Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Die Wikipedia auf den Mond/Abstimmung

< Wikipedia to the Moon
This page is a translated version of the page Wikipedia to the Moon/Voting and the translation is 75% complete.
Other languages:

Dies ist der Ort, wo für den besten Weg, Inhalte für Wikipedia to the Moon zu sammeln und zu ordnen, gewählt wird. Bitte lese Phase 1: Szenarien für die Diskussion und die Entwicklung von Szenarien, welche hier zu wählen sind. Die Zusammenstellung von Szenarien ist nun abgeschlossen und weiter unten findest du eine Kurzfassung des Abstimmungsprozesses. Abgestimmt werden kann bis zum 24. Juni 2016!

Hauptseite Phase 1: Szenarien Phase 2: abstimmen Phase 3: arbeiten an Inhalten Phase 4: festmachen Über FAQ
  fertig fertig fertig fertig    

Wie man wählt

Jeder kann wählen, egal welche Benutzerrechte er hat. Allerdings logge dich vor dem Abstimmen ein oder registriere einen neuen Account, da IP-Stimmen nicht gewertet werden können.

  • Du hast so viele Stimmen, wie unten Szenarien aufgelistet sind. Nicht mehr. Du kannst sie alle verwenden, aber du musst – natürlich – nicht.
  • Nur eine Stimme pro Szenario.
  • Der Abstimmungsmodus ist unterstützend, das heißt, dass Stimmen als Unterstützung des jeweiligen Szenarios gezählt werden. Es gibt keine Gegenstimmen

Wie das Ergebnis ausgewertet wird

  • Das Szenario mit den meisten Stimmen (bedenke, alle sind nur unterstützend) gewinnt.
  • Es ist eine Abstimmung mit einfacher Mehrheit. Das bedeutet, dass das Szenario mit den meisten Stimmen nicht auch noch einen Mindestprozentsatz an Stimmen (wie 50 %) erreichen muss um zu gewinnen.
  • Es gibt 10 Szenarien, für die du stimmen kannst, von denen 9 verschiedene Vorschläge sind, wie man die Daten-CD als globale Community verwenden soll. Das letzte Szenario ist, wie auch immer, eine Nein-Stimme. Es schlägt vor, nicht als globale Community für Wikipedia to the Moon zu arbeiten. Es wäre nur das gewinnende Szenario, wenn es die Zahl der Leute, die für irgendein anderes Szenario abstimmen, überbietet.

Hier abstimmen

Let's work on: a Wikipedia canon

Eine Zahl von Szenarien (siehe beispielsweise „sprachunabhängig“ und „Alle besonders wichtigen Artikel aller Wikipedien“) scheinen mehr oder weniger Versionen des Canon-Szenarios zu sein, welches einer der ursprünglichen drei Vorschläge war. Die Kernidee ist es eine Auswahl an repräsentativen Artikeln, unabhängig von der spezifischen Sprache, zu sammeln. Sobal ein Konsens über eine solche Auswahl an Artikeln gefunden wurde, ist es nötig, diese Artikel in so viele Sprachen wie möglich zu übersetzen. Eine entscheidende Frage für alle Canon-Szenarien ist es welche Kriterien festgelegt werden, um den Artikel auszusuchen.

Grundidee: „In der Literatur beschreibt ein Canon eine Sammlung von Werken, die als eine Art von Standart oder öffentliche Repräsentation von etwas angesehen werden. Es gibt keinen globalen Canon der wichtigsten Wikipedia-Artikel oder etwas ähnliches. Doch in vielen Sprachversionen gibt es Listen der Wikipedia-Artikel, von denen Leute meinen, dass sie jede Sprachversion enthalten sollte. In diesem Szenario die Communitys aller Sprachen würde eingeladen werden, über einen bewegungsweiten Canon von Wikipedia-Artikeln zu diskutieren und abzustimmen.“
Originaltext

“In literature, a canon describes a set of works that are considered to be some kind of standard or official representation of something. There is no global canon of the most important Wikipedia articles or anything similar. However, in many language versions there are lists of Wikipedia articles that people suggest every Wikipedia should feature. In this scenario all language communities would be invited to discuss and agree on one movement-wide canon of Wikipedia articles.” Siehe die gesamte Diskussion zum Kanon!, Szenario language agnostic („sprachunabhängig“), Szenario Top importance („Höchste Wichtigkeit“)­, Szenario Space4all („Platz für alles“)

Hier abstimmen!

Votes: a Wikipedia canon

  1. --Lsanabria (talk) 19:42, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  2. —JerrySa1 (talk) 13:28, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --Mysteriumen (talk) 23:08, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --Teamihlehyn (talk) 12:12, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --AfroThundr3007730 (talk) 12:38, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  6. --Gerrit (talk) 12:40, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  7. --Blackhat999 (talk) 14:53, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  8. --ONUnicorn (talk) 19:05, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  9. --Alvaro Vidal-Abarca (talk) 20:56, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  10. --NaBUru38 (talk)
  11. --Eritain (talk) 00:47, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  12. --Eric.LEWIN (talk) 00:48, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  13. --Tonystewart14 (talk) 21:40, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  14. --Arussom (talk) 02:06, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  15. --Chickadee46 (talk) 20:47, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  16. --Sergey WereWolf (talk) 11:29, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Let's work on: TOP30 lists

Dies ist eine Art „umgekehrte“ Canon-Idee, in der nicht eine Auswahl Artikel alle Wikipedia-Communitys repräsentiert. Stattdessen bekommt jede Sprach-Community die Chance ihre eigenen TOP-30 Listen von Artikeln zu übergeben.

Grundidee: „Während ein Wikipedia-Canon eine Auswahl der globalen Community repräsentieren würde, stehen die beinahe 300 Sprachversionen für eine Vielzahl von Kulturen und Wissen. In diesem Szenario, würden alle Wikipedia Sprachversionen dazu eingeladen werden deren eigene Top-30-Artikel zu diskutieren und auszuwählen. Alle Top-30-Auswahlen aller teilnehmender Sprachversionen würden gesammelt werden und in die Wikipedia Nutzlast aufgenommen werden.“
Originaltext

“Whereas a Wikipedia canon would represent a decision of one global community, the almost 300 language versions of Wikipedia stand for a wide variety of culture and knowledge. In this scenario, all Wikipedia language versions would be invited to discuss and select their own Top 30 of articles. All Top 30 selections from all participating language versions would then be collected and included in the Wikipedia payload.” Zur gesamten Diskussion.

Hier abstimmen!

Votes: TOP30 lists

  1. -- Andrew Dalby (talk) 18:47, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --Maria.martelli (talk) 20:18, 10 June 2016 (UTC)--[reply]
  3. Colonel Wilhelm Klink (talk) 23:22, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --Stang 11:00, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --GunChleoc (talk) 12:08, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  6. José Luiz talk 21:00, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  7. ~Mable (chat) 07:21, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  8. --Postcrosser (talk) 12:37, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  9. --Breogan2008 (talk) 14:02, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  10. --RookJameson (talk) 15:23, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Waters.Justin (talk) 15:36, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  12. AveroXY (talk) 16:11, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  13. --Zabia (talk) 18:00, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  14. --Franco3450 (talk) 18:31, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  15. --ONUnicorn (talk) 19:06, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  16. --Alvaro Vidal-Abarca (talk) 20:55, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  17. --Moony22 (talk) 21:45, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  18. --Carnildo (talk) 21:54, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  19. --Golan's mom (talk) 05:58, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  20. --User:Trurle (talk) 23:03, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  21. --Joalpe (talk) 01:55, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  22. --Sthelen.aqua (talk) 13:24, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  23. --Chiborg (talk) 14:35, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  24. --Dimi z (talk) 14:38, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  25. -- Chickadee46 (talk) 20:49, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  26. — Yerpo Eh? 17:26, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  27. --Filipinayzd (talk) 17:42, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  28. -- IKHazarika (talk) 05:07, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Let's work on: a nominated items list

Der dritte der ursprünglichen Vorschläge beschreibt eine offene List, die mit einem Vorschlag pro registriertem Account gefüllt werden kann, unabhängig der Sprache oder anderen Barrieren.

Grundidee: „Ein Account, eine Stimme. In diesem Szenario kann jeder Wikipedianer ein Listenelement hinzufügen und dann den eigenen Vorschlag unterzeichnen. Dies können Wikipedia-Artikel (unabhängig von der Sprache), ein Bild, oder irgendein anderes Medium sein. Keine Einschränkungen, außer dass man nur ein Listenelement nominieren darf. Die Elemente der ganzen Liste gehen ins All.“
Originaltext

“One account, one vote. In this scenario, every Wikipedian could add one list item and then sign their own suggestion. This could be Wikipedia articles (regardless of language), an image, or any other media item. No restrictions, except that you can only name one list item. The items of the whole list go to space.” Zur gesamten Diskussion.

Discussion_Scenario_.23List:

Hier abstimmen!

Votes: a nominated items list

  1. —DerHexer (Talk) 10:19, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --Golan's mom (talk) 11:39, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --Bastenbas (talk) 13:16, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Irn (talk) 15:12, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Halibutt (talk) 22:49, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  6. --Carlsrator (talk) 18:52, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  7. --DS-fax 17:24, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  8. -- IKHazarika (talk) 05:09, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Let's work on: Taking “Mond/Maan/Луна/Månen/Mjesec/Bulan/Hold/Luna/Księżyc/Lua/Mesiac/Ay/Moon” to the moon!

Dieses neue Szenario wählt nur einen Artikel, beispielsweise den Artikel über den Mond selbst – in allen verfügbaren Sprachen.

Grundidee:" „القمر, آی, ചന്ദ്രൻ, चंद्र, Mặt Trăng, und die Artikel über den Mond in vielen anderen Sprachen sind ausgezeichnet. Lasst uns sie alle dort hochsenden. Dies könnte Teil von manchen der anderen Szenarien sein.“
Originaltext

“القمر, آی, ചന്ദ്രൻ, चंद्र, Mặt Trăng, and the articles on the moon in many other languages are featured. Let's send them all up there. This could be part of some of the other scenarios.” Zur gesamten Diskussion.

Hier abstimmen!

Votes: Taking “Mond/Maan/Луна/Månen/Mjesec/Bulan/Hold/Luna/Księżyc/Lua/Mesiac/Ay/Moon/ਚੰਦਰਮਾ” to the moon!

  1. Almafeta (talk) 16:24, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --Liridon (talk) 16:31, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Seb az86556 (talk) 16:41, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --Lsanabria (talk) 19:42, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  5. 4nn1l2 (talk) 21:05, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  6. MichaelSchoenitzer (talk) 21:32, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  7. --స్వరలాసిక (talk) 00:35, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Michaelpires (talk) 02:15, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Bhaskaranaidu (talk) 03:10, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  10.  Klaas `Z4␟` V:  05:33, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  11. Mike Coppolano (talk) 08:20, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  12. --valepert (talk) 10:36, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  13. --Barbaking (talk) 11:15, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  14. --Titou (talk) 11:15, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  15. --Golan's mom (talk) 11:29, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  16. --GunChleoc (talk) 12:07, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  17. —JerrySa1 (talk) 13:28, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  18. --Winstonza (talk) 14:06, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  19. --Mickey83 (talk) 14:37, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  20. --Teamihlehyn (talk) 12:14, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  21. — xaosflux Talk 05:28, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  22.  TOW  talk  08:08, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  23. --Daniele Pugliesi (talk) 14:37, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  24. --Rupertsciamenna (talk) 18:10, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  25. --Vikas Hegde (talk) 09:22, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  26. --Palnatoke (talk) 09:41, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  27. --Postcrosser (talk) 12:38, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  28. -- HvW (talk) 12:48, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  29. -Nyiffi (talk) 14:45, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  30. --RookJameson (talk) 15:23, 13 June 2016 (UTC) Though I dont like the part about "picking just one article". The Moon articles won't fill the disc, so this should be combined with other scenarios.[reply]
  31. --CristianCantoro (talk) 15:48, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  32. --Zabia (talk) 17:59, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  33. -- ONUnicorn (talk) 19:07, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  34. --YjM (talk) 19:43, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  35. -- Jonathunder (talk) 19:49, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  36. --Moony22 (talk) 21:45, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  37. --Khutuck (talk) 22:29, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  38. -- Bora (talk) 22:46, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  39. -- YenilenebilirAdamMESAJ 16:24, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  40. Litlok (talk) 20:47, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  41. --User:Trurle (talk) 23:03, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  42. --Sir Shurf (talk) 11:10, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  43. Popo le Chien (talk) 14:33, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  44. Metrónomo-Goldwyn-Mayer   19:13, 18 June 2016 (UTC)It would be our Rosetta Stone[reply]
  45. Olsi (talk) 23:37, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  46. --Sergey WereWolf (talk) 11:29, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  47. --e.c. 23:33, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Let's work on: a global editathon on Astronomy

Dieses schlägt vor einen monatelangen Astronomie Editathon abzuhalten. Es würde virtuell sein, was bedeutet, dass es überall auf der Welt online stattfindet. Teilnehmer müssten astronomiebezogene Artikel zu schreiben.

Grundidee: „Halte eine online-Edit-Woche oder einen Monat, in dem Leute über Astronomie schreiben. Jeder Artikel bringt dem Autor ein Ticket. Am Ende ziehen wir ein dutzend Leute, die einen Artikel, der ins All gehen darf, auswählen.“
Originaltext

“Hold an online edith week or month in which people write about Astronomy. Every article gets its author a ticket. At the end we draw a dozen people who can select an article to go to space.” Zur gesamten Diskussion.

Hier abstimmen!

Votes: a global editathon on Astronomy

  1. --GunChleoc (talk) 12:09, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --JerrySa1 (talk) 13:51, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --Mickey83 (talk) 14:38, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --Vikas Hegde (talk) 09:22, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --Eric.LEWIN (talk) 00:51, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  6. --কৌশিক বিশ্বাস (talk) 10:05, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  7. -- Tanweer (talk) 10:38, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Litlok (talk) 20:47, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  9. ~ Moheen (talk) 22:32, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Metrónomo-Goldwyn-Mayer   19:12, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  11. --Sergey WereWolf (talk) 11:29, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ausgezeichnete Artikel sind der Kern einer anderen Entwurfsidee. Er schlägt vor, eine Auswahl dieser oder vergleichbarer Arten von besonders guten Artikeln in verschiedenen Sprachen zu machen.

Grundidee: „Lasst uns das beste zum besten hochsenden. Alle ausgezeichneten Artikel und Listen in allen Wikipedien. Dies würde einen starken Anreiz für Leute schaffen, deren Lieblingsthemen zu ausgezeichneten Artikeln zu bringen. Stell dir die Art der PR vor, die diese Initiative bekommen würde: ‚Die Wikipedia-Community sendet das Beste, was sie zum anbieten hat zum Mond.‘“
Originaltext

“Let's send up the best of the best. All featured articles and lists on all Wikipedias. This would create a strong intensive for people to bring their favorite topics up to featured status. Imagine the kind of PR this initiative would get: ‘Wikipedia community sends the best it has to offer to the moon.’” Zur gesamten Diskussion.

Hier abstimmen!

  1. --AzorAhai (talk) 15:57, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --JTCEPB (talk) 16:05, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  3. --Liridon (talk) 16:34, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  4. --Arian Talk 17:26, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --Andrew Dalby (talk) 18:22, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  6. --MrBn (talk) 18:52, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  7. --Lsanabria (talk) 19:40, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  8. NMaia (talk) 20:16, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  9. -- Marcus Cyron (talk) 20:37, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  10. -- Фред-Продавец звёзд (talk) 20:57, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  11. 4nn1l2 (talk) 21:06, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  12. MichaelSchoenitzer (talk) 21:31, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  13. GrandCelinien (talk) 22:35, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Colonel Wilhelm Klink (talk) 23:20, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  15. Tetraktys (talk) 23:38, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  16. --Gts-tg (talk) 00:22, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  17. Michaelpires (talk) 02:16, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  18.  Klaas `Z4␟` V:  05:13, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  19. Like tears in rain (talk) 06:52, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Murbaut (talk) 07:14, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  21. --Bspf (talk) 08:24, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  22. --Cavaliere grande (talk) 09:00, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  23. --Lotus 50 (talk) 10:00, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  24. --g (talk) 10:23, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  25. --Coolland (talk) 10:27, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  26. --Stang 11:00, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  27. --Titou (talk 11:13, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  28. --Wintereu 11:36, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  29. --Marica Massaro (talk) 12:14, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  30. --JerrySa1 (talk) 13:51, 11 June 2016 (UTC) Assuming that the number is ~40,000, the rest goes to the next place, third place, etc. I would like to see combinations of proposals.[reply]
  31. --Winstonza (talk) 14:05, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  32. -- Irn (talk) 15:13, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  33. Mathanaharan (talk) 17:17, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  34. José Luiz talk 20:59, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  35. Halibutt (talk) 22:49, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  36. --Yiyi (talk) 23:27, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  37. Jopparn (talk) 03:47, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  38. — xaosflux Talk 05:28, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  39. --Sumita Roy Dutta (talk) 06:38, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  40. --Ανώνυμος Βικιπαιδιστής (talk) 14:45, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  41. --Rupertsciamenna (talk) 18:10, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  42. ~Mable (chat) 07:21, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  43. --Palnatoke (talk) 09:42, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  44. --Zamaster4536 (talk) 12:36, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  45. --Ghilt (talk) 12:36, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  46. --Gerrit (talk) 12:41, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  47. --Fanfwah (talk) 12:45, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  48. --Syced (talk) 12:49, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  49. --AfroThundr3007730 (talk) 12:56, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  50. Braveheart (talk) 13:03, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  51. --Cruifer (talk) 13:27, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  52. --Nahum (talk) 13:44, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  53. --Breogan2008 (talk) 14:05, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  54. -Nyiffi (talk) 14:44, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  55. --RookJameson (talk) 15:23, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  56. -- CreativeC38 (talk) 16:03, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  57. --Zzyzx (talk) 17:45, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  58. -- Zabia (talk) 17:58, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  59. — Antimuonium U wanna talk? 18:08, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  60. Shashwat986 (talk) 18:31, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  61. --Soul Train (talk) 20:31, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  62. --Alvaro Vidal-Abarca (talk) 20:54, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  63. --Moony22 (talk) 21:44, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  64. --Frettie (talk) 21:52, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  65. --Carnildo (talk) 21:53, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  66. --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 22:08, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  67. -- Bora (talk) 23:00, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  68. --Eritain (talk) 00:48, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  69. --Golan's mom (talk) 05:59, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  70. --Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:25, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  71. --কৌশিক বিশ্বাস (talk) 10:13, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  72. --Tanweer (talk) 10:40, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  73. --Fano (talk) 14:04, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  74. --Omnilaika02 (talk) 14:57, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  75. --MRG90 (talk) 17:47, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  76. --White DemΩn (talk) 21:18, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  77. --Lucas (talk) 23:06, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  78. --Rodrigo Padula (talk) 23:28, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  79. --Pablo Darko (talk) 11:22, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  80. --Stepro (talk) 04:07, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  81. --Sir Shurf (talk) 11:10, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  82. --Chiborg (talk) 14:35, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  83. --Paolotacchi (talk) 03:58, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  84. --Samuele2002 (talk) 07:36, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  85. --wL<speak·check> 05:54, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  86. Olsi (talk) 23:38, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  87. --Sergey WereWolf (talk) 11:29, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  88. --3Jo7 (talk) 11:48, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  89. --Florian838 (talk) 20:22, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  90. --Uğurkenttalk 22:06, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  91. --Galobtter (talk) 09:06, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  92. --Pakeha (talk) 14:20, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  93. -- IKHazarika (talk) 05:09, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Let's work on: information about cutting-edge technology

Der Inhalt dieses Vorschlages ist es auf den Inhalt anderer Zeitkapseln zurückzublicken, welche Informationen über die Technologie der damaligen Zeit enthielten.

Grundidee: „(Dies ist wahrscheinlich nicht genug, um den kompletten Datenträger zu füllen, sondern nur um als ein Teil zu dienen.) Was wir heute an Zeitkapseln und alten Dokumenten interessant finden sind Informationen über innovative Technologien und Wissenschaften – das Gramophon, Biplanes, RADAR. Also sollten wir das sicher senden – Seiten mit den verschiedenen Fortschritten in den verschiedenen Wissenschaften und Zweigen der Technik, und vielleicht Inormationen darüber, wie die Erde heute ist.“
Originaltext

“(This probably isn't enough to fill the entire disc, just to serve as a portion.) What we find interesting about time capsules and old documents today is information about 'cutting edge' technology and science – the gramophone, biplanes, RADAR. So surely, we should send that – pages with the most recent advances in different sciences and branches of technology, and maybe information about what the Earth is like today.” Zur gesamten Diskussion.

Hier abstimmen!

Votes: information about cutting-edge technology

  1. --MrBn (talk) 18:56, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  2. 21:15, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
  3. …Bhaskaranaidu (talk) 03:11, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  4. -- Irn (talk) 15:14, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --AfroThundr3007730 (talk) 12:41, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  6. --RookJameson (talk) 15:23, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Shashwat986 (talk) 18:30, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  8. --Miguu (talk) 16:10, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  9. --Chickadee46 (talk) 20:44, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  10. --Sergey WereWolf (talk) 11:29, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Let's work on: Decoding with DNA

Dies schaut buchstäblich über den Menschen. Was soll man auf den Datenträger aufnehmen, falls es dadurch (für irgendjemanden?) möglich wäre, die Menschheit vor dem Aussterben zu bewahren.

Grundidee: „Fokusiere dich auf die Gewährleistung, dass Menschen vom Aussterben zurückgebracht werden und zu gewährleisten, dass, wer auch immer es findet, es für ihn brauchbar ist, selbst wenn es an den menschlichen Sprachen oder an der Software mangelt. Beide werden am besten durchgeführt, durch die Veerwendung von Teilen der Ursprungssprache der Biosphäre der Erde : DNA. Einbezogen der Artikel, ‚Mensch‘, ‚De-Auslöschung‘, ‚menschliche Genome‘, das aktuelle menschliche Genom, lesenswerte und exzellente Artikel über Organismen mit einem DNA-Barcode, das Periodensystem, Sonnensystemteile, Raumschiffartikel und Artikel über Buchstaben, Nummer und die menschliche Sprache. Fülle den verbleibenden Platz mit was auch immer andere stimmen ist als wird als zweites gewertet.“
Originaltext

“Focus on ensuring humans can be brought back from extinction and on ensuring that whoever finds it can make sense of it even if they lack familiarity with human languages or software. Both are best accomplished by including snippets of Earth’s biosphere’s native language: DNA. Include the articles ‘Human’, ‘De-extinction’, ‘Human Genome’, the actual human genome, Good and Featured articles of organisms with a DNA barcode, the periodic table, Solar System bodies, spacecraft articles, and articles on all letters, numbers, and human languages. Fill the remaining space with whatever other proposal is voted second.” Zur gesamten Diskussion.

Hier abstimmen!

Votes: Decoding with DNA

  1. --MrBn (talk) 18:55, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --Aranae (talk) 20:56, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  3. 4nn1l2 (talk) 21:10, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  4. #--Mickey83 (talk) 14:39, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --Evolutionoftheuniverse (talk) 11:30, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  6. --AfroThundr3007730 (talk) 12:42, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  7. --Blackhat999 (talk) 14:54, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  8. --Zzyzx (talk) 17:57, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Shashwat986 (talk) 18:31, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  10. --Anntinomy (talk) 07:59, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Let's work on: Risk of Extinction

Hast du von Listen über gefährdete Arten gehört? Dises Szenario handelt vom sammeln von Inhalt in Bezug auf Dinge, die wahrscheinlich bald nicht mehr da sind.

Grundidee: „Konzentriere dich darauf, Informationen über Dinge, die eine hohe Wahrscheinlichkeit haben, in den nächsten Jahrzehnten, Jahrhunderten oder Jahrtausenden zu verschwinden, zu bewahren. Schließe alle Artikel aller Sprachen der folgenden Kategorien ein (oder gleichwertige – diese Beispiele beziehen sich auf en.wikipedia): Category:IUCN Red List extinct in the wild species, Category:IUCN Red List critically endangered species, Category:IUCN Red List endangered species, Category:IUCN Red List vulnerable species, Category:World Heritage Sites in Danger, und Category:Endangered_languages; und die Arikel auf folgender Liste: UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage Lists. Außerdem die gesammten Wikipedien der Sprachen, die in Category:Endangered_languages zu finden sind.“
Originaltext

“Focus on preserving information on things that have a high probability of disappearing within the next decades, centuries, and millenia. Include all articles in all languages in the following categories (or equivalent – I am working off of en.wikipedia): Category:IUCN Red List extinct in the wild species, Category:IUCN Red List critically endangered species, Category:IUCN Red List endangered species, Category:IUCN Red List vulnerable species, Category:World Heritage Sites in Danger, and Category:Endangered_languages; and the articles on the following list: UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage Lists. Include the entire wikipedia of any language that is found in Category:Endangered_languages.” Zur gesamten Diskussion.

Hier abstimmen!

Votes: Risk of Extinction

  1. --MrBn (talk) 18:54, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  2. --Aranae (talk) 20:57, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  3. 4nn1l2 (talk) 21:12, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  4. …Bhaskaranaidu (talk) 03:11, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  5. --AzorAhai (talk) 09:37, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  6. --Titou (talk) 11:15, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  7. --Bastenbas (talk) 13:18, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  8. -- Irn (talk) 15:14, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  9. --Evolutionoftheuniverse (talk) 22:42, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  10. --Eric.LEWIN (talk) 00:53, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  11. --Miguu (talk) 16:07, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  12. --MRG90 (talk) 17:48, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  13. --Sir Shurf (talk) 11:10, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  14. --Chiborg (talk) 14:36, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  15. --PupyFaki (talk) 18:04, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  16. -- IKHazarika (talk) 05:11, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Let's work on: … wait, no, let's not

Diese Option repräsentiert Fragen über die Grundidee von Wikipedia to the Moon. Sollte sich die weltweite Community engagieren und Inhalte in diesem Projekt bearbeiten? Um diese Stimmen einzubeziehen, habe wir diese Option hinzugefügt.

Grundidee: „Mach dies zu keiner globalen Sache, rufe nicht nach Aufmerksamkeit.“

Originaltext: “Don't make this a global thing, don't call for action.” Zur gesamten Diskussion.

Hier abstimmen!

Votes: … wait, no, let's not

  1. Natuur12 (talk) 18:42, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  2. AndyVolykhov (talk) 20:07, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  3. —MarcoAurelio 10:28, 11 June 2016 (UTC) I'd hope that we had so much enthusiasm on rather more important things such as fixing bugs and admin tools development. Apparently not this year either...[reply]
  4. BethNaught (talk) 08:29, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  5. pne (talk) 16:13, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  6. I don't like any of the options (including this one). Nemo 16:11, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ergebnis

Gratulation! Danke an jeden, der seine Stimme abgegeben hat, wir haben nun ein Szenario, das gewonnen hat, und es ist ”All ausgezeichneten Artikel und Listen aller Wikipedias”. Insgesammt haben 152 einzelne Personen an dieser Entscheidung teilgenommen

What happens now? This result means that Wikipedians from every language community are warmly invited in the upcoming weeks and months to work on their best articles and lists, to be included on the data disc. Details about how to actually do things will follow in the next few days.

For now, thanks to everyone who voted! We put the proposal up on Meta-Wiki on 24 April. The pages were immediately translated by volunteers into more than 60 languages. Many people engaged in the 6-week-discussion about how (and if) to work on this together. Out of 17 scenarios, 10 were available to be voted on over the past 2 weeks. Now the working phase/editing will be open until 31 October, leaving much time to select and improve content, or solve challenges along the way.

The goal is to finish our “Wikipedia time capsule” by 5 December 2016, which is International Volunteers Day.

Anmerkungen

Bitte beachte: Zwei der Szenarien, die diskutiert wurden weiten deren Ideen über Wikipedia selbst hinaus aus, eines schlägt vor, Inhalte aus allen Wikimedia-Projekten zu sammeln, das andere auf Wikidata fokusiert. Beide Szenarien sind geltende Vorschläge, jedoch haben wir explizip für die Wikipedia, nicht für andere Projekte, für dieses Geschenk. Die folgenden sind alle wählbaren Vorschläge:

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_to_the_Moon/Voting/de&oldid=27661514"