Wikimania:Discussions

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Wikimania 2005
Meeting
Wikimania 2005 archive
(on meta)
Participants
Feedback
Blog
Photos
IRC
Broadcasting
Programme
Programme
Presenters
Ongoing Discussions
Call for papers
Organisation
Organisers
Meetings
Helpers
Website & Promotion
Announcements
Communication
Translation
Translation requests
Banner
Event planning
Social events
Party
Network
Practical
Transport
Venue


Welcome! Please contribute to the title articles, to start the roundtable discussions. I hope to see you in Frankfurt, in person, via webcast, or on IRC.... +sj | Translate the Quarto |+

Improving Quality and Reliability of Wikipedia[edit]

  • The Montreal propositions (Propositions to help in solving Wikipedia's most frequently reported weaknesses)
  • Ongoing discussions about Wikipedia 1.0 (see User:David Gerard's contributions, posts by Bruce McHenry, etc.)
  • Peer review discussions : how can distributed peer review work? Can it work better with a salting of part-time experts? With interlocking review committees composed of largely-anonymous contributors? How can whatever peer review is implemented be presented to the rest of the world in a clear and productive manner?

Wiki and freelance knowledge work[edit]

  • Journalism: cf. the German Press Association and their coping with freelancers, Wikinews, the new Gillmor conception of citizen journalism in the US; Indymedia; and OhMyNews. How are new opportunities opening up through wikis, even as others are closing?
  • Publishing: cf. dead-tree reference works, dictionary.com, answers.com, Wikipedia, the Logos Dictionary, WP CD/DVD plans. How are new publishing opportunities emerging, and which old publishing structures are disappearing. How are freelance authors contributing to the body of printed literature and scholarship; and how is this helping and harming various fields?
  • Academia: See the note on freelance authors above. Open Journals, arXiv.org, etc. are expanding the audience for modern journals... how is this helping and harming the state of knowledge and the trust in published works in these fields? How is the institution of peer review in general changing?

Wiki proliferation: the why and how of the divided wikiworld[edit]

  • Why do so many small wikis exist? Is it just that they're easy to make? Do larger wikis forget what's so great about being small?
  • A dozen wikis will be represented at Wikimania. A dozen more will be watching or participating from afar. Tell us about your own project, and why and how it is different from the rest!
MattisManzel 12:03, 1 August 2005 (UTC): I'm very interested in a wikilandia-wide collaboration, that's where the real fun is going to start. See community-wiki: wikilandia, please.

Versioning and distributed data[edit]

  • Is there a way to let people contribute to the wiki without diving into the community? To coordinate a small local wiki about water purity with the Wikipedia category on the same subject?
  • How can we efficiently allow people to download a small set of articles (with histories)? How about letting them synch their local changes with Wikipedia's database?

Research Issues[edit]

Here are some issues I'd love to talk to other folks about, please feel free to add. Fuzheado 02:44, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

  • Heuristics for recognizing patterns in edit histories. Most pressing is an algorithm to determine what constitutes an edit war, vandalism or any other type of "noise" in the system if one's measuring "substantive" edits. (This is hard - even the "I'll know it when I see it" method is problematic, as evidenced by the recent dispute with and departure of RickK.) Much of the research myself, Jakob Voss, Cathy Ma and others do depend on analyzing edit histories and drawing conclusions about article quality. So far, none of the research I've seen has "factored out" the effect of edit wars and vandalism.
  • Classifying types of edits, using diffs or edit summaries. There is a desire to qualitative lexical (spelling, punctuation), factual (numbers, dates), organizational (rearranging), prose (style, tense change), etc. What are the best practices in detecting and classifying these?
  • Comparative approaches to research and modelling article "clusters."' Last year, while comparing entries in a print encyclopedia against the categories in Wikipedia, the toughest part was trying to match up the taxonomical classifications, and the variation in breakdown into subtopics. How are people dealing with this mapping?

Copyright issues[edit]

Following my article on copyright issues (Right or wrong use of intellectual property), I would like going further into this subject, exchanging experiences and opinions with other Wikimedians. I will also participate in a poster with Jean-Baptiste Soufron. Yann 09:50, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

ting[edit]

Tings are real-time online sessions using a collab-editor.