Wikimedia Conference 2018/Documentation/Movement Strategy track/Annexes/Diversity
| WMCON 2018 | Core Conference Program | Fringe Events | Registration & Participants |
Location |
Logistics |
Contact |
Documentation, Reports, Reviews |
|
|
Working Group Input Document: Diversity edit
Extracted May 1st from Etherpads
Diversity edit
PARTICIPANTS edit
- Wojciech Pedzich - Wikimedia Polska
- Käbi Suvi - Wikimedia Estonia
- Pru Mitchell - Wikimedia Australia
- Netha Hussain
- Olga Lidia
- Dr. Gabriele Theren, WMDE Board
- Oscar Costero
- Andrew Lih
- Galder Gonzalez Larranaga
- imacat - Wikimedia Taiwan, WikiWomen Taiwan, Wikimedia LGBT+
WHAT? edit
QUESTIONS edit
- A task force specifically for attract users under 30 to Wikipedia.
- How do we ensure a future pipeline or curate a contribution journey that makes young people feel supported and valued?
- How do we "gamify" the editor experience for the next generation of editors
- How do we answer the criticism that "the WP interface is so 1990s" It is impossible to edit Wikipedia. Commons and Wikidata on mobile device unless super motivated
- WikiData as a multilingual and more inclusive, representative, accurate picture of knowledge
- What is the potential role of <wikidata to enable the goals of diversity and inclusion + language, types of content, partnerships and linkage with outside knowledge bases - Knowledge as a service
- The Western Philosophical concept of "category" (for example, colour) is very fundamental in current Wikipedia projects, but it isn't easy for all cultures to work with. We must not force everything into categories. respect alternative ideas and issues ...
- rigidity of the concept of citations
- concept of colour ... etc.
- Every humankind means every one.
- How do we show different versions of wp/wm for different readers - i.e. children wikipedia (tipedia, basque), visual wik, multimedia, elderly, marginalised communities, alternative perceptions, disabilities?
- Automatic translation tools and features available to all languages and projects (so more people get included)
- How do we take advantage of translation tools, taking into account perspectives and sources that are language/community specific and the limitations of machine translation; with framing to allow context ... ?
- How do we leverage existing tools to wikimedia projects, whilst still respecting content and community, e.g. use google for oral input to text?
- What are different ways of recognising the efforts of new editors (whilst still keep existing community)?
- How might we create a more welcoming environment for new users unfamiliar with the technicalities of our current technical, community and content ecosystem?
- Oralpedia - how do we use this idea to ... facilitate
- indigenous knowledge / oral citations ? format vs. types of knowledge - preservation of audio, voice intro, voices of the actual people,
- spoken articles for disability, enriched experience and illiteracy - UN stipulation to make all documentation oral for people who cannot read - text to speech engines.
- simple tools for recording audio direct to content
- How do we incorporate different scholarship processes (multilingual, citation practices, multimedia tagging, academic vs. hobbyist, vs. community etc.)?
- include research on Wikipedia, what is missing, on diversity ... scholarship process - include the excluded
- How do some process differ in different regions and languages -> and how do we reconcile them whilst honouring and respecting the community or incorporating others?
- be culturally respectful, how open or resistent is this movement to change? what is the limit?
- What happened to the new voices strand from SD1? It was very useful …
- who else do we need to look for? who is missing? what groups, in the community / in the foundation?
- which readers are not being catered for?
- How do we ask the consumers of our content what change they want to see?
- who is not consuming the content and why …
- What barriers exist to inclusion
- technology
- cost of data
- confidence
- physical access
- education
- test heaviness
- citations vs. written knowledge
- How do we stay ahead to the technology and how it can potentially widen the exclusion of people, e.g. alexa or siri, or etc.?
- How might we include knowledge and participation from traditionally marginalized communities while being sensitive to their culture?
- it is felt that existing notability requirements are a challenge in this area.
- Is diversity and inclusion contextual?
- How might we be more open to traditionally marginalised communities and their needs?
WHO? edit
MEMBERS edit
- Who this greater diversity impacts: Readers and non-readers / literate and non-literate / minority languages, genders and isolated and marginalised communities / disabled peoples / varied age groupsWho should be represented in the working group (no limits set)
- Who is actions the recommendations : content creators from many different communities ; new voices ; diverse voices
- existing contributors from existing and diverse communities
- first nations, marginalised voices, etc
- voices under risk - preservation
- physically disadvantaged people
- mentally disadvantaged people
- people from diverse beliefs, religions and faiths
- readers
- OTHER CONTRIBUTORS
Potential consultants include:
- women's and LGBTI activists and organisations
- first nations, marginalised voices, etc
- voices under risk - preservation,
- physically disadvantaged people
- mentally disadvantaged
- indigenous knowledge
- oral-based
- non-academic
- alternative perspectives
- illiterate people
- criminals
- readers
HOW? edit
PROCESS edit
DON'T REINVENT WHAT ALREADY EXISTS?
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Diversity_Conference_2017/Diversity_conversation
Main group : 10-15 people
- Sub groups working on specific issues
- Consultation required from people and organisations and partners outside the movement
- Respect for cultural sensitivities required to ensure there is no "savior complex" involved in the work - and that only people or communities who want to be involved are involved on their terms
- Constant consultation with other working groups
- Transparency and inclusivity are vital to the process
Multiple dimensions required in nominating
- This rubric attempts to visualise the multiple voices that ideally will be represented in the Working Group for Diversity and Inclusion
- https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YsThSmUKnXsTLR0Xnuc5kIEwfP8X83TR9q2FngAB8Bs/edit?usp=sharing
- Multiple voices are essential to this area of work. It is strongly recommended that the Working Group actively seek out these voices via focus groups, a larger consultative process or working body
- While an individual nominee is not necessarily fully representative of their 'community'.
Alternative to working group is an open group
- Everyone who wants to be part of this working group, can be included.
- Steering group should work completely transparently and openly, to ensure all those interested in this question can see the progress of the work
Possible topics edit
- gender
- sexual orientation
- geographies of knowledge / academically disadvantaged communities / countries (dominant communities from developing countries)
- marginalised communities within larger, dominant communities and isolated communities (including nomadic and transient communities * refugees and immigrants * indigenous and isolated )
- citation challenged communities (oral-based and non-written)
- physically disadvantaged
- mental disadvantaged
- illiterate or non-written languages .. (what is literacy to different communities?)
- MPOV alternative perspectives and perceptions (example, religion or faith)
- age: children, youth, elderly, etc.
- languages (threatened, rare or small)
- access: technology, cost of data, digital devices, etc.
OTHER COMMENTS edit
Possible crossover with other working groups
Partnerships
- who do we partner with to bring in marginalised knowledge - both networks and content
- How do we partner with other organisations so we don't have to do everything ourselves? If someone has useful technology or content, or processes how can we work together?
- Community Health
- - how do we make them feel included and continue their work; not step on their toes or disrespect their processes and cultural sensitivities
- - What is the structure for prioritising the needs for individual communities?. Where does a marginalised community go to request what they need for technical, content and community support
- Capacity Building
- - how do we develop these communities, skills transfer and support to make them self sustaining
- Technology
- - access
- - how do we leverage existing technology or develop new ones to increase participation and reduce barriers to access
- - how do we use technology to create diverse content and close knowledge gaps
- - How might we incorporate more multimedia content within our projects?
- Definitions of diversity and inclusion within the movement:
- who does greater diversity would impact?
- > content
- indigenous
- oral
- non-academic
- alternative perspectives
- marginalised voices
- voices under risk - preservation,
- first nations, etc
- languages
- > contributors
- readers
- editors
- community organisers
- partners - network and content
- technology partners
- languages
- > communities
- marginalised communities within larger, dominant communities
- dominant communities from developing countries
- indigenous and isolated communities
- nomadic and transient communities
- refugees and immigrants
- languages
- > access : technology, cost of data, digital devices
- Research and respect
- how do we incorporate universal design
- What research is required to inform our work on diversity and inclusion? = how to re-include those who have been excluded
- How do we determine what each community see as important in their practice?
- ask the consumers of our content (our readers) what and who is missing