Open main menu

Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2018-20/Working Groups/Diversity/Recommendations/3

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Currently, a new iteration of discussions is taking place.
Most likely, new comments will not be taken into account by Working Group members in their work of developing the Recommendations. You are free however to continue discussing in the spirit of "discussing about Wikipedia is a work in progress". :)

CommentEdit

  • Now, this is the type of initiative you ought to be focusing on. It's an excellent suggestion and works to support the communities rather than damaging them. More of this type of support, and less (as in no) dictating to communities how to run themselves. Seraphimblade (talk) 15:47, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
  • [Placeholder] - Winged Blades of Godric (talk) 12:52, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
  • This is the right and proper way to close coverage gaps. MER-C (talk) 15:42, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
  • +1 as per Seraphimblade -- Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 17:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
  • +1 per Seraphimblade — Aron M (talk) 12:50, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • +1; could be great for Wikisource and Commons. It might also make sense to partner with the Internet Archive for this. --MarioGom (talk) 08:43, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • +1, this would be a positive way to support diversity and a good use of resources. the wub "?!" 23:08, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Missing textEdit

There seems to be text missing from the Q 1 What is your Recommendation? section. Libcub (talk) 05:18, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

Assumptions and DownsidesEdit

Please rethink your assumptions and the possible downsides. For example, perhaps you are assuming that funding this activity is of a higher priority than most other WMF projects. The downside is that less funds are available for other priorities. The possible consequence of the WMF getting into this area, is that it may cause other potential funders to shift their funding to other areas. The WMF will do more harm than good if it just "sticks its toe" into funding this area and then leaves the area or funds it at less than adequate levels. Research is needed to determine the appropriate funding level and then have the community ask whether we can afford to make a long-term commitment at that level. Hlevy2 (talk) 04:30, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Agreed. A serious consideration of Question 4b/4c is needed for an honest conversation. Nearly every recommendation will have negative impacts - and it's better to be upfront and open about it. Effeietsanders (talk) 21:00, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

IfEdit

If the project that is summarized in the wikimania program here is an example of what is being proposed, then this a very good idea. From there: "much is being done to raise awareness about the diversity issues on the wiki-projects ... But then it often stops there because the sources do not exist or are not readily available". Directing resources towards improving access to sources is a much better way of addressing diversity than any of the other proposals I've seen here. I suggest adding/incorporating ways of improving awareness of the existence of such (new) sources to these "recommendations" – if editors don't know that the sources exist, they won't be used. EddieHugh (talk) 19:21, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

+1 One service I wish the Foundation would provide is to help teach Wiki[m|p]edians how to research. Reading & writing WP articles for almost 17 years, I find that far too many are poorly researched. And this is not an indictment of the educational system of any one nation: if one country taught its students how to perform research, I would see a connection; all national educational systems suck at teaching how to research. The WMF could contract with library experts to draw up handlists of books, articles, & other sources for topics where coverage is lacking. (When I started writing articles on Ethiopia, for example, it took me the better of 6 months just to develop such a list. And it included a number of works that I know were out of date, for lack of better knowledge of the subject.) Or the Washington, DC Wikimedia chapter could partner with the Library of Congress or Smithsonian to hold presentations about their resources on Native Americans to educate our volunteers. In many case the resources are out there, but the volunteers have no idea they exist. -- Llywrch (talk) 17:36, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
+1 Focusing on improving research methods is something I've been doing for some time in the educational projects I'm involved in, but there is still a long, long way to go. There are very few materials available, and most are completely outdated, or/and have low usability. Teaching people how to properly research and produce resulting contents acceptable to the Wikimedia projects is key to improve diversity. Everybody that has been around the Art & Feminism initiative for some times have already observed, or at least heard of, the article massacres which are common there, mainly due to the poor preparation of the participants of the initiative. Such materials would greatly help improving that.--- Darwin Ahoy! 20:33, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
Return to "Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2018-20/Working Groups/Diversity/Recommendations/3" page.