Bank, an NGO, or government agencies-- creating a Wikimedia partnership to digitize archival and library materials might be a determining factor in making these hidden collections available. --Djembayz (talk) 14:00, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

John Carter's thoughts on question 2Edit

I hesitate to point out "future trends that I think important," because it is kind of hard to know in advance what trends the future will hold, but, in general, I think we would all be very, very much better served if the foundation entities devoted to broadly news and analysis related content, like the various iterations of wikinews and wikibooks, were to be better developed. Even with the increase in the number of encyclopedic articles I expect from the international growth, I see as even more likely an increase in the diversity of opinion of editors and of sources used by editors which will not easily be dealt with in purely encyclopedic content. That being the case, making places where such content can be easily and broadly accessible would definitely serve both the interests of the encyclopedias of the WMF and also the other, broader, entities of the WMF.

John, I would love to spend more time with more non-encyclopedia projects. However, we have limited resources, and have to be careful about our stewardship of donor money. With that in mind, do you have suggestions on what kinds of projects we should prioritize? For example, are there particular reasons you singled out wikinews and wikibooks? Are there other projects (that aren't currently part of the Wikimedia family) that you think might be useful to fund? I'd be interested to hear your suggestions. Thanks! —Luis Villa (WMF) (talk) 02:18, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Wikinews in particular seems to be a good place to put a lot of the "update" information which tend to be somewhat problematic in a lot of "breaking stories" which tend to overload encyclopedia articles with too much recent content. Wikibooks, or perhaps Wikiversity, are good locations where a lot of content which is reasonably of a "reference" type but might be of excessive length for encyclopedia articles could reasonably be placed, or where the exact current separate notability of "subtopics" might be harder to establish. I am thinking here specifically of some of the rather lengthy "History of (X) County" books I have seen, and similar books, which contain a lot of information (sometimes over a thousand pages of information) regarding their specific topic, most of which merits inclusion somewhere, but which would be difficult or impossible to add to a small number of articles. For those editors who seem to be primarily interested in content of either the "update" type or possibly those who seek to add what others might consider too much information to a single encyclopedia article, making it clear to them that there are other venues available, and maybe helping them in a sense get a bit more attention, may well help keep at least those editors. Also, for some of the "good SPA" editors, giving them somewhere to continue to contribute might well help keep them when they might otherwise leave. John Carter (talk) 23:57, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
@John Carter: Thanks for these thoughts, John. Even if they aren't reflected in the overall WMF direction, I'm sure they'll show up in my department's work over time. —Luis Villa (WMF) (talk) 00:12, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Célestin MoreauEdit

Response by Célestin Moreau 00:39, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Mes réflexions pour la question 1Edit

Les encyclopédies dites "classiques" ont disparu ou sont en voie de disparition. Wikipedia va certainement devenir l'unique encyclopédie dans la majorité des pays occidentaux tels que ceux de la Communauté Européenne et même les USA, le Canada ou le Japon. Ce monopole va induire les gouvernements à agir sur Wikipedia d'une manière ou d'une autre pour protéger ou contrôler ce qu'ils finiront par appeler un patrimoine culturel, voire un patrimoine culturel national.

Les interfaces de saisies finiront par se simplifier encore plus. On parlera à Wikipedia comme on parle à une personne. Il est même possible qu'une conversation puisse avoir lieu entre Wikipedia et ses utilisateurs.

Le fait que seul l'internet soit le support logistique de diffusion de Wikipedia est une entrave à son bon fonctionnement du fait même que ce réseau internet ne soit pas pérenne (on peut toujours y croire, mais c'est se faire des illusions). D'autre part l'accroissement des capacités de stockage de l'information sur des supports de plus en plus petits et de ce fait facilement transportables va changer la manière de concevoir et de préserver l'information encyclopédique. Le système de serveurs centralisés va être remis en question. La disparité et la validation globale par le biais d'interfaces automatisées de mise à jour prendra le pas.

Encyclopedias "classic" have disappeared or are disappearing. Wikipedia will definitely become the sole encyclopedia in most Western countries such as those of the European Union and even the United States, Canada or Japan. This monopoly will induce governments to act on Wikipedia one way or another to protect or control that they will eventually call a cultural heritage or national cultural heritage.

Seizures interfaces will eventually simplify more. We'll talk to Wikipedia as one speaks to a person. It is even possible that a conversation can take place between Wikipedia and its users.

The fact that only the internet is the Wikipedia mailing logistics support is an obstacle to the proper functioning of the fact that the Internet network is not sustainable (one can always believe it, but this is self-delusion). On the other hand the increase in information storage capacity on media increasingly small and easily transportable fact that will change the way of designing and maintaining the encyclopedic information. The centralized server system will be questioned. Disparity and global validation through automated interfaces update will take precedence.

Merci beaucoup. Des idées très intéressantes. On va les considerer en formant notre stratégie. GeoffBrigham (WMF) (talk) 01:38, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Mes réflexions pour la question 2Edit

Pour le moment, il n'y a pas de projets au sein de Wikipedia. Un projet suppose une organisation, un découpage en taches et une conduite du projet dans le temps. Les seuls projets qui existent à l'heure actuelle sont simplement posés comme des gateaux dans la vitrine d'une patisserie, en attente d'une éventuelle consommation.

Un projet sain et prospère devra donc être organisé, regrouper une équipe, fixer des objectifs et se donner les moyens de les atteindre en fixant des dates butoirs. La coopération doit prendre le pas sur l'individualité. La communauté wikipédienne doit savoir se remettre en cause et développer un état d'esprit réellement communautaire en se fixant elle-même des règles claires et consultables par tout un chacun. Non pas des règles de police, mais des lignes de conduite visant justement à développer un état d'esprit allant dans le sens d'une coopération des individualités dans la réalisation de projets.

At the moment, there are no projects in Wikipedia. A project involves an organization, a division into tasks and conduct the project in time. The only projects that exist at present are simply placed as cakes in the window of a pastry, waiting for a possible consumption.

A healthy and prosperous project will be organized together a team, set goals and provide the means to achieve them by setting deadlines. Cooperation must take precedence over individuality. The Wikipedian community must be able to challenge and develop a true community spirit by setting itself clear rules, viewable by everyone. Not police rules, but guidelines aimed precisely to develop a mindset going in the direction of individualities cooperation in the implementation of projects.

Merci de nouveau. Il y a des projets - comme "Wiki Loves Monuments" - et il y a des organizations, notamment les "chapitres" de Wikimedians. Il y'a quelque chose d'autre qu'il faut considerer? GeoffBrigham (WMF) (talk) 01:41, 6 March 2015 (UTC)


Response by Corradosaija 01:03, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Considerazioni di Corradosaija sulla domanda n. 1Edit

Vi chiedo di accettare il contributo di una persona che forse non parla da competente, ma che parla con il cuore…perché ha a cuore il tema. internet sembra sempre più oggetto di interesse (per via della sua capacità di raccogliere informazioni come consensi, dissensi e preferenze varie) di gruppi di potere...penso in primis al potere economico (pubblicità, indagini di mercato etc..) ma anche al potere politico….si pensi a quanti politici utilizzano i socialnetwork ad esempio per comunicare…spesso anche per scopi propagandistici. In questo scenario rimane il fatto che la rete è uno strumento efficace sotto il profilo dell'informazione perché consente una reazione immediata ai fatti della realtà rispetto a radio e televisioni, ed ammette le opinioni di tutti che vengono pesate in base a dei criteri di affidabilità ancora forse nel del tutto regolamentati o se già regolamentati questa regolamentazione non è molto contemplata dai milioni di utenti (potremmo chiamarli "medi") che fruiscono dei servizi della rete. L'altra bellezza di internet è interattività del mezzo che oggi però sembra assolvere maggiormente le esigenze del mercato come citato prima. io noto che il mondo degli smart phone oggi sia un terreno un po selvaggio dove le potenzialità "benefiche" di un mezzo come internet siano un po soppresse in favore della solita logica consumistica…(centelliniamo la tecnologia e restringiamo il campo delle possibilità tecnologiche per fare speculazioni e monetizzazioni) dunque io non vedo il futuro di internet negli smart phone e negli I pad. Comunque internet deve essere uno strumento edificante dove chiunque possa avere accesso alle informazioni per accrescersi culturalmente, formarsi un opinione sul mondo, apprendere il know how sulle cose, svagarsi, sbrigare faccende burocratiche, acquistare beni e servizi comunicare liberamente etc… io credo che sia un valido strumento di accrescimento della consapevolezza nell'esercizio della sovranità popolare.

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"I ask you to accept the contribution of a person who may not speak for competent, but speaking from the heart ... because he cares about the issue.
@Corradosaija: Thank you. We absolutely accept your contribution on those terms. I know I'm here because of what I believe from the heart.
Internet seems increasingly the object of interest (because of its ability to gather information such as consensus, disagreements and different preferences) of power groups ... I think first and foremost economic power (advertising, market research, etc. ..) but also to political power ... .you think of how many politicians are using social networks such as to communicate ... often for propaganda purposes.
Absolutely. As we've become increasingly interconnected through the the internet, positive power differentials grow, overcoming traditional power asymmetries, but they're increasingly matched by powerful interests with deep resources.
In this scenario, the fact remains that the network is an effective tool in terms of information because it allows an immediate reaction to the facts of reality with respect to radio and television stations, and admits reviews of all who are weighed according to the criteria of reliability perhaps even in completely regulated or if already regulated this regulation is not very contemplated by millions of users (we could call them "average") who use the services of the network.
Yes. I have often thought one of the best things about the internet was that it offers a sort of "circumvention tool" for mainstream, consolidated media. At the same time, this is one of the internet's greatest weaknesses -- in most places (unlike Wikipedia!) we have limited ways to establish consensus and shared knowledge.
The other beauty of the Internet is interactivity of the medium, however, that today seems to perform better the needs of the market as mentioned before.
Indeed. Look at us, interacting globally, across languages, and asynchronously!
I know that the world of smart phones today is a little wild land where the potential "beneficial" as a means of Internet are somewhat suppressed in favor of the usual logic of consumerism ... (centelliniamo technology and narrow the field of technological possibilities to make speculation and monetization) So I do not see the future of the internet in the smart phone and the pads. However the Internet should be a tool uplifting where anyone can have access to information to grow culturally, form an opinion about the world, learn the know-how on things, recreation, attend to paperwork, purchase goods and services communicate freely etc ...
I am both an optimist and pessimist in this regard. I think that people will continue to innovate around consumer boundaries, to do the things that we humans do best -- connect and share. This may look slightly different from "the internet" as a global network, but I believe that on the balance, this connectivity is empowering. As Wikimedia, we believe in the power of the potential of the internet -- after all, it makes Wikipedia possible!
I think it is a valuable tool for awareness raising in the exercise of popular sovereignty."
One of my favorite quotes is from Thomas Jefferson, in 1787, in a letter to a colleague. “The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should receive those papers and be capable of reading them." Katherine (WMF) (talk) 01:58, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Considerazioni di Corradosaija sulla domanda n. 2Edit

wikimedia ha dimostrato che la condivisione può generare uno sguardo abbastanza oggettivo sulle cose, forse è ancora troppo poco praticata per racchiudere tutto il sapere…di più non so dire grazie per il vostro tempo

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"Wikimedia has shown that sharing can create a look fairly objective about things, maybe it's still too little practiced to encompass all knowledge ... more I can not say
thanks for your time"
Thank you for your time! Katherine (WMF) (talk) 02:02, 6 March 2015 (UTC)


Response by Llywrch 01:50, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Llywrch's thoughts on question 1Edit

If I knew which major trends in technology were coming I wouldn't be sharing what I knew here, I'd be hard at work making a few billion dollars from this knowledge. But from having been a participant in the growth of the Internet over the last 20+ years (I got my start doing tech support for this software product called Netscape, & most recently did QA work developing 40 Gbit network adapters), I can attest that no one will know what the next real technology trend will be.

And even good technology can take years to take root. Tim Berners-Lee's first web browser (created in 1989) allowed its user to edit documents; Ward Cunningham invented Wiki software in 1994; true interactively modifitable web pages only became common no earlier than 2005 -- over 15 years after the idea was first proposed. And even now the idea is still too radical for some people to accept.

I'd just like to point out that the most portable data format for computer files is ASCII. Copying a usable selection of human knowledge into a digital yet human-readable format is a major challenge in itself. One of the major unacknowledged challenges to this transition of knowledge from print to electronic format is the simple act of researching and gathering this information. I'll write here about the case of Wikipedia, because I am most familiar with that. I am fortunate to have access to a good public library (which offers me free access to JSTOR, other online databases, & an efficient Inter-Library Loan system), several universities, a large & well-known bookstore, & other centers of knowledge, yet I routinely find I do not access to the resources I need to write articles. (And the Internet is not enough: while there are some wonderful resources online that are free for use, when I search online for usable information, I am often left feeling that I am searching thru a disorganized, although huge, attic of information, with obsolete junk leaning against something new & brilliant.) And more & more often, I find that I have to spend my own money for the content I am donating to Wikipedia. (In the years writing articles on Ethiopia I spent over $500 on books & photocopy; working on a very narrow subject -- the history of the defunct Empire of Trebizond -- I have already spent $200 on books & photocopy. And my library ILL is beginning to charge me for copies of articles I want.)

Another drawback is that when one writes a Wikipedia article that is above average in quality it is surprisingly quickly mirrored in all different kinds of places -- most depressingly, other language Wikipedias. In the case of the history of the Empire of Trebizond (the topic I have been recently working on) I've discovered that the latest work has been published in Greek & Russian; when I've turned to those Wikipedias in hope of finding that research summarized there, I've been disappointed to discover that the relevant articles are little more than translations of older versions of the English language articles -- all of which draw on one book published in the 1920s. (It can sometimes be discouraging to find I'm citing more recent work in French & German than are the French & German Wikipedias.)

Consider the above to be a roundabout way to say that helping those who write the content -- which is why people come to Wikipedia & the other Wikimedia projects -- should be a major priority of the Foundation. At the cost of defunding some of its other current priorities. (Wikimedia is not a technology company; its role has clearly been as an information provider. And its legacy depends on the information it provides in its websites, not on alleged & ill-defined faults in the interface of those websites.)

Llywrch's thoughts on question 2Edit

I've noticed an interesting coincidence. Numbers of new volunteers on en.wikipedia began to fall off in 2007; the Foundation started to assume a significant role in 2007. While it may sound like nothing more than unproductive snark to connect the two, there is one known dynamic that connects them: when a paid group takes over the activity of a group of unpaid volunteers, the group of volunteers begins to suffer for it. Having the Foundation -- as well as an absentee "Founder" -- makes it hard for volunteers to feel that they own a piece of a given project, encourages them to do less, &/or perceive slights where none is intended, etc. The Foundation needs to be sensitive to this dynamic -- or at least more sensitive than it has been recently. If that is not attempted, then I believe a death spiral is inevitable.

@Llywrch: Thanks for the detailed thoughts. What do you make of projects like Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library? This speaks to your point earlier about access to research resources -- and might be one way to build a relationship that's more respectful and supportive.--Erik Moeller (WMF) (talk) 01:33, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Response by 03:02, 5 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

The other obvious trend is the Internet of Things, which I imagine will drive more real-time data flows and might, for your purposes, change the meaning of up-to-date information.

That's a good observation. I'm interested in how that could fit into the Wikidata project. Katherine (WMF) (talk) 01:27, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 2Edit

I would simply underline that the next billion users probably won't be native English speakers. I know Wikimedia aims to be multilingual but I thik that's really going to hit, with resultant multicultural issues as well. Overall these changes will be positive and make a substantial contribution to our shared knowledge, but there will be moments when beliefs and values collide.

I like this answer. For wikimedia to engage with the newcomer countries, it would need a foothold (either self or by association) on the community to understand how it collaborates, what builds trust and how to make people act. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 04:47, 5 March 2015
This is true. We've taken note of how many contributors throughout this consultation have spoken for the need for better translation tools. It's been a really strong theme of the past two weeks. You're right though, there are things that will be different country by country. At the same time, we have historic examples of where differing cultures have worked across language wikis to resolve different expectations and norms in a Wikipedia way. For example, in 2006, the Urdu Wikipedia ran a sitenotice with a verse from the Quran. Offering this sort of recognition (in the verse) would not be an uncommon thing in Muslim communities, but it is generally outside the bounds of the core pillars of Wikipedia. After a cross-wiki conversation, the community ended up taking the banner down. Katherine (WMF) (talk) 01:38, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Response by 11:20, 5 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

The movement from a collected knowledge to an interactive knowledge base.'s thoughts on question 2Edit

Wikipedia already connects to similar article, however it could attempt to add modules and simulations. Examples would be in scientific areas, specifically physics. Further an option would be in History having gifs as detailed battle movements in addition to the existing stationary images.

The idea of detailed battle movement gifs is kind of fun. I think there's a solid use for that. I'll let the folks over in Wikiproject:Military History know. They tend to be fairly connected to folks who write in that subject area on other projects, so I'm sure they'll pass it along. Thanks! Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 01:20, 6 March 2015 (UTC)


Response by Nacktharfe 16:34, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Nacktharfe's thoughts on question 1Edit

  1. The next trend to my opinion could be a subtheme of mobile use: New devices. I can imagine to use holographic lenses or the use within 3D scenarios. This will raise the need for new GUIs.
  2. Vandalism and transforming strikes will grew stronger. Due to drastically changes in world order (war in Ukraine, Syria and ISIS theorism) I see many manipulating forces technically perfectly equipped that should be faced
@Nacktharfe: I think, as a strategy, we need to get better at responding to technical trends. These could be new devices or new patterns of use. We are to some extent already going in that direction, by working on better APIs and more flexible UIs, but we could do more.
Yes, we need to get better at facing vandals, or more specifically, we need to get better at supporting the users who fight vandals by giving them better tools and techniques.
Thanks for your suggestions! —Luis Villa (WMF) (talk) 02:02, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Nacktharfe's thoughts on question 2Edit

Mobile use and next billion users will be for my opinion the strongest influence. The issue is "new connectivity". So some relevant questions may be

  1. How could Wikimedia support teams and their projects/work? Not only concerning the collaborative work ON articles e.g. but further more the work WITH information (retrieved out of Wikipedia e.g.)! Example: Bookmarking notes for groups, etc.
  2. How can cross cultural use of articles/media be supported? A good article in Hindu language should be noticeable by a German mother tongue speaker (and vice versa) - for example.
  3. Editing of articles can be much more eased - no technical textual notations e.g. - think of usage with mobile devices or by less technical skilled people ("next billion user").
Yes, these are all excellent points. I am surprised we have not seen more suggestions of the collaborative work, in particular - I think that will be very big and very useful. —Luis Villa (WMF) (talk) 02:07, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Response by 00:05, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Pienso que los nuevos usuarios tendrán acceso a un internet gratuito en plazas y centros comerciales populares con una marcada tendencia a las viviendas y el trabajo.

Ahora es importante relacionar esta gratuidad del internet con la vocación de servicio que deberán tener las grandes corporaciones informáticas web, sin publicidad ni renta directa.

Las conferencias en vivo con nueva tecnología tendrán el mismo valor que tienen ahora los conciertos de una cantante americana pop, toda será compartido y gratis menos las experiencias científico-tecnológicas en el campo de la sicología, siquiatría y liderazgo, por que cada vez será más difícil manejar gente.

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"I think new users will have access to free internet in squares and popular shopping centers with a marked tendency to housing and work.
Now it is important to relate this free internet with the vocation of service that should have large IT corporations web without advertising or direct income.
Live conferences with new technology will have the same value they now have concerts an American pop singer, all will be shared and free unless scientific-technological field of psychology, psychiatry and leadership experiences that increasingly will be more handle difficult people."

Response by 00:16, 6 March 2015‎ (UTC)

Need more info

I really like it but I think more information is required. i know i can trust tjis site, and i dont like going to soem wierd hippy dippy bottom of the page search result. Wikepidia is reliable, and my main reserch resource. i make donatiions monthly. :)

Thank you! We really appreciate your support! --Lgruwell-WMF (talk) 01:58, 6 March 2015 (UTC) Visible Flow Chart Key and Icon on menu barEdit

Response by 00:40, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 2Edit

Hi Wiki,

Regarding Question 2 above stating "Based on the future trends that you think are improtant, what would thriving and healthy Wikimedia projects look like". I feel that it would be helpful to new users to have a key and icon of a tiny flow chart on the menu bar to help people find their place when they have clicked on hypertext on a page, or several pages. The flow chart key could then show them how they got to the page they're on, as well as where they started and the other pages they visited. Thanks, N. Costello


Response by 2602:306:CEEA:9400:ACEE:CD8B:C849:CFE6 00:40, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

2602:306:CEEA:9400:ACEE:CD8B:C849:CFE6's thoughts on question 1Edit

incorporate bi=lingual options in a post--paragraph by paragraph so a user can toggle between 2 written languages within a particular post. This would promote bi-lingual learning/exploration. Perhaps have a phonetic option for the language. Judy Robbins

Response by 01:10, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

You should create a mobile app for phones, tablets, etc


Response by 2602:30A:2C37:84F0:18DE:CE8:3C8A:80B7 01:12, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

you guys need more informtion because i need info on orange chicken and you need more color because to be honset you guys have no color at all and make have a teenager make a wiki user id and have them make this site very interesting make one for adults schools and kids

Response by 01:40, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

The basic way people communicate is by voice. Typing and texting are not what we evolved to do. I see the eventual long term trend towards having conversations with intelligent computers. For example, I wanted to know why the mass of the earth behaves as if it is concentrated at the center when attracting other objects. Eventually, after many failed typed searches using different and somewhat arbitrary word combinations, I discovered it is related to the shell theorem. In the distant future I imagine speaking my question and having a conversation that would first lead me to the shell theorem and then, with a follow up conversation driven by me, to how Newton proved it. BTW I am neither a student nor educator and my question arose from an unsupported statement made in an article.'s thoughts on question 2Edit

Based on my answer to question 1, I see it having voice interaction moderated by intelligent computers.

A major problem is taking and using input from users. I see AI as important in filtering and analyzing comments from such a large number of new users with very diverse backgrunds. Even today there is a problem. For example, I found an ambiguity in one trigonometric article. It used the word 'clockwise' without defining the coordinate system or giving a reference to what system was being used. I tried to make a comment, but found it too difficult to do so. In contrast it is easy to make comments in this format, so I hope you find mine useful.

Go Wikmedia!!! Live Long and Keep Strong!!!Edit

Response by 01:52, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

increased contextual customization (location specific information and other tracked info such as recent sites visited, recent searches, etc.) ability to more easily file/save/find recent search information deeper than the simple bookmarks in the browsers now continued expansion of the ability to easily share information with others via social media increased voice/IVR/scan integration from the mobile devices's thoughts on question 2Edit

suggest topics/ideas to mobile searchers based on initial input more options to save and customize searches and to share these with others more ability to share information with social media as it continues to evolve images/pictures - increase and link to more visual information - cameras are everywhere actively solicit input for new topic areas

Response by 02:30, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

With cellular phones becoming increasingly ubiquitous throughout Africa a SMS interface would greatly aid in Wikimedia's expansion.

Response by 02:35, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

I expect even more page changes and random edits, more pseudo articles that are actually advertising. Over time with more and more users wikipedia has gotten public focus and is nower days more often abused for lobbying and even propaganda. Looking through the history of Articles about political subjects (Socialdarwinism, Biologism aso.) older versions tend to be better, more neutral, having stronger sources...'s thoughts on question 2Edit

Make the history of articles more accesible. Maybe a voting system on wich version within the history is best? Give people that are quoted or have articles written about them the possibily to make a statement, that really is theirs. Maybe even ask scientist, discribed people or invovled people for statements? Those could be a video or audio messegas to give some credibility that it's really them.

How bout a live-leak like section wiki pedia style? Where people can upload videos/photos/whatever of events?

Response by 02:45, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

I believe that Wikipedia would benefit from a more inclusive search feature. Create a smart search, maybe like the scholar mode for a google search, that would allow Wikipedia to search in general terms. also being able to see dates and times of when specific information was updated so that wikipedia could actually be used as a academic source and not just a reference

Gl nahuelEdit

Response by Gl nahuel 03:12, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Las ideas de Gl nahuel acerca de la pregunta 1Edit

Las redes sociales influyen cada vez más en las personas que manejan un usuario dentro de la Internet. Con las redes sociales las personas opinan, se informan, o crean información falsa que modifique la opinión de otra persona. Pareciera que hoy en día la red social se usa como un noticiero televisivo. Todo esto creo que ocurre por la facilidad de manejo que hay en un usuario que use la red social para hacer una publicación.

Machine translation; please improve: Social networks are becoming increasingly influential in people who handle a user within the Internet. With social networks people say, are reported, or create false information to modify the opinion of another person. It seems that nowadays the social network is used as a television newscast. All this happens I think the ease of use that is in a user who use the social network to a publication.

Las ideas de Gl nahuel acerca de la pregunta 2Edit

Mi opinión es que Wikipedia, desde que la conozco, ha crecido de una manera notoria a lo largo de estos últimos 8 años. Ya sea por la adición de nuevos artículos, actualización de los mismos, o por la mejora en la información que se presenta. Ser uno de los sitios más famosos en todo el mundo facilitó su continuo progreso. La diferencia con las redes sociales, es que éstas son tan fáciles de manejar y pueden ser utilizadas por personas de todas las edades y generaciones. Además, promueve la cultura, educación, concientización como también la ignorancia, violencia y mal entendidos. Es por eso que al reunir tantas cualidades sea utilizado por tantas personas.

Machine translation; please improve: My opinion is that Wikipedia, since I've known, has grown from a markedly over the last eight years. Either by adding new items, update them, or by improving the information presented. Being one of the most famous sites worldwide facilitated their continued progress.
The difference with social networks is that they are so easy to handle and can be used by people of all ages and generations. It promotes culture, education, awareness as well as ignorance, violence and misunderstanding. That's why so many qualities to collect is used by many people.

Response by 03:39, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

This site will be subject to social misgivings and popular viewpoints that are not based on fact. Example: GMO has the reputation of being BAD and possible creating super-weeds. Corn on the cob is an example of a GMO. So is your favorite dog breed. Canola oil is a GMO. Crops do not mate with weeds; that's basic biology but the truth is irrelevant. If a hollywood star feels that way, it must be true. This site will lose credibility and become more of a "rumor central' location.

una pagina excelente que se ha mantenido y actualizado de una manera sorprendente y algo que verdaderamente se agradece es que no han puesto publicidad sin duda que por ese detalle es la mejor del mundo. y espero que siga así.

Machine translation; please improve: an excellent product that has been maintained and updated in a surprising way and something that truly grateful they have not put advertising certainly that this detail is the best in the world. and I hope it stays that way.


Response by Photonique 04:34, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Photonique's thoughts on question 1Edit

I am primarily concerned about Indian Languages, while I understand other languages are equally or more important, my preferences remain here.

  1. How does wikipedia promote and retain women, and new-editors from a cabalistic crew in language wiki?
  2. How does wikipedia promote terminology and vocabulary normalization in new languages ?

Photonique's thoughts on question 2Edit

  1. Promoting Wikipedia principles of openness and NPOV are critical to me as a Wikipedia contributor. This needs to be addressed for neutrality and growth as a reference.
    1. There are significant differences from English and $LANG version of articles in Indian language wikipedia.

Response by 04:36, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 2Edit

I think that Wikipedia will continue to be more popular with whatever media comes in the market. The only concern is that Wikipedia must maintain the standards as it has maintained till today. In fact you should raise the bar every year, year after year. By this way you will not only be able to maintain your viewership but also increase the same.

Wikipedia must transform favourably in respect of newer media and hand held devices so it can be accessed from any device. Dr Ananda Chanda.

Response by 05:21, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 2Edit

...В связи с уменьшением фундаментальности (изучения основ более детально) в начальном образовании я думаю целесообразно сделать многоуровневую подачу информации 1 /начальный/ поверхностные знания 2 /общедоступный/ расширенные 3 /специальный/ для желающих изучить до конца

Мое мнение что для мобильных устройств достаточно будет 1 ну мах 2 уровня

Machine translation; please improve: Due to the decrease in fundamental (learning the basics in more detail) in primary education, I think it is advisable to make a multi-level supply information 1 / Start / superficial knowledge 2 / public / extended 3 / special / for those wishing to explore to the end

My opinion is that mobile will be enough 1 2 well max level

Response by 05:33, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 2Edit

focus on localized businesses in India integrate other information portal's extension (such as justdial in India) integrate mid level info portals on global level so that mid level B2B gets more exposure on international level

If i open page of a particular place then on either side of the page list similar places (will help tourism development for unknown places). This can be applied for all the info articles.


Response by Djembayz 05:41, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Djembayz's thoughts on question 1Edit

  1. Agree with several others:
  2. As per Guy Macon, "page weight matters."
  3. As per WereSpielChequers, "The greying of the pedia" is a major trend. Key members of the core group of editors will age out or move on.
  4. As per WereSpielChequers, "The extra billion need to have access to reliable sources especially about the places they come from and the history of their culture and community. One part of the digital divide between the West and much of the global south is the lack of accessible reference material. In some cases this can be addressed by the WMF funding the scanning and digitising of some of the sources that already exist but are not widely available."
  5. As per Martijn Hoekstra, "As the amount of content per active user continues to grow, more emphasis is being put on maintaining quality rather than creating quality. The wiki model will show itself more and more inadequate for the task, and new tooling will be created to curate and stabilise content rather than grow in volume."
  6. It is clear that there will be ongoing, unpredictable public crises regarding poor behaviors carried out over the Internet and social media. Although the frequency and variety of these online crises seems endless, their general description remains constant: threats, disparagement or harassment; sexual misconduct, bizarre, outrageous, embarrassing, or criminal behaviors. It is also clear that much of the world has different social norms than the non-diverse tech sector centered in the Silicon Valley. Without considerable effort on the part of governments and non-profit organizations to push back against harassment and intimidation, many women and people of color may find themselves compelled to limit their participation in technology and public life altogether, and restrict themselves to personal communications, read-only access to web pages, and closed online groups.
  7. Most people living on less than US$10 / day will continue to need useful, practical information, about health, news, and "how to," along with entertainment/sports. Some good points have been made by others here about the difficulties of curating locally created content in places like India or places with ethnic and national conflicts.
  8. Custom mashups by Google and others, repurposing high-quality sites like the Mayo Clinic, will continue to outpace Wikipedia's efforts with Wikidata, templates, and infoboxes. The value-add of Wikipedia will continue to be surfacing and curating high-quality sources for original content.
  9. It is possible the Wikimedia movement will choose to remain a software organization that serves a contentious and shrinking group of volunteers who are obsessively dedicated to "the cult of the encyclopedia."
  10. It is also possible the Wikimedia movement will succeed in positioning itself as a more general platform for public sharing of knowledge.

Djembayz's thoughts on question 2Edit

Thriving and healthy communities would:

  1. Have a low-bandwidth text version for text-based, phone access, on the order of Lynx (web browser). Lynx was really useful in the days of dial-up modems. An all-text format makes it easy to spot the concise, well-written prose with substantive content. The "all-text / low bandwidth" version might work best as a separate project, similar to Simple English Wikipedia.
  2. Look like "a random sample of the world's intelligent altruists," with the addition of grant-funded work that fills in the missing geographical and topical areas, and paid staff to ensure that tools, accountability, legwork on policies/processes/administrative matters, and central, well-informed communication points are available.
  3. Be a more civilized atmosphere, suitable for working people and students. Tools of the sort used to maintain the article pages are used in a transparent and reasonable way to maintain a more collegial atmosphere in the user spaces. (For example, editors with an ongoing pattern of making instant, hot-headed comments are put on a delayed response.)
  4. Have well-trained administrators who are required to conduct Wiki business with a suitable level of respect and decorum.
  5. Have clearly defined user roles for working on technical (non-behavioral) backlogs and queues, with clear criteria for access to necessary tools and privileges.
  6. Have high quality webcasts for new editor training. Offer free copies or reduced rates on manuals such as How Wikipedia Works, and Wikipedia: The Missing Manual for editors interested in expanding their skills. Offer printed copies of existing brochures on "how to edit" for beginning users after a certain number of edits, delivered by postal mail.
  7. Provide a button for Google (or equivalent) translation options on the smaller language wikis, to ensure that readers in these languages have access to other perspectives and more extensive information, as a step towards mitigating the difficulties of creating good quality NPOV content in areas of the world with intractable conflicts and/or little source material.
  8. Prioritize tools and initiatives that support adding and curating citations and links to high quality sources to improve content quality.
  9. Provide an easy way to contribute more audio and video content, especially for "how to" and educational/pedagogical/training materials.
  10. Prioritize the mass upload tool for GLAMs, especially for purposes of digitzation and uploading of more content about the developing world.
  11. Make arrangements, through professional partnerships, for qualified people with critical language skills to translate core content in public health.
  12. In addition to the existing Education Foundation, establish other non-profit organizations, headed by people with professional experience in their fields, (probably need startup paid staff of at least 2-3 FTE), to serve the following functions:
  • Wikimedia Medicine, dedicated to reliable coverage of basic public health in all languages, in collaboration with major health organizations
  • Wikimedia Agriculture and Development, dedicated to technical and practical information about farming, water supply, sanitation, local economic enterprises, literacy, basic education, current road conditions, fish and wildlife, handicraft, construction and the trades-- a Wiki How-To / Farmer's Almanac for the developing world. (Basic audio phrases in local languages for greetings, buying and selling, and directions could also be useful.) The organization partners with development organizations, and organizations with a focus on supporting small business. It has a separate Wiki (like Wikivoyage), and is designed to be a low-bandwidth site. The interface makes it easy to link to Wikipedia, Commons, and WikiHow, for readers with connections that support images.
  • Wikimedia Culture, Science, and Humanities, dedicated to all things GLAM, focusing on access, digitization and curation of source materials
  • Wikimedia Outreach, Training, and Editor Affairs, dedicated to assembling groups of well informed and competent editors to improve content, both in public events and online
  • Wikimedia Journalism, Reader Response, and Public Affairs, dedicated to ensuring competent, NPOV editors are on hand for breaking news stories, to maintaining a factual tone in articles, and to serving the public by maintaining a respectful and dignified treatment in biography articles
  • Wikimedia Access to Books and Media, dedicated to creating and maintaining a page for all items in every library catalog
  • (Alternatively, some of these functions might be combined into one or more organizations ...).

In short-- an open, participatory platform for scientific, cultural, and technical information, with a group of solid non-profit, real life cultural organizations that make the platform accessible to all the groups, organizations, and institutions already working in this space. --Djembayz (talk) 05:41, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Response by 06:00, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

dEVELOP apps for android, iphone windows n blackberry


Response by Notthatsid 06:26, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Notthatsid's thoughts on question 1Edit

I primarily use Wikipedia and related portals with intermittent use of Wikivoyage, wikibooks, Wiktionary and Wikiqotes. so my observations will tend to lean towards these. I know so would be most user's, so I will now go through other projects and hopefully extend my input. 1. Try to incorporate Virtual reality into the Wiki entries. eg; try to give 3D tours of Monuments, Machines, Anatomy n whatnot. 2. Why not Augmented reality then?!; camera is pointed to an object, photo, topic of desire(knowledge only). Wiki should bring up info on them. 3. in the above point, try to make it as audio visual as possible. the descriptions to pop up around the picture taken. it will be like a guided tour of monuments without the guide(i think it would need GPS info too). 4. Please suggest a few topics to me based on what you think I like. not too intrusive, maybe like your topic/pic of the day, but a little personalized subjects. 5. Organize Wiki-camps in Africa and Asia for students. I think getting funding on this would be no sweat ;-)

Notthatsid's thoughts on question 2Edit

1. I think it should be possible in the future wikipedia projects to pull up quickly multiple references from web related to an end page citation. usually a single web-page citation is taken as truth and editors who want to correct need to go to google(or other websites) to find articles. 2. It should be possible to compare multiple articles without an editor having to write the comparison as a separate topic. for eg; difference/similiarity of 3G and 4G. I pull up both pages, put them into comparison tool and it should give point-by -point comparison. just like digital electronics! 3. Wikimaps is something i really crave for. especially in Geography wikipedia pages. 4. I think in future editing will be an online in-time and collaborative activity(with chat/teleconf), rather than i-edit-from-my-basement, you-correct-from-your-basement... loop. 5. Please implant wikimedia into my head :-) of course with Wifi.


Response by Dcpleland 06:32, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Dcpleland's thoughts on question 1Edit

The next billion users of Wikipedia might come largely from the PRC. Currently they are able to use the website without problems, but the any rise in the attention paid to Wikipedia will include government scrutiny in that tightly controled information environment. Internet access is predominantly by phone, followed distantly by pad, with a far third using computer (almost exclusively laptop) at some point in their week. This billion people could all come on line very soon, and in a brief amount of time, as there are nearly that many people using smartphones in this single country. All it would take would be a solid barrage of mention about a single story of popular interest, on We-chat (Weiqin) and Weibo, and in a matter of days, another billion users could be on Wikipedia. So I hope you have a scalable cloud service plan with edge content delivery enabled! The usage would be almost exclusively in Chinese Simplified. Subjects of searches would likely span the Arts and Humanities, Science, popular cultural interests, history and economical/financial topics.

Dcpleland's thoughts on question 2Edit

Presently the netizens have been filling up on facts and figures, and that is a trend that seems to be plateauing. The same for shopping, which has increased hugely, but is experiencing slowing growth. A new paradigm is brewing for the internet, where the sharing of items of ongoing popular interest is gaining attention. Netizens are building communities of thought and action wherein the internet is integrated into inclusive, in-personal group interaction, and such communication is reshaping our lives and workplaces. This kind of sharing and collaboration is a new level for wiki-based media.

Response by 06:56, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 2Edit

The world have come a long way since the telegraph or light/smoke signals were invented- Humans have the ability to creat what they can concieve.........and that is the truth.cordless telephones were dream and now a necessiety similarly the only way to communicate was post and now we have SMS /Email and a number of other applications ............if where are we heading is the question then the answer is 'Humans have the ability to creat what they can concieve' is not necessiraly the brightest and the best gauged by the educational standards those who contribute to the inventive work which lead to the benifit of human race. mostly the effort in one direction leads to the invention of the century. I see the world will ultimately crumble like a black hole when it reaches the last limit of human development -the last limit of human mind to concieve and a time would come when humans absolve them selves from all material needs of dependance on equipment and human brain would finally be put to its use to its optimum capicity. efforts are still at hand in the shape of artificial intelligence to be a platform to control physical movement by brain. Thanx for asking me the question.

Response by 06:59, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

Осознание необходимости ведения здорового образа жизни и понимание того, что мир скатится в яму, если будет идти на поводу у своих эмоций, желаний получать удовольствие любыми способами. В этом направлении и нужно организовать масштабные работы, в том числе доступность и системность информации о здоровом образе жизни начиная с детсадовского возраста.

Machine translation: Awareness of the need of a healthy lifestyle and an understanding that the world will roll into the hole if it is to be led by their emotions, desires to have fun by any means. In this direction, and it is necessary to organize large-scale works, including the availability and consistency of information on healthy lifestyles since kindergarten age.'s thoughts on question 2Edit

Предоставлять более системно, полно и доказательно информацию о здоровом образе жизни и о том, что можно быть здоровым не прибегая к дорогостоящей медицине. И такие прецеденты не единичны. Просто не все люди практикующие ЗОЖ готовы трубить об этом всему миру. Дополнительно велико противостояние этому сложившейся инфраструктуры общества, проповедующей платные медицинские услуги как панацею от болезней. И большая часть человечества хавает эту пропаганду (прошу прощение за жаргон. И чтобы противостоять государственной пропаганде нужны такие ресурсы как youtube и ваш ресурс, который политически независимы. Заплатин Евгений

Machine translation: To provide a more systematic, comprehensive and evidence-informed about healthy lifestyles and that can be healthy without resorting to expensive medicine. And such precedents are not unique. Just not all people practicing healthy lifestyle ready to blow it to the world. In addition to this great confrontation existing infrastructure of society, preaching paid medical services as a panacea for diseases. And the best part of mankind hawala this propaganda (sorry for the jargon. And to counter the propaganda of the state needed resources such as youtube and your resource that is politically independent. Zaplatin Eugene

Response by 07:26, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

Content and quality improvement.'s thoughts on question 2Edit

Wikipedia aims at collecting the knowledge of humanity. For example, in its articles on physics this is not the case. Wikipedia articles on physics are badly written: bad structure, bad explanations, bad images, bad summaries. In fact, the many people who improve the articles see how they are destroyed again later on.

The question is: Is Wikipedia aiming for knowledge or for freedom of editing?

The two aims are contradictory: An encyclopedia cannot be free to edit by anyone. There should be an editor for each article. His aim should be to IMPROVE the article.

Response by 08:07, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on questionsEdit

hi how about a system for small annual fee for (all?) users? probably many of the newcomers from the regions you mentioned will have a lower income so maybe fees should be appropriate?

Response by 08:18, 6 March 2015 (UTC) I think (hope) information will become compartialised. already there is a flat mobile version. perhaps there will be three. (eg. a template that would allow "(99%)international reactions " to be filtered from the nemtsov article, but I can also think of it in science topics. usefull (facts or links) and garbage apart. 08:18, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Response by 08:45, 6 March 2015 (UTC) by giving people the most accurate information without adds being thrown in thier face

Response by 08:48, 6 March 2015 (UTC)


Machine translation; please improve: Again, I think it's way to prosperity healthy to keep up operated by installing such as providing (banner). By the above, fear that image changes I hope to not personally. Also I will seems the same about many other people's opinion

Response by 09:05, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Mijn mening over vraag 1Edit

Virtual Reality

Mijn mening over vraag 2Edit

Geen idee.

Translation: No idea.

Response by 09:42, 6 March 2015 (UTC)


大きなトレンドは今後起るであろう金融経済の行方と数十億の人種の共通認識が生まれるかどうかの2つと思われる。 テクノロジーの進化が人類の尊厳を損なう事無く発展する為に、技術を広める必要性がある。 ただし、公平性を保つ為に「宗教」「政治」「行き過ぎた営利主義」は排除する必要があるだろう。 あなた達(又は私達)は世界を冷静に分析し、人類に「知識による安心を与える」仕事であると認識している。

Machine translation; please improve: big trend is common understanding of the whereabouts and several billion of racial financial economy that will happen in future is likely whether two and born. To evolution of technology is evolving that detract from the dignity of human beings, there is a need to spread the technology. However, in order to maintain fairness "religion", "politics", "excessive profit principle" will need to be eliminated. You guys (or we) can calmly analyze the world, "give peace of mind by knowledge" to the human race has been recognized as a work.


冷静な経済学と文化人類学、アメリカ主導で行い、現在不安定化したグローバル経済のソフトランディングの経緯(現在進行形) また、それらを解決する為の技術情報(エネルギー学・医学・薬学・工学・ETC)

Machine translation; please improve: Sober economics and cultural anthropology, is carried out in the United States-led, currently destabilized soft landing of the history of the global economy (ongoing) In addition, because of technical information to resolve them (energy science, medical and pharmaceutical, engineering · ETC)

Response by 10:10, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

I see Wikipedia at market saturation. I don't see the next billion users.

Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook CEO says 70% of the world does not have internet.

I would add that 6.7% of the world have college degrees.

So even if the Iceberg emerges from hiding like a giant this population will a) not have access b) have it but will not be able to communicate c) or at least not have skills to communicate at the level of crowdsourcing that you see nowadays on Wikipedia & Quora.'s thoughts on question 2Edit

I think point c) is most important because people will always look for alternatives. I see people gravitating towards more base level option like myspace or whatsapp for communicating. Even wikipedia is like a community. If you want more people to join the internet first fix this planet we call earth.

Also, I think Wikipedia is surprisingly good.


^This seems like the wrong word to use.

I get confused by anything other than -pedia after Wikis. Lot of diffent wikis confuse my idea of an encyclopedia. Others users have asked for more videos and tools but this should be avoided. I miss the days of Facebook when it was simple. Wikipeida is still quite classy in that way.

So in a sense, I look forward to the old days that are gone.. :)

Response by 10:20, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

...You must tı lock size site to other user becouse some peoples share wrong information...

Response by 10:25, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

The three trends I see are:

1. Mobile Browsing - A responsive website goes a long way. 2. Bootstrap - Using Bootstrap to make a website is becoming the norm and you see it everywhere, that with your own css makes a very pretty website. 3. Flat desing - This one is debatable, but I do see it a lot despite its criticism.'s thoughts on question 2Edit

...write here…

To survive you need to make your sites more mobile friendly. Responsive Design is everything, around 40% of browsing is done on a mobile and I can only see that going up. Focus on that, but don't put all the time and effort into that, make a pretty website for desktops too that is easy to navigate..

Maybe something like:

<!-- header -->
<WIKI PEDIA LOGO>                                                      <Create account> <sign in>       <SEARCH>
<!-- nav -->
<!-- end Nav -->
<!-- end header -->

<!-- content -->
Then with content just style it to be modern and a really clear font, wiki is for finding info so the font is 
crucial and needs to be legible.. not something like bradley hand ITC or Comic Sans.. make it stretch across 
the whole screen by using bootstraps col-md-12 and create a column layout within that..
<!-- end content -->

<!-- footer -->
<Privacy Policy> <About Meta> <Disclaimers> <Developers> (Mobile View to be removed, should automatically detect 
the viewport and adjust accordingly)         <logos>
<!-- end footer --> 

I hope this helps :-)

Response by 10:38, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

The good idea is to create fast preview of the links. This previwe can contain short description of the world.

Response by 10:49, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

Current trends in internet usage are social media and video media. Focusing on these two things would usher in a more globally connected community of ideas.'s thoughts on question 2Edit

Future Wikimedia projects could focus on information outreach and ways of marketing knowledge bases to active internet users. Wikimedia projects could focus on new ways of drawing in the average user in everyday usage such as through social media and video media.

Response by 10:51, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 2Edit

Wikipedia es una herramienta excepcional, no se puede concebir Internet sin ella. Por lo tanto creo que respecto a contenidos y traducciones deberan contar con Oficinas en todo el mundo. Creo que para que llegye a ser exitoso debera tener un precio por consulta y ese sera el problema.Creo que debera ser minimo en centavos pues. Y podran con lo recaudado pagar ORGANIZADORES WIKI. O ser recompensados por el Gobierno y los empresarios anunciantes.

Machine translation; please improve: Wikipedia is an exceptional tool, the Internet can not be conceived without it. So I think regarding content and translations MUST have offices worldwide. I think to be successful llegye should be priced consultation and that will be the problema.Creo that should be minimal because cents. And the proceeds will be able to pay ORGANIZERS WIKI. Or be rewarded by the government and entrepreneurs advertisers.


Response by Niketmistry7 10:59, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Niketmistry7's thoughts on question 1Edit

First i would like to have wikipedia as an application in mobile prior with both ios and android. Because then it will be very easy to access wiki from mobiles, as currently it is the most widespread way of reaching the healthy minds.

Response by 11:16, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

Люди будут меньше использовать персональные компьютеры, а в будущем и ноутбуки. Скорее всего, в широкое употребление войдут совершенно новые устройства, которые сейчас не существуют. Например, сейчас, кажется ведется разработка умных плащей и другой одежды, часов и т. д.

Machine translation; please improve: People will be less use of personal computers and laptops in the future. Likely to enter into wide use completely new device, which now do not exist. For example, it now seems is developing smart coats and other clothing, watches and so on. D.'s thoughts on question 2Edit

Учитывая увеличение мобильных устройств, мобильная версия сайтов в должны выглядеть не хуже стационарных, даже лучших. Также, Викимедии следует обзавестись новыми серверами и большим числом сотрудников.

Machine translation; please improve: Given the increase in mobile devices, the mobile version of the site should look at not less stationary, even better. Also, Wikimedia should get new servers and a large number of employees.

Daniel Kinzler (WMDE) (talk)Edit

The "next big thing" is, I think, augemented reality. Between Ingress and Google Glasses, the idea is slowly becoming mainstream, and the technology affordable. The world Charles Stross imagines in Halting State, or Vernor Vinge in Rainbow's End, isn't far any more. The augmentation of our senses will be powered by freely available, location bound structured data, search algorithms powered by big data analysis, and local information from the "internet of things", all combined via applications on mobile devices (phones, glasses, etc).

Wikimedia should aim to be an integral part of that technology platform, offering services that allow easy access to free information about things and places. Wikimedia should also make it easy to provide micro-contributions "on the fly", in context. This however poses great challanges with respect to quality assurance and other curation and editing tasks. Allowing easy micro-contributions from mobile devices does not only need good UI, it also needs good tools and processes for the communities who we hope will curate the growing stream of bits and pieces of information - and have fun doing it.


bence bir konu hakkında birden fazla site açılabilir böylece kullanıcılar belki daha ayrıntılı veya konu hakkındaki farklı bilgilere ulaşabilirler

Machine translation; please improve: I think it can be opened multiple sites on a topic so that users may have access to different information about more or topics

Response by 11:45, 6 March 2015 (UTC) Gedanken zu Frage 1Edit

Die Themen Datenschutz und freier Informationsfluß vs. Big-Brother und Alpha-Plus sind m.E. gerade erst am Anfang ihrer Brisanz und werden sich weiter zuspitzen, zumal auch weitere technische Medien und Entwicklungen zu erwarten sind (1. PC -> 2. Mobiltelefon -> 3. Smartphone -> 4. google-Glasses -> Nanotechnologie, totale Vernetzung) => totaler Informationsfluß => Potential zur totalen Überwachung und Kontrolle einerseits, Potential zu noch nicht absehbaren sozialen Veränderungen und Formationen - auch liberale - andererseits.

Translation: The issues of data protection and freedom of information vs. Big Brother and Alpha-Plus are imho just at the beginning of their explosiveness and will grow more acute, especially as further technical developments and media are expected (1. PC -> 2. Mobile phone -> 3. Smartphone -> 4. google-Glasses -> Nanotechnology, total interconnectedness) => total information flow => potential for total surveillance and control on one hand, a potential to unforeseeable changes and social formations - liberal as well - on the other. Gedanken zu Frage 2Edit

Unabhängigkeit und freier Zugang muß unter allen Umständen bewahrt bleiben.

Translation: Independence and free access must be preserved at all costs.

My opinionEdit

Response by 01:15, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Thoughts on question 1Edit

People are using mobile sites like Twitter and Facebook more often now, a incoperation of Wikimedia services into these sorts of sight would be nice, but is not needed. Most people drift towards trendy things, so your best bet is to do something like the (Just for example) ALS Ice Bucket Challange for donations, not on that scale, but the idea of it.

Thoughts on Question 2Edit

Future trends like games, mobile in-cooperation, trendy things, and just popular things in general. Wikimedia projects are non-profit and ad-free, and if everybody knew about the Wikimedia projects, and could donate, they would. The problem is that people do not know much about how the projects work, the site works, much of the stuff like that. So just spreading thw word about Wikipedia/Wikimedia is a great thing to do, but should be done in a way to make it popular. Target a certain audience? No ideas from me on that, but should be done.

Thank you for all the help Wiki's!Edit

Not really important, but Wikipedia and Wikimedia have helped me with many things. It has a strong admin and moderator base, aswell as a strong community of people who donate their own time to run and manage the site, thanks! :)

Peter M. AdamsEdit

Response by Peter M. Adams 12:02, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Peter M. Adams's thoughts on question 1Edit

First, "will a website be relevantin a billion years?" A billion years is one thousand million years. The question is unrealistic. A million years maybe. Second, the website I was screening, may be combined with like equipment however should not be deleted. Remember the movie "Superman" and the digital data retrieval crystal system?? Or Holograms!! No, Quantum memory, Wiki melding!! Get out of the box!! Think back a million years, and think forward a million years!!

Peter M. Adams's thoughts on question 2Edit

Categorize all philosophical and scientific knowledge. Us curmudgeons will still need a reference source!!

I don't care about those questions. Make sure teachers start to trust this site some how, with collours or something that looks legit. ty

Offline /App /pdf generation/download to avoid mobile roaming costs with your smartphone (wikivoyage)Edit

Response by 12:50, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

1a) Using wikivoyage on your smartphone abroad's thoughts on question 2Edit

1b) A very comfortable way of downloading the information (city article/aerea article and related articles) on your smartphone to avoid mobile roaming costs. (pdf generation as alternative)

Response by 13:45, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Keep your style! And continuously provide accurate information.

Response by 14:06, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

I don't see any.'s thoughts on question 2Edit

I think that because the world is going mobile that you should make multiple mobile views(java, blackberry, android 2.x,3.x,4.x, ...) that do not have improperly displayed pictures plus the design for Java phones is terrible and unlike the android or laptop view especially for lower level Java phones and/or improve the existing mobile views for full Java support of any software version or subtype(Samsung, Nokia, ...).

Response by 14:07, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Your Side is very best for us but there is more information in English compare to other indian language so if English information meaning can convert in to our local language then it is more useful to us.

Response by 14:36, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 2Edit

this is very useful to our youngsters that are growing in the future to continue offering this service the web storage should be revised as it is containing many pornographic sites. many illegal sites are mainly the great problems to preserve our man kind contribution and to forecast for the future its better now we should do something(react) to have a better quality of life. a better world. simply ANAS

Response by 14:53, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

thanks for giving me a chance to express my views. let people edit the biographies without the coding knowledge. in this way people with no knowledge of coding will give their contribution. For example I want to edit at least one biography everyday but because it looks complicated I step back. thanks

Hi. :) Thanks for taking the time to express your views. This is something that we're working on actively. Have you tried the relatively new VisualEditor? This Beta software is intended to make it easier for people to edit without coding knowledge. On the English Wikipedia (just guessing, since you wrote this in English) you can access VisualEditor by pressing "Edit Beta" at the top of the screen. It gives you something closer to a "what you see is what you get" editor, although there are a few tasks that remain a bit complex. I hope you'll give it a try! If you have any questions about editing, there's a friendly space for newcomers on the English Wikipedia at w:Wikipedia:Teahouse. :) --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 15:51, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

audio optionsEdit

Response by 5:25, 6 March 2015‎ (UTC)

Illiteracy is prevalent in the world over, having an option to have a page, or sections of a page read a loud would truly make information free and available to the public at large.

I think that would be great, too. I'd love to have this option on mobile, for instance. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 15:54, 6 March 2015 (UTC)


Response by TAKURIAN 15:28, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

TAKURIAN's thoughts on question 1Edit

Google remains the biggest search engine and is likely to dominate that space for the next decade. Users usually access wikipedia via google for any information they need and that trend will continue with any search engine.

TAKURIAN's thoughts on question 2Edit

A thriving wikimedia needs to partner with Google if that is not on the cards already. For Wikimedia to remain relevant for the next decade or so, it must not publish free ads on its pages like what most commercial sites do.

Response by 15:37, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 2Edit

...Will not fix it, handle grammatical errors…


Response by Jakubt 15:48, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Jakubt's thoughts on question 1Edit

More and more people are using mobile phones to search things. Their searches are much more often connected to things they see around them, and if Wikipedia wants to adress this it should be tightely conneced to geoinformation.

Jakubt's thoughts on question 2Edit

Wikipedia needs to be more tightely connected to "reality". Major steps in that direction have been taken (semantic wikidata, cooperaion with OpenStreetMap) but is should continue and deepen. Users should be able to forget about that they are using wikipedia at the moment, they have to be able to search information about things which are in their proximity.

This will need steps both in project itself and in mobile apps it represent the project in devices. There are two major areas where the project is lacking:

1. Cooperation with OpenStreetMap ... if there was no OSM, that Wikipedia should have founded one. But we are lucky and the project exists, so Wikipedia needs to find way how to connect these databases in every possible way imaginable. There is a huge synergic effext if it can be done. We need to stop putting coordinates to articles, we need to start to connect them to OSM objects. I am very well aware of obstacles on the road (persistent id of OSM object, different community styles, etc ...) but solutions can and must be found.

2. Much bigger attention should be payed to users using any of these databases online with they mobiles. Mobile applications need to be inproved and perhaps new participation style can be introduced for people who gather the information in terrain. However this seems to be a big challenge, some experiments in this direction can be done easily. For example simple notes made a huge impact on OSM mapping and introduced whole new category of contributors (but this of course is just inspiration).

Response by 15:50, 6 March 2015 (UTC) Alot of work . . well done !

Alot of good background info.

not always the best with the facts . . . Not to be bias in any form . . .

Please keep me directed for good.

Response by 15:58, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 2Edit

Я считаю, что Википедия действительно хороший сайт, который помогает ВСЕМ найти нужную информацию. Я сердечно благодарна вам за столь тяжкий труд. Лично мне всё нравится в Википедии. Я желаю вам удачи, любви и счастью. Вы превосходно поработали и можете пойти попить чаёк с печеньками :)

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"I believe that Wikipedia is a really good site that helps everyone find the right information. I sincerely thank you for such a chore. Personally, I like everything in Wikipedia. I wish you good luck, love and happiness. You are an excellent job and can go to have a drink with cookies gulls :)"

Response by 16:00, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

A este ritmo, la página va a crecer mucho mas de lo que ha crecido hasta ahora, me ha ayudado mucho en TODO, me permite saber cosas facilmente, con una informacion muy completa.

Machine translation, please improve: At this rate, the page will grow much more than it has grown so far has helped me in ALL, let me know things easily, with very complete information.

Response by 16:04, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

there will be many different processes of integration. they will be subjected to numerous forces generated by material processes of bio-politic conflict. Whatever the final outcome will be, the integration effort writes an exciting chapter in the history of culture.


Response by 2607:FA78:109F:45:0:0:0:234 16:08, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

2607:FA78:109F:45:0:0:0:234's thoughts on question 1Edit

mobile users are looking to less reading or having it read to them Or better have videos relating to the topic instead of only pictures since more people are moving to sites like YouTube or daily motion for tutorials or information

2607:FA78:109F:45:0:0:0:234's thoughts on question 2Edit

more videos and tutorials. free language audio lessons possibly? embedded YouTube videos that are relevant and properly sourced and back up with real intelligence

Response by 16:26, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

it would help if the pictures are as clear(HD) as possible.'s thoughts on question 2Edit

I would like to see an ability to change the background color when creating a wiki page.

Response by 16:28, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

Physical interaction's thoughts on question 2Edit

The same as it does now

Maxime CôtéEdit

Response by Maxime Côté 16:45, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Maxime Côté's thoughts on question 2Edit

Hello, thank you for your wonderful work.

I think the trends that you have singled out are very true.

I find that my mobile devices don't always give out the mobile view first. Maybe a more readily visible "switcher Icon" would do the trick? (Instead of all the way at the bottom end of the page..:D)

Also, I find that the "birth" of the le Internet for everyone has mostly occured in western "democratic" scholarized civilisation.

The second expansion wave might encounter difficulties with "less accustomed" to liberty populations, more in sync with directive, even dictatorial regimes...

It would greatly suprise me that this new creed of users take to the learning, questionning and even, creating cultural knowledge as beningly as the first group of users.

Greatly indeed.

So in order to ease-in the new eventual leaders(?) of the world (asia) I suggest creating a special team of media designers to prepare a "democracy and freedom of expression 101" course.

It should be very respectful of the asian values of the new users, so as to keep them onboard for the transition. It should also be very interactive, so as to keep in tune, in real time, with their concerns.

The objective is to sell freedom of speech, Rousseau's "Contrat social", our collective freedom and ultimately: Truth itself.

Thak you.

Maxime Côté High school, Ethics teacher Laval,Québec, Beautiful, But cold, Canada

Response by 17:03, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

Native advertising. For e.g. sponsored posts in Facebook, promoted post on Twitter or an online publication such as BuzzFeed works with a brand. . Advertising built-in to the platform.'s thoughts on question 2Edit

Mobile videos are the way to the future.

Response by 17:08, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Make it so you can`t edit!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Response by 17:11, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

Multiple languages Systems that will "read" the Wikipedia to provide answers, a bit like Google is already doing by answering to questions without requiring you to go to the Wikipedia's thoughts on question 2Edit

Improve its content (i.e. have more content) But, more important, improve the content quality, not only by providing more languages but also by being better structured, easier to read (for both humans and machines)

Response by 17:30, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Integration with other products and understanding user's context and providing relevant information without him asking is the key. Most of the times I seek new information when I am at a new place or when I need information about an artist or celebrity. Before I search for an artist's page in wikipedia, either Im listening to his song or reading his post on facebook or tweet. Wikipedia somehow should integrate with these apps, and as soon as I open wikipedia app, should give me relevant suggestions. I dont have to type and search the artist's name. Same thing with locations, new places, new technology. Understand what line of profession user is on, understand what he is doing and suggest him subtly information relevant to him.

Response by 17:31, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

sir i guess the trend of making some info fun to know would be a new trend..!!!'s thoughts on question 2Edit

and i would defend my ans 1 with thi ssolution

  1. i think by adding some trivia online games could be a new step to make it more popular n vast surfers gatherer.

Response by 17:33, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

I have noticed that a lot of teachers, students and professors say that wikipedia is not a credible source of information. I have noticed that this trend has resulted in a decrease in the use and knowledge of wikipedia resources. If you can change this, many more people will see the usefulness and resourcefulness of Wikipedia.

Response by 17:52, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

I am Patricia Quinn, who played Alice in the film Alice's Restaurant. The foto shown is of a Brit actress who was in Rocky Horror Picture Show. Please correct this error on the Alice's Restaurant Wikipedia page. Thank you.

Hi, Patricia. There is currently no photo on Alice's Restaurant (film), (nor at any of the other language editions). There aren't any photos in the recent versions, either. Can you paste a link to the problem page? Thanks. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 18:43, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Response by 18:13, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'ın 1. soru hakkındaki düşünceleriEdit

Mobilleşmeniz Şart Çünki Türkiyede Okullarda Tabletle Eğitim Görülmeye Başlanıyor Ve Wifi den Wikipediye Girip Hocaların Verdiği Ödevlerle İlgili Hemen Hızlıca Bilgi Sahibi Olurlar.

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"Charter Because you are going mobile Başlanıy seeing tabletting Education in Schools in Turkey and the assignment given by the teacher from Wikipedia enter and Wifi Related Immediately Info Owner's Consent."'ın 2. soru hakkındaki düşünceleriEdit

Yazılanları Biri Seslendirmeli Allta Buton Olmalı Ve Seslendiren Kişi Okucak Dinliyen Kişi Oradaki Yazıyı Dinliyebilir. Hem Ödev Yaparken Bir Bilgisayara veya telefona bak bir kağıta bak zor oluyor boyle daha kolay olur.

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"Someone should be typed on a Button And Singer People Speak Allt Okucak listener can listen there Letter. Both Paper Whilst it is difficult to look at a computer or phone will be easier to look at a paper cylinder."

Response by 18:35, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

Big Data is a major trend observed and it is one of the fastest upcoming sectors in IT. The information over the entire internet will double every 4 years. Increasing use of smartphones and Apps have changed the way we access information.'s thoughts on question 2Edit

In order to sustain the next billion users, I think that Wikimedia should upgrade their networking hardware and make it more scalable by incorporating latest technologies and Big Data. People want relevant information to their query in a gist, so keeping that in mind, I would like to suggest you to develop a search engine that will answer a specific question by crawling through all the information in Wikipedia. (For example, What is the current population of Mumbai?)

Response by 18:41, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Don't change anything! Don't screw up what works!

Response by 19:17, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Well one thing that would majorly improve wikimedia in the mobile department would be pictures. Pictures are hard and often impossible to see in mobile sites so improving that would be Amazing

Response by 19:43, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

In my opinion if you link people that make difference in our history with real people in Facebook will be very interesting, I am example I have parents that made the difference and changed the world.

Response by 19:46, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

No ads on this site, Swagalicous and swagtastic,

Response by 20:02, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

i think synching up with Youtube could potentially give Wikimedia advantages such as a broader audience, videos related to the information provided, and visual stimulation all relative to the search topics. Also, brain games.


Response by 20:02, 6 March 2015 (UTC)'s thoughts on question 1Edit

Video gaming so like apps for xbox one Wii U and PS4's thoughts on question 2Edit

Response by 20:15, 6 March 2015 (UTC) tankar kring fråga 2Edit

Säg det. Men...; jag tänkte på en sak. Det finns väl Wikipedia på engelska till exempel. Men det finns väl också Wikipedia på enkel engelska, eller som det kanske heter: Simple English. Men varför finns det inget sådant på svenska? Nåt som då kanske kunde heta Enkel Svenska eller nåt. /

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"I thought of one thing. There are well-Wikipedia in English, for example. But there are probably also Wikipedia in simple English, or perhaps named Simple English. But why is there no such thing in Swedish? Something which then could maybe hot Simple Swedish or something."


Response by TheDJ 20:26, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

TheDJ's thoughts on question 1Edit

  1. One of the biggest trends I see is that everything becomes 'shorter'. You interact with something for 10 seconds and you are gone again.
  2. Google is taking away our readers (See the google knowledge graph)
  3. The Internet will increasingly become more mundane and commercial. It is turning from your local grocery store, towards mega malls owned by 4 conglomerates.
  4. The core of Wikipedians will continue to wane, causing confusion and wavering

TheDJ's thoughts on question 2Edit

  1. It is critical that we provide the tools that allow you to reach your goal within that timeframe. That doesn't mean we need to limit ourselves to these short interactions, it's just that we need to serve that demand better. It's all about right here, right now, and personalization.
  2. We need to do things that google doesn't. Ingest content, grade content, curate and improve content, share/distribute content. All for and by the people, transparency and visibility. We need to do more than merely collect.
  3. We need to be the memory of the Internet. Collaborate with all, but not sell out, guard the ethos of the community inside the foundation and the community (there have been too many perversions since 2007). And if we can do that, THEN we need to sell that message of ethos to the world (there is nothing worse then selling a perverted message).
  4. The 2005-2008 spurt has given us a huge amount of contributors, who are still responsible for huge amounts of what goes on inside the community, but this group is not being replenished as fast as it initially formed. We need to find better ways to have talent surface throughout the ranks. Better metrics and indicators that will help grow people into roles that are useful for the community, without having to be 100% perfect at all tasks.

Additional ideas and pointsEdit

  • Improve cooperation with archives in general and in particular
  • make wikisource multilingual to increase participation and community 'power'. Preserve, curate and redistribute.
  • Make it possible for people to collaborate in real time, through chat and actual collaborative editing.
  • Give better tools to the curator community to grade and use micro-contributions. (abuse and overload are dangers, good tools to assess will allow us to ingest more, but not burn out)
  • We need to do so much more with location and maps. But also graphs etc. Those are much more important than video for instance in my opinion. Video is nice, but it is also VERY hard to collaboratively tell a good story (and the software investments for that would be huge).
  • Avoid duplication (from userscripts to content), stimulate reuse (from code to wikipedia article text), but keep giving space to the differences of countries and languages.


Response by Elitre 20:57, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Elitre's thoughts on question 1Edit

I think big/open data is getting increasingly important.

Elitre's thoughts on question 2Edit

Our projects will need to re-evaluate how we share knowledge (i.e., is our current code - templates, categories - efficient in this?). While I want each Wikipedia to stay true to their interpretation of what an encyclopedia is supposed to feature, I also don't want users for whom that very word doesn't mean much to have to rely on other sites for their learning needs. Therefore I believe we may need to find a new space which actually works for very different kind of contributions (think about oral tradition, for example); that would need state of the art tech (fast, big uploads, even through apps), but also a lot of visibility; we can aim at starting a new community on solid grounds of civility, reciprocal understanding, mutual respect. Overall though I think that it's kinda important that we enhance the uniqueness of our Movement, and prove it can keep growing in directions we probably didn't imagine just a few years ago; hence we'll need to make sure we're not merely "replicating" something which other realities are already doing, especially when, for some reasons, they're more qualified to do it (think of entities like Foundations working in specialized fields like education for decades, for example). I'll probably like to see more strategic, long-term, joint work precisely with this kind of ideal partners.

Thanks for reading. I don't need anyone to reply.

Re: Thriving Healthy Wikipedia projects looking like.Edit

Response by 21:28, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

The site can stay healthy and alive independently, but to have relevance and influence, it may remain simply involved in it's steady course of higher objective in a fun open and sincere manner. People to come and go as they will.

An overall goal can for instance be to bring in ways to interact with the stream on your site. So you can give something, or do since you want to do something needed or understand needed by observing.

Projects could be a preparation of response if it is big enough to become a project. The interaction is the relevancy. There is a time granted with mutual understanding and kind manners, if it is something waited on needing a preparation or upgrade first. Then that is your project. A real response is small, and billions of them are happening, represents a majority of relevant responses. In the relationship we are having. There will be bigger projects along the way, the majority of success is listening and fulfilling a reliable enjoyable function for me.and me.and me.

So it seems by the question, there is a Hope to do something big. I encourage not to rely on goals and that utilize a bubble, a machine or a castle.

Project-ing could become become too effortful to keep up. Being outside, maintaining correct predictions to a stream of happening stuff. Using resources in the projects. With the growing complexity, even when it becomes math, and when math is wrong, we would rely on the public who are individually going about their own thing involved with own others in that stream of stuff. It would become more confusing to understand logically even what the yields of those projects really mean. And why those projects you have matter to us.

Just active listening, the simple stuff.


Response by Waled.wedo 22:16, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Waled.wedo رأيك بالسؤال الأولEdit

.انا ارى انه يجب ان توجد افلام وثائقية وتسجيليةومقاطع سمعية..اكتب هنا...

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
". I see that there must be documentaries and Tsgelahomqata Samaah..aketb here ..."

Waled.wedo رأيك بالسؤال الثانيEdit

...اكتب هناهى مشروعات مفيدة وهامة بالفعل ولا ينقصها الا بعض الدعاية ةتغير شكل الصفحات بالوان مميزةوتصميم مختلف...

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"... Type Hnahy useful and important projects already not lacking, but some form of propaganda Hngar pages Mmeshotsamam different colors ..."
Return to "Strategy/Wikimedia Foundation/2015/Community consultation/2015-03-11" page.