Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia Foundation/2015/Community consultation: Difference between revisions
→zghbkrapv;csnkg[p0g;ozsdfk bnazsdlijfzdfh: new section |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 903: | Line 903: | ||
=== 213.87.139.210's thoughts on question 2 === |
=== 213.87.139.210's thoughts on question 2 === |
||
...write here… |
...write here… |
||
== Collect == <!-- This "subst:REVISIONUSER" bit will add your username automatically. Feel free to leave this line alone. --> |
|||
<small> Response by [[Special:Contributions/Collect|Collect]]</small> |
|||
=== Collect's thoughts on question 1 === |
|||
The trend appears to be going from "written word with thousands of references" into "short declarative statements, capable of being transmitted orally, with visual material as needed" For those users of mobile devices who want "quick information" the articles which are "too long" or which have abstruse wording are going to be avoided, and those which have a larger gallery of images than is currently the rule become of more interest (noting the emphasis on visuals in all the social media now) In addition, we will have to provide an audio version of many articles - which will be a major technological challenge. |
|||
=== Collect's thoughts on question 2 === |
|||
Any thriving (?) project will simply have to reflect quick changes - no one here can make a sensible prediction even five years out. They will, in my view, continue some current trends - a tendency to be more clearly written, and (because of the vagaries of international political situations) likely be more ''carefully'' written in accord with being "pure information" rather than the current "reflect the proper answers" standard. Lastly, they will have to provide a great deal more visual information, which will then have to be far more carefully vetted. |
|||
Revision as of 14:01, 27 February 2015
Tell us what you think
Help shape the future of the Wikimedia Foundation by clicking the button below. Your input is appreciated as we begin this process.
Please remember that all answers are publicly posted and that by submitting them here you are releasing them in the public domain,[1] so that we may use or release them for research or other purposes. Please do not provide private data here.
The questions to be answered are:
- What major trends would you identify in addition to mobile and the next billion users?
- Based on the future trends that you think are important, what would thriving and healthy Wikimedia projects look like?
In order to keep the discussion manageable sections will be archived when there has been no answer for 3 days (72 hours) or more. If the page gets especially large a section may be archived earlier if it appears that the discussion is complete or has moved to a different, related, section.
- Note
- ↑ (Comment/Discussion moved to #Public domain section)
|
Please click here to share your thoughts, or send email to improve@wikimedia.org.
|
|
Tell us what you think
Help shape the future of the Wikimedia Foundation by clicking the button below. Your input is appreciated as we begin this process.
Please remember that all answers are publicly posted and that by submitting them here you are releasing them in the public domain,[1] so that we may use or release them for research or other purposes. Please do not provide private data here.
The questions to be answered are:
- What major trends would you identify in addition to mobile and the next billion users?
- Based on the future trends that you think are important, what would thriving and healthy Wikimedia projects look like?
In order to keep the discussion manageable sections will be archived when there has been no answer for 3 days (72 hours) or more. If the page gets especially large a section may be archived earlier if it appears that the discussion is complete or has moved to a different, related, section.
- Note
- ↑ (Comment/Discussion moved to #Public domain section)
|
|
Please click here to share your thoughts, or send email to improve@wikimedia.org.
|
|
Template loop detected: Talk:2015 Strategy/Community consultation/Day 1 Template loop detected: Talk:2015 Strategy/Community consultation/Day 2 Template loop detected: Talk:2015 Strategy/Community consultation/Day 3 Template loop detected: Talk:2015 Strategy/Community consultation/Day 4
75.143.54.195
Response by 75.143.54.195
75.143.54.195's thoughts on question 2
nên nhớ khi tạo web là phải nên tạo một sự chú ý đặc biệt để được nhiều người biết đén
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "remember when creating web is to create a special attention to be known"
KATHREN THE GREAT
Response by KATHREN THE GREAT
A very different view of the world.
KATHREN THE GREAT's thoughts on question 1
...write here… I have a unique view nationally and globally. I began studying Sociology, Psychology, and Human Behavior in my early 20's as a way to understand the World, Life, the Insanity in my family, and myself. It was a survival instinct which has given me my unique outlook, and beliefs. Although it was "Self Education", my study of these subjects has 32 years, and is still going on. I see the global trends, not in terms of what people will be going gaga over, but in terms of how the current technology craze will effect the course of human history. As was noted, most people use mobile devices a great deal. There are some who use only mobile devices. This is where my view truly splits off from the average.... The current, and future- Mobile only- people are interested in two things...constant Communication; with anyone really. This phenomenon is far less "The future of the internet" and a lot more "The emotional instability of the users themselves. Because of technology... the last couple generations of Ignored, neglected, forgotten, and some even verbally abused... young people turn inward, electronically when their home lives are not what they should be. Constant use of mobile tech is more of an ADDICTION/COMPULSION than a MARKETING TREND. Those who are so attached to their mobile devices generally do not do well in the work place, and therefore climb the corporate ladder slowly if at all. They are not interested in knowledge, research, or READING anything other than texts, and the like. This demographic group will always exist, and are increasing only because the population is increasing. There will be decades when it is larger, and others when it is smaller. They simply replaced the "non-lethal" disgruntled and hard to control teen, the mischief makers. Instead of soothing their angst by smoking pot, hanging out, and spray painting the school buildings... they chat incessantly with other unhappy kids...turned twenty-something, turned thirty-something, and on. The constant "NEW THING" technology we have today will not be able to continue on. True advancements in technology is being made in many corners of the world, and it is only a matter of time before announcement after announcement of major breakthroughs on many fronts... will stop the current trend dead in its tracks. A new reality will be born out of the ashes.... more balanced, and accessible... out of necessity. Our markets, our Governments even, will not be able to continue functioning without becoming more balanced. As for the rest of society, who are not attached to their mobile devices 24/7... The younger crowd tend to like the mobile gadgets a great deal more than those in ; say their 40's and 50's. The smaller devices are harder to use, requires the person to sit in odd positions for hours while the painstakingly attempt to write a business plan, or??? Devices as small as a spiral tablet, to a medium laptop will always be around.... for all us grown-ups whom have gotten tired of the novelty of doing everything on a Blackberry, Iphones, Androids, ect. Its already happening. cells larger than a box of Everlasting Gobstoppers are common. Many of my friends are looking forward to cells that can replace Netbooks, and Kindles, and still be a phone. They simply got tired of lugging a briefcase full of electronics. The most important trend in the future will be for DEPENDABLE, EASY TO ACCESS KNOWLEDGE BASES. AND WEATHER THEY ARE 30 WITH THEIR GOBSTOPPER CELL/KINDEL, OR 50 WITH A LARGE DATA BASE/LAPTOP AT HOME THEY CAN CONNECT TO ANYWHERE... A SINGLE, DEPENDABLE, ACCURATE SOURCE OF INFORMATION WILL BE ON ALL THEIR MINDS. The days of having 200 accounts with different websites are over... it isn't the 'FUN' that counts, its what you can get done, and wht you know.
KATHREN THE GREAT's thoughts on question 2
...write here… I think it would be a single site with a page, or pages of links to every kind of knowledge database available. Perhaps links also to reliable journalism, as in BBC; links to webcams in The U.S. Congress, UK's Parliament, and such, where the latest political silliness is easily accessed. Wikipedia articles that have been verified as accurate, written by people whom have also been verified as experts. For the most part, wikipedia has been a wonderful, groundbreaking success. But as time has past, and more people have become aware of it, along with real experts, and good journalistic writing... there are also major crackpots whom have bluffed their way in, written articles that are not even remotely accurate... and no one at Wiki knows because they too, are not experts in that particular field, nor should they be expected to. I know this would mean a major increase in Wiki staff, so as to pre-qualify those who want to volunteer their time. However; many organizations make use of volunteers and use a verification process. A good friend of mine is a Volunteer Coordinator for a local Hospice. And if that isn't the hardest recruitment job, I don't what would be. She took time to set up online training, and some verification processes she does on line as well. For her field, they also have to fun NCIC checks to ensure the person isn't a felon, or a fake. Other than paying her salary, and miles she is required to drive... there is very little cost to her company. Another trend I see is need for more varied knowledge databases. For instance... I was trying to find a reliable dictionary for First Nation blackfoot, or cree languages. There isn't one. But if your volunteer recruitment was more aggressive... as in making calls to Chief's office, or anyone of several very good Native American, and First Nation Colleges: Explain your purpose of making important knowledge available to all without cost, as knowledge should be... I bet you would have many new recruits you wouldn't have to put through a verification process. In fact- Colleges and Universities world wide are full of knowledgeable people whom might never have thought of contributing, or perhaps the Heads of University departments, who have students needing things to do for extra credit, or simply to keep them out of the Deans hair, they could assign THE WRITING, EDITING, OR DOING VERIFICATION WORK FOR WIKI, Organizations like World Health Organization, who are trying to get information out to the public, might assign Undergrad interns to set up, and update a page, or section on their work. The same goes for Law schools, and students... anywhere getting their name out would help them, there are sure to be individuals ready, willing and able to volunteer. Archeologists, Historians, Language Professors... especially those of dead, or nearly so, native languages. Doing there things, I believe would keep Wiki in the top spot for information. Perhaps open an investigative unit... example. I ran a search on U.S. Government Organizations. I was shocked to see the number there were. What do they do? , Is it redundant, or unnecessary information they are gathering? How much are the employees of each organization being paid-or how much does it cost, overall, to keep it going? Is it important to the functioning of our nation? Who started it? That would be a section all its own, it would have so much information in ti. here is another... There is a Native American, and First Nation reservation just east of the Great Lakes that covers both sides of the border with Canada. They are restricted a great deal when it comes to crossing the river to the others side of their own land. Canada has one set of reasons tfor not allowing them free access, the U.S. has another. I venture very few know about it... but if a Wiki investigator looked into it, and wrote a report for ..."NEGLECTED HUMAN ISSUES WORLDWIDE" section, lots more people would know, and ask questions, and poke at politicians until something is done. These are the ways Wiki, can gain the top spot, and all the respect, and always be known to wvwry family, every school. I did not put my email on my account because I do not want it to be available to everyone. But I will leave it here if anyone wishes to ask me questions, or continue the conversation... it is only meant for top Wiki personal. I do not wish to get emails from volunteers, or others whom have left comments here. And I do check to insure the identity of everyone I corresponded with. I am very willing to share ideas, but only with those who can bring about change, be respectful , and please do not intrude where you are not invited. Thank You. k.ann3824@yahoo.com
212.154.61.126
Response by 212.154.61.126
AI ready wikipedia
212.154.61.126's thoughts on question 2
As the AI progress, wikipedia may play major role as an open database for AI applications. In this context, the database has to be organized and created to support applications to connect, search and even modify it. Such as: "apple" fruit, yellow or red color, eatable, cultivated,... authors should specify these using the html database interface. And also several silhouette drawings(or even a 3d model since there are many 3d artists in this planet) can be useful for future pattern recognition projects. Thanks.
202.3.92.218
Response by 202.3.92.218
202.3.92.218's thoughts on question 2
i recommend to make gallery for sharing information on real time. that could be very helpful for a armatures to develop their skills and able to get a confidence from experts. who knows, you(the founder of wikipedia) could be a winner of the Nobel Prize. lol
My Thoughts
Response by 203.104.11.21
You could probably start by adding in a questionare so people cauld ask what every questions instead of having to read them. cause most of it people cant get feedback on assignments on this sight cause it doesnt have what they need. And also you should have more information on the topics illistrated in your website, there is NOT enough.
173.58.94.127
Response by 173.58.94.127
The information contained in the articles I read are of great importance to people of Norwegian ancestry. With 12 grandcgildren and 9 great grandchildren you can be sure this info wuill be passed along to most all, of them. While are all, patriotic Amercans we have not forgotten our great heritage, Today Norway is the most prosperous country on the planet and according to United Nations one of the most livable and desireable countries inthe world. Granpa Holter came over here in 1895 and would be amazed at the way things have changed since his day.It's to bad there are so few of us in the world!
Rolf Holter
87.209.111.167
Response by 87.209.111.167
87.209.111.167's thoughts on question 1
More emphasis on Wikimedia commons and on translation. The upload wizard is convenient for adding languages.
The gap in know how is big.
87.209.111.167's thoughts on question 2
Bril>
108.56.204.224's thoughts on question 1
"And then there are the powerful pharmaceutical interests that deftly use Wikipedia to distribute their propaganda and control the message. They maniacally troll specific Wikipedia pages to promulgate positive but sometimes-false information about medicines, vaccines, and their manufacturers; and delete negative but often-true information about the same topics. They unabatedly violate Wikipedia’s own rules and disparage scientists, advocates, and reporters who research medical and vaccine controversies by controlling their Wikipedia biographical pages. Conversely, they scrub all of the controversial information from the biographical pages of those pharmaceutical and research officials whom they are paid to defend. This phenomenon is surely one factor contributing to shameful study results that compared several Wikipedia articles about medical conditions to peer-reviewed research papers, and found that Wikipedia contradicted medical research 90 percent of the time. You may never fully trust what you read on Wikipedia again. Nor should you. | SPIN CYCLE
Attkisson, Sharyl (2014-11-04). Stonewalled: My Fight for Truth Against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation, and Harassment in Obama's Washington (Kindle Locations 920-928). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition. "
108.56.204.224's thoughts on question 2
I love what you guys do, but sometimes not "how" you do it
218.94.132.84
Response by 218.94.132.84
218.94.132.84's thoughts on question 1
建立兴趣圈子、兴趣小组机制，把拥有共同兴趣点的高品质用户聚拢起来。积极开展众多的线下交流活动、定制品把维基百科打造成为一个拥有众多粉丝的明星品牌。维基百科网友见面会，网友野营、旅行聚会，带有维基百科大佬签字的维基百科纪念衫、纪念杯子、维基百科限量精装版图书、邀请学术领域顶尖专家与幸运网友共进晚餐。——维基百科的权威性、知识的广泛并不具有唯一性，例如，百度百科已经成为维基百科一个强有力的对手。我们只有把握时代的脉搏，与时俱进才能活出我们自己的风格。总之，想在中国打出市场一方面需要注重本土化，另一方面需要会炒作。
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "Build interest circles, interest groups mechanisms to share a common point of interest, high-quality user gather together. Actively carry out exchanges under many lines, fixed products Wikipedia build into a star brand has many fans. Wikipedia will meet friends, friends camping, travel party, Wikipedia commemorative T-shirt with a big brother signed Wikipedia, the Memorial Cup, Wikipedia limited edition hardcover books, invited leading experts in the academic field and lucky friends for dinner. - Wikipedia, the authority does not have extensive knowledge of the unique, for example, Baidu encyclopedia Wikipedia has become a strong opponent. We only grasp the pulse of the times, the times in order to live out our own style. In short, want to hit the market in China need to focus on the one hand, localization, on the other hand need to be speculation."
218.94.132.84's thoughts on question 2
1、引进等级激励机制，对于优秀的编辑人才，给予等级上的、头衔上的或者证书形式的荣誉奖励。 2、邀请学术专业领域人士、行业专家对各种条目进行指导和顾问，使之更具有权威性。 3、与微博大V、企业开展友好互利的合作。我认为不接受企业名义的赞助，不放置企业广告，不能代表需要拒绝一切与企业的合作。我觉得企业有可能会成为维基百科的助推器。
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "1, introduce a grading system for editors with outstanding editing skills, give awards to them in the form of grades, prefixes, or certificates.
- 2, invite academic professionals and industry experts for guidance and consultancy on a variety of articles, to make it more authoritative.
- 3, develop friendly and mutually beneficial cooperation with micro blog authorized users and enterprises. I think that not accepting sponsorship from enterprises and not putting ads does not mean that refusing cooperation with any enterprises. I think the enterprises could become Wikipedia's booster."
71.89.72.163
Response by 71.89.72.163
add more swag
RaidenB1
Response by RaidenB1
RaidenB1's thoughts on question 1
add more flash stuff
RaidenB1's thoughts on question 2
none
107.152.11.3
Response by 107.152.11.3 === 107.152.11.3's thoughts on question 1 === I am not qulified to answer this. "In order to know your enemy, you must be your enemy." Sun Tzu
107.152.11.3's thoughts on question 2
Most educational institutions do not recognize any wikimedia projects as credible despite my arguments. As a student whenever I am researching something the first result is always a very in depth wikimedia article. If students could use wikipedia as a source many more people would visit the site. A study / poll might need to be done on what teachers believe would make wikipedia a credible source. I know i have turned to visiting the wikipedia sources as my cited information.
- Hello, @107.152.11.3:, Did you check our education programs page before? We have been running an education program in collaboration with different volunteers and institutes. The program doesn't promote Wikipedia as a source, but rather encourages more academics to contribute, understand the dynamics of how WP works, and help add more cited resources. --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 10:56, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
76.169.56.120
Response by 76.169.56.120
76.169.56.120's thoughts on question 2
First thought, is make it easier to add articles. This is archaic. Second, Images are becoming more and more the thing of the internet. Make it easier for people to add pictures (with text and suggested use) and then develop ways of sorting them for value and categorization (which article) Third, Wikipedia needs to become as much an educational tool as knowledge source. There is a big difference and only some of your articles are really educational. Fourth, Reduce commercial/advertising entries. Too many Companies, sports organizations, use Wikipedia as a documentation tool or worse, for advertising.
- Hello, regarding editing articles, did you know about our visual editor? It is coming soon, and is supposed to make life easier. As for content, it is controlled via these policies. Thanks --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 11:08, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
128.199.41.249
Response by 128.199.41.249
128.199.41.249's thoughts on question 2
Почему админы сего сайта не русские люди?Почему вы не админы еврейской вики?
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "Why admins of this site is not the Russian people? Why do not Jewish wiki admins?"
202.100.20.110
Response by 202.100.20.110
202.100.20.110对问题一的想法
云端的出现可能意味着互联网会更加智能化
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "The emergence of the Internet cloud will likely mean more intelligent"
202.100.20.110对问题二的想法
对于移动客户端的设计需要更加符合当地用户的使用习惯，版面设计应更加丰富。对于涉及到政治敏感问题有可能影响维基在特殊地区的推广，一定要坚持还原事件真相，不可委曲求全。
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "For mobile client design needs to be more in line with the local user's habits, the layout should be more abundant. For politically sensitive issues related to the possible impact on special areas wiki promotion, we must adhere to restore the truth, not compromises."
76.11.94.94
Response by 76.11.94.94
76.11.94.94's thoughts on question 1
It seems the future of Wikipedia was debated in exactly these terms years ago. Some best cases and worst cases for Wikipedia growth were outlined. Those facing the one billionth user, even 4.5 billionth user were a matter of concern as early as 2010. Is the five hundred millionth user really "the worst user of English on Earth", making vocabulary and even a defining vocabulary the major concerns? Why was she or he never named as the hundred millionth user was? Interestingly, governance did evolve more or less as predicted then, though the ideal Wikimedia board of trustees is always a work in progress.
Some of this stuff is prescient. Clearly problems arising from systemic bias of Wikipedia were anticipated at that time, and conflicts like the recent one between gamers and feminists. The idea of a "natural point of view" anticipates conflicts like science versus religion perspectives that cannot be easily resolved by NPOV alone but require intervention at all twelve leverage points to ensure that neutral editors familiar with science and philosophy have some status. What is rather amazing is that Jimmy Wales is arguing adamantly against the very idea of systemic bias at that time, Larry Sanger is arguing adamantly against needing some referees with priveleged perspective, but both reversed their positions utterly. Florence Devouard was probably most reponsible for recognizing the systemic bias issue as Wikimedia Chair, setting up ArbCom in its current form, and it seems she was doing so largely in reference to this material from 2003-10.
Of all this the questions in Five hundred millionth user seem most interesting, and they point to the more extensive discussion on vocabulary/defining vocabulary and systemic bias of Wikipedia more expansively those listed in Wikipedia:systemic bias. Perhaps a project to extensively update the list of systemic biases would be worthwhile to start?
76.11.94.94's thoughts on question 2
The best cases and wackier visions for Wikipedia from that same time period are much more interesting in the present context than more prosaic "The future of Wikipedia" nuts and bolts discussions. Perhaps expanding a best case list and reviewing value systems that apply to Wikimedia projects, what motivates users for instance, how they achieve autonomy, mastery, purpose, satisfaction, etc., would be a useful start?
It seems Wikipedia is a thriving and healthy project now largely because of these early debates. Maybe this structure of laying out visions, threats, best cases, worst cases and an updated status quo had merit? Keeping them updated over ten years or so surely would have given more useful perspective now.
Perhaps the history of Wikipedia needs to be rewritten also to reflect the fact that people arguing against Wales and Sanger had probably more influence on the project's current form than they ever did. And that Florence Devouard is an organizational genius, if only for getting all these loons to work together. An honest assessment of history is a very good place to start with any vision. Devouard "Anthere" wrote the main articles on twelve leverage points in English and French originally so perhaps those organizing principles were important in the shift from squabbling trolls (Wales, Sanger, "24", etc.) to a more standard NGO board as Wikimedia has now.
And would be equally or more important in future evolution.
74.196.105.62
Response by 74.196.105.62
74.196.105.62's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
74.196.105.62's thoughts on question 2
...write here…I love this. we all have our own thoughts on what is real and true. i know what happened here. and it seems very unreal .
Menschenrechte, Religion, Frieden
217.7.216.10
Response by 217.7.216.10
217.7.216.10's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.7.216.10's thoughts on question 2
Es gibt immer mehr Konflikte auf der Welt. Menschenrechte werden teils mit Füßen getreten, Religionen werden missverstenden. Ein gutter Beitrag von WIKI wäre, eigene Rubriken für "Menschenrechte" und "Religionen der Welt" damit jeder Mensch weiß was man ihm zumuten kann und was nicht (in den "neuen Regionen" wie Teile Asiens, Afrika und Südamerika fehlt generelles Wissen über Menschenrechte) Die Religionen sollten auch eine eigene Rubrik bekommen. Denn nur wer das Denken seines Gegenüber kennt, kann ihn auch verstehen.
Filceolaire
Response by Filceolaire
Filceolaire's thoughts on question 1
The commodification of knowledge. A future where the only knowledge that gets taught is that which can be tested by a multiple choice question. Please not follow this trend. I am an active participant in wikidata but I am conscious that all the metadata in even the best wikidata page put together would barely make a stub article. Continue to develop wikidata and use it to fill infoboxes. Make sure the lead sections really are beginner level summaries of the articles. Make both of these available to others to reuse in varied formats but never forget that these are just appetisers for the main article.
A specific trend I can foresee is the collapse of the school textbook industry, replaced by CC-BY-SA licensed textbooks, compiled on wikiversity, based on wikipedia articles, with new editions reviewed and certified each year by a teams of educators appointed by the various ministries of education. This may take a little longer to happen in Texas.
Another thing I can foresee is "Voice references". WMF has already done work on this and must think of more ways to incorporate information for which there is not a traditional academic reference - first hand accounts of events by the people who were there, quick before they die - a 'Wiki loves grannies' project. This may have to be filtered through another project - Commons perhaps or maybe WikiNews - but it is, I believe, important work which the WMF may well be better placed to do than anyone else.
Filceolaire's thoughts on question 2
Thriving and healthy wikimedia projects will have their content reused in a thousand different formats with different skins available even to not logged in users, with portals promoted to act as the front page of specialised sections, with sites offering verified versions as school textbooks. Think of Open street maps. One set of data available through lots of different routes with corrections and additions steered back to the central repository and made available to all the other versions. We have the start of this with the Google graph reusing our info; in future there will be a load of other sites doing this just as many already use photos from Commons - Wikipedia as a public utility.
What is important is the quality of the information in the articles. Google has recently stated that they will start offering medical advice on search pages which has been checked for quality. This will be the holy grail in future, in my opinion - quality - and as other sites get corrupted by their need to kowtow to advertisers I believe that there is a real niche that wikipedia is poised to fill, supported by the other WMF sites. Many people complain about the quality of wikipedia but look at what they write. Mostly they are complaining that we are failing to live up to the high standards we set ourselves. Few are claiming that others do the job better.
Please murder all deletionists.
203.213.82.212
Response by 203.213.82.212
203.213.82.212's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
203.213.82.212's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Guy Macon
Response by Guy Macon
Guy Macon's thoughts on question 1
As background , I would call your attention to Page Weight Matters, by Chris Zacharias:
- "Three years ago, while I was a web developer at YouTube, one of the senior engineers began a rant about the page weight of the video watch page being far too large. The page had ballooned to as high as 1.2MB and dozens of requests. This engineer openly vented that “if they can write an entire Quake clone in under 100KB, we have no excuse for this!” Given that I agreed with him and I was excited to find a new project, I decided to champion the cause of getting the YouTube watch page to weigh in under 100KB. On the shuttle home from San Bruno that night, I coded up a prototype. I decided to limit the functionality to just a basic masthead, the video player, five related videos, a sharing button, a flagging tool, and ten comments loaded in via AJAX. I code-named the project “Feather”.
- "Even with such a limited set of features, the page was weighing in at 250KB. I dug into the code and realized that our optimization tools (i.e. Closure compilation) were unable to exclude code that was never actually used in the page itself (which would be an unfair expectation of any tool under the circumstances). The only way to reduce the code further was to optimize by hand the CSS, Javascript, and image sprites myself. After three painstaking days, I had arrived at a much leaner solution. It still was not under 100KB though. Having just finished writing the HTML5 video player, I decided to plug it in instead of the far heavier Flash player. Bam! 98KB and only 14 requests. I threaded the code with some basic monitoring and launched an opt-in to a fraction of our traffic.
- "After a week of data collection, the numbers came back… and they were baffling. The average aggregate page latency under Feather had actually INCREASED. I had decreased the total page weight and number of requests to a tenth of what they were previously and somehow the numbers were showing that it was taking LONGER for videos to load on Feather. This could not be possible. Digging through the numbers more and after browser testing repeatedly, nothing made sense. I was just about to give up on the project, with my world view completely shattered, when my colleague discovered the answer: geography.
- "When we plotted the data geographically and compared it to our total numbers broken out by region, there was a disproportionate increase in traffic from places like Southeast Asia, South America, Africa, and even remote regions of Siberia. Further investigation revealed that, in these places, the average page load time under Feather was over TWO MINUTES! This meant that a regular video page, at over a megabyte, was taking more than TWENTY MINUTES to load! This was the penalty incurred before the video stream even had a chance to show the first frame. Correspondingly, entire populations of people simply could not use YouTube because it took too long to see anything. Under Feather, despite it taking over two minutes to get to the first frame of video, watching a video actually became a real possibility. Over the week, word of Feather had spread in these areas and our numbers were completely skewed as a result. Large numbers of people who were previously unable to use YouTube before were suddenly able to.
- "Through Feather, I learned a valuable lesson about the state of the Internet throughout the rest of the world. Many of us are fortunate to live in high bandwidth regions, but there are still large portions of the world that do not. By keeping your client side code small and lightweight, you can literally open your product up to new markets."
Source: [ http://blog.chriszacharias.com/page-weight-matters ]
(Emphasis added, capitalization in original.)
(Reproduced under fair use: "The first factor is regarding whether the use in question helps fulfill the intention of copyright law to stimulate creativity for the enrichment of the general public, or whether it aims to only 'supersede the objects' of the original for reasons of personal profit.")
In addition to the above, keeping our pages small and lightweight will have a significant impact on the energy we and our readers use and thus the amount of carbon we add to the atmosphere. --Guy Macon (talk) 07:03, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Guy Macon's thoughts on question 2
Given the above, we need a project with the specific goal of serving pages with the fewest bytes and requests possible. --Guy Macon (talk) 07:03, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
1.000.000.000 of people-in the 2025 - platform extensive for argoment science logical mathematic
151.61.250.37
Response by 151.61.250.37
151.61.250.37's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
151.61.250.37's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
I like
217.87.119.89
Response by 217.87.119.89
217.87.119.89's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.87.119.89's thoughts on question 2
...Ich mag die Seite weil wegen isso.
Strategy 2015
Anonym's thoughts on question 1
Да, мобильные устройства очень быстро развиваются и распространяются! Неплохо было бы если вы разработаете приложения для таких платформ как: iOS, Android, Symbian, Windows phone... Это будет большим плюсом для вашей стратегии 2015.
Anonym's thoughts on question 2
Wikimedia развивался бы очень быстро если вы разработаете приложения для устройств и улучшите дизайн сайтов wikimedia & wikipedia...
5.138.64.137
Response by 5.138.64.137
5.138.64.137's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
5.138.64.137's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
175.137.158.140
Response by 175.137.158.140
175.137.158.140's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
If Wikipedia was an mobile app, it will be like a walking encyclopedia. It will be much easier for users to find out the answers that has been bugging them for hours.
But that is not the issue here, the issue is that Wikipedia has always been deemed an unreliable source for school, college and university. Reasons may be because of the easy accessibility of the website and information available on Wikipedia.
Imagine if wikipedia was made into a popular and convenient mobile app. Everyone will be using the app for answers not only for personal self-enhancement usage but also for destructive usage such as cheating during a test or assignment. It also makes people lazy to search for answers the good old fashion way.
But long story short, people are getting lazy nowadays and there's no changing. Either way the Wikipedia mobile app will be a big hit without any innovation and with minimum effort, younger generations will be reliant on Wikipedia on EVERYTHING and so begins the destruction of the human race.
- We do have apps, for both Andriod and iOs. Thanks! --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 11:29, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
=== 175.137.158.140's thoughts on question 2 ===c
...write here…
Google glasses? How about WIKI GLASSES??? Genius....
NO MORE COMMENTS!!!
Sinjoro Ajnulo
Sinjoro Ajnulo's thoughts on question 1
I think in the coming decade:
- world will be more polarized and more mathematical than ever.
- the number of active Wikipedia editors will increase.
- the rate of increase of quality of content will remain same.
- Wikipedia will survive.
Sinjoro Ajnulo's thoughts on question 2
I think Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that is:
- free as in trying (although we all know yoda’s opinion on this.)
- initiated by the right people.
- edited by both people who should and shouldn’t edit.
- merely a gift of the editors to the world.
I think Wikimedia movement may be interested in strategies for a better:
- fundraising (I’ll skip)
- better management/operating (I’ll skip)
- better content (I could bite)
1. Grandma's badge
An apolitical way to gain and share knowledge constitutes a frame of reference on its own, which is required to define any “movement” (or motion) since there are no absolute frames of reference, which was Einstein's way of being apolitical I suspect. I suggest editors let their "apolitical" reference be approximately the most knowledge-deprived portion of Wikipedia's audience, and on that purpose, a "grandma's badge" could be awarded to the ones who have a stronger command on the living force, in the physical sense of course, in Latin if you want. I know quite a lot of people are badge freaks around here, but grandma's badge would be THE badge: "You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother". You did triple major (preferably one soft plus two hard) in a platinum grade school, and have a verified IQ of 140? That’s quite alright, and it should not be too difficult for you to sympathize with the idea that editing Wikipedia is not a challenge to understand, it is a challenge to explain (although these two can be viewed as a bi-instability for editors).
I might also suggest that all baby editors learn to walk sufficiently well (or develop “x-ray vision”) before they learn directions (or play north & south, preferably on C64).
Wikipedia is not moving? It should.
We don't care in which direction? We should.
We can't understand the direction? Nobody can.
We can't do anything? Anything but what we are doing.
Do heaven and earth move? Sure.
(Did Jupiter really sleep with his sister? \\/o/man, please!)
2. Wikipedia school of defensive arts: From inception to extraction no longer than a hundred years!
I have a sister, who is studying law in one of those eevee schools. She showed me a talk page the other day, and said "if you are looking for something, there is a good chance it is in the talk pages", although I suspect she said that because she knew me well. Frankly spoken, I have no idea why she was reading that article, or the editor chitchat about the subject matter. It is (probably) true that we share more than 45% (and less than 56%) of our genes, but it reminded me that I've never seen my father, and neither did she. After I read the section, I immediately thought about an improvement to Wikipedia: I remember somebody said something about forming a team for community engagement in one of below comments. I could suggest forming another specialized team to extract case-studies from talk pages to constitute a set of examples for interested editors, to illustrate the kind of editors that could help Wikipedia more effectively than others; don't worry, information in public domain can be modified freely; free as in freedom. Another reason not to worry is, as Lincoln said, "We cannot escape history".
I think Wikipedia doesn't need all kinds of editors. Let me make absolutely clear, if I can (this would be the time I wasn’t being neutral), that "neutrality" hasn't been found yet among fundamental forces of nature, and if it had been, that would not only be "big" but it could also perturb the concept of "mission", although I'd be perfectly comfortable with Wikipedia being mission-less. In fact, having a sense of fundamental neutrality at the moment of this writing would be even better; it would be like teaching a graduate level thermodynamics course, and talking about reversible processes as if you have seen one.
3. Public-in-contact rating
I saw somebody suggested public rating of articles. I also seem to remember the words twitter and youtube for some reason. I don't think public rating would work for "freedom" in Wikipedia scale, although a smart guy, who is living in somebody else’s shoes, could keep working on his mutating algorithm (or whatever). I think public wouldn’t give a "free" indicator. Perhaps a good-enough and easy to implement solution could be to involve editors' (non-editor) folks to rate articles; they are ‘public’ after all. Think of it like those human-computer interaction people hanging around with a prototype, letting people touch it and feel it you know, or like code-breaking challenges published publicly in gchq website, if you will. Of course, no editors should turn this into a community service; keep it to a dozen reviewer per editor, which would effectively enlarge the reviewer space by an order-of-magnitude. Knowing how to serve would be a critical requirement of community service, I imagine, although I’m fairly certain I don’t know how to do it properly.
4. Emphasis on cross-reivew: review of articles on hard-sciences by softies and vice-versa
I don’t know about articles on hard-sciences, but articles on social sciences quite often make me ask the question “is there a point in writing fifty billion pages if less than half will make sense?” I guess a philosopher could always have a statistician handy, although I always vote yes for people from maths, physics, EECS, and astro/aero disciplines.
[[Special:MyLanguage/#REDIRECT[[]]]]
203.25.82.62
Response by 203.25.82.62
203.25.82.62's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
203.25.82.62's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
- REDIRECT[[
]]#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[1]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
50.174.102.18
Response by 50.174.102.18
50.174.102.18's thoughts on question 1
- A dramatic shift in education with a smaller percent of people able to attend/afford college, more frequent need for career (re)education, and education in much smaller increments, esp. in technical domains.
- More people reading articles not in their mother tongue.
50.174.102.18's thoughts on question 2
Redesign the structure of Wikipedia articles -- esp. technical articles -- for more effective pedagogy and to speak to a general audience. Readers with a wide range of backgrounds should be able to understand Wikipedia articles.
Many current Wikipedia articles in technical domains such as mathematics, engineering, and science begin with a definition that's difficult or impossible to understand by people who are not already steeped in the topic. The first paragraph often depends on citations to several other Wikipedia and Wiktionary pages, making the reader have to trace through a web of interdependent articles. Too few articles begin at the beginning.
After the beginning, such articles assume the reader understands graduate level mathematics. They assume the reader already knows and remembers the mathematical notation used in the article, even though mathematicians do not agree on notation.
Some Wikipedia discussion pages debate whether the purpose of the article is to "inform" vs. "teach." That's silly. You cannot inform people about a new (to them) topic without teaching! You don't have to test them on it (although I won't entirely discard that idea) or connect them to other students, but you do have to explain it.
Article design for pedagogy:
- Write for a general audience, including people without a college education and people from other disciplines than the article.
- Don't lose the reader in a web of articles to get started. Begin at the beginning or link to an introduction/background article for that domain.
- Orient the reader with some background and the simplest possible explanation possible first, then fill in more detail, then give a precise definition. Do not begin with a precise definition that's only readable by experts.
- Don't require more mathematics or other background than necessary.
- Introduce the notation used.
- ...
Wikipedia design for pedagogy:
- Add material and structure that's broader than a single article but richer than a portal to many articles. This should organize micro-domains into approachable batches with background, recommended reading order for several articles, and connective material. Minimize external and forward references in these recommended articles.
- Add how-to articles?
- ...
offline condensed wiki dictionary
91.99.224.116
Response by 91.99.224.116
91.99.224.116's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
91.99.224.116's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
i think you'd better build an offline condensed wiki dictionary .
84.144.66.72
Response by 84.144.66.72
84.144.66.72s Gedanken zu Frage 1
...bitte hier angeben...
84.144.66.72s Gedanken zu Frage 2
...bitte hier angeben... penis
24.21.218.73
Response by 24.21.218.73
24.21.218.73's thoughts on question 1
One trend might be toward increasing use of smart bots not only to correct grammar and sort categories but also to write text, cite references, and automatically archive every external link. There may come a time when the encyclopedia encounters a Humpty Dumpty moment where we are not in control of content. Another trend might be toward commercialization of the encyclopedia where content is controlled by marketers. In some parts of the world our content might be managed by the ministry of information. For now, the encyclopedia is well connected online, but we could be just another image of Myspace before Facebook was invented.
24.21.218.73's thoughts on question 2
A thriving and healthy Wikimedia is able to avoid the eventualities mentioned in my answer to question one, but it takes a village.
Effect on the internet as a result of increased numbers of users, and particularly with the use of mobile devices:
2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66
Response by 2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66
2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66's thoughts on question 1
...write here…You have asked an interesting question. My initial thought reverts back to what is common today. My answer is opinionated. It seems that an increasing number of people wage in on subjects to which they are not necessarily adequately acquainted. This insures that their response will be less than useful. It is also disconcerting to read responses from people who are grammatically incoherent.
I would guess that you are going to see more of the same, thus making intelligence greatly masked, if not entirely missing.
Richard G. Alps, Colorado, USA
2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66's thoughts on question 2
...write here…I dare not think. Mass confusion??
UI and search engine
Response by 103.242.150.17
103.242.150.17's thoughts on question 1
UI and search engine - people like nice looking pages to make it interesting
103.242.150.17's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
59.136.210.211
Response by 59.136.210.211
質問1への私の考え
...例えば、間違った情報を共有してしまうと正しい情報が認識されにくくなると思う。私は政治家が隠しているUFO技術を公開して欲しいと強く願う。UFO技術を戦争に使用することは許されないと思うからだ。それから正しい翻訳ソフトが発達して欲しいけど、それは難しいと思う。...
質問2への私の考え
...ウィキペディアは今後、様々な変化をしたとしても商業目的でページを閲覧されるのは好ましくないと思う。知識を共有するという点でウィキペディアは全ての人に平等の権利をもたらす事ができる重要な場所になると思う。...
91.90.65.192
Response by 91.90.65.192
91.90.65.192's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
91.90.65.192's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
1: More people willing to learn 2: Honestly you guys are doing great, just keep on doing what you're doing. One thing though, idk how to fix it, is making it so that not everybody can edit everything. Kind of a cooldown system where if your edits get thumbs ups for factual correctness you would get a shorter cooldown, and if got downvotes, for for example miss-information, you would get a longer cooldown.
more pawn
78.33.14.82
Response by 78.33.14.82
78.33.14.82's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
78.33.14.82's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
202.65.183.3
Response by 202.65.183.3
202.65.183.3's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
202.65.183.3's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Uring mangagawa hukbong mapagpalaya
Mrwellnaulak
Response by Mrwellnaulak
Mrwellnaulak's thoughts on question 1
...For the Zo people/Zomi family to harmonise in a nation. The Zo people were three groups; Kuki,Chin,Mizo. The kukies is Zomi and absorb some of the clan. The chin is also said itself zomi and absorb some clan. The mizo also absorb some clan by a key. In this therefore why i see the zo people cannot harmonise in a nation in any one of these. Besides,among these three groups(Kuki,Mizo,Chin) equal number of members cannot enter in the groups. But the new constraction is greatly opposed. My action is all the distinction are suppress with human right.
Mrwellnaulak's thoughts on question 2
...Protection of to distinc important events,culture,etc
88.247.104.79
Response by 88.247.104.79
88.247.104.79's thoughts on question 1
...tulis di sini...
88.247.104.79's thoughts on question 2
...tulis di sini...
KISITLAMAYI KALDIRIN. İSTEYEN İSTEDİĞİ KADAR BİLGİ VEREBİLSİN. BU REKLAM DAHİ OLSA. EĞER BİR YERDE KISIT VARSA ORADA BÜYÜMEDE DE KISTLAMA VARDIR DEMEKTİR BENCE
ngb uuj
117.0.33.133
Response by 117.0.33.133
117.0.33.133's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
117.0.33.133's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
79.241.158.174
Response by 79.241.158.174
79.241.158.174's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
79.241.158.174's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
ihr seit behindert
Jdz mediA Spitfire Chin gang going in Hold tight Tbone on cam nottingham shottingham begin
46.18.178.21
Response by 46.18.178.21
46.18.178.21's thoughts on question 1
...write here… People need to know about this. It has changed my life for the better and it can others too if you give it a chance
46.18.178.21's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
81.218.251.251
Response by 81.218.251.251
81.218.251.251's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
81.218.251.251's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
i very likee
159.255.77.74
Response by 159.255.77.74
159.255.77.74's thoughts on question 1
Продолжение массового перехода на мобильные устройства
159.255.77.74's thoughts on question 2
Развитие мобильной версии сайта и приложений для разных мобильных платформ,возможно больше проектов где возможно задействовать участников без регистрации
62.178.250.9
Response by 62.178.250.9
62.178.250.9's thoughts on question 1
- Further "proletarization" - more mass, less class. (I'm not sure if this is the right word.) International public use of Internet started mostly between students and university staff, tech faculties first. Then big companies (and their employees) joined and Internet changed. Then small companies and their employees joined and Internet changed. Then most of them got Internet at home, so spouse and kids and their friends joined - and Internet changed again. Then my mother and her friends joined, and Internet didn't change much ... well it did for the kids now getting daily e-mails from their parents ;)
I'd say Internet will change, the mass will grow, but the quality won't grow that much. Now all age groups participate - and it will take less time for the older to join within that next billion.
- More global village effects. Which means more opportunity to experience other cultures, but also more war on the Internet, more spam, more scam.
62.178.250.9's thoughts on question 2
- Try to build a natural project / social structure to answer the challenges. Stick to high standards of open society. Avoid bureaucratic approaches, avoid and prevent bureaucratic mindset. Fight racism. Always show quality. Stay true to the goals. Provide for the people to enable their development and exchange.
- Some of the answers above give very good ideas about what to do. E.g. online education for editors where they can learn about the best practices, about caveats and pitfalls.
62.255.14.178
Response by 62.255.14.178
62.255.14.178님의 질문 1에 대한 생각
...여기 써 주세요…
62.255.14.178님의 질문 2에 대한 생각
...여기 써 주세요… yah sick mate this is seckk!!!!
2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62
Response by 2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62
2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62s Gedanken zu Frage 1
Bedeutend wäre wenn die nächste Milliarde persönliche Gegebenheiten gleichermaßen einfließen lassen könnte als nur das rein Wissenschaftliche Denken, Das bloße ansammeln von Wissen ohne den Spiegel der Person erzeugt zwar reines Uran sollte aber die Pluto "Seelische" Umsetzung implementieren.Ob das Echtzeit Internet mit Lichtgeschwindigkeit ab 2020 Seelische Gerechtigkeit erzeugt ist lediglich zu hoffen meier Meinung nach lediglich eine Veränderung im Unveränderlichen. Seelische Gesundheit bleibt auch nach 2020 eine Persönliche Realität und lässt sich nicht ausschließlich in Plutonisches Plasma transformieren.
2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62s Gedanken zu Frage 2
Erfolgreich ist wenn der Leser dieser Zeilen bedenkt das nicht nur eine Html Seite einen Kopf und Körper hat und es ein privat leben in Lichtgeschwindigkeit schon jetzt gibt. Selbstlernende Computersysteme erzeugen nicht immer die Luft die der evulutionären Reise der Seele behagt.
Rberchie
Response by Rberchie
Rberchie's thoughts on question 1
...write here…I think Wikipedia should be more audio visual for instance we can have a software fro reading articles again some articles may need self explanatory videos.
Rberchie's thoughts on question 2
...write here…Thriving Wikimedia project should have audio visuals and disability friendly apps.--Rberchie (talk) 10:20, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
78.174.63.56
Response by 78.174.63.56
78.174.63.56's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
78.174.63.56's thoughts on question 2
... get rid of your ass faggot mods and man up Wales. Democracy and internet does not go too well you know, take the harness and tame wikipedia…
123.236.196.70
Response by 123.236.196.70
123.236.196.70's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
I dont see any major trend other than those mentioned.
123.236.196.70's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
(1) Writing / editing articles should be easy. I find it quite technical and think it requires website programming knowledge.
(2) More stress and importance should be given to authenticity of articles published.
87.255.31.241
Response by 87.255.31.241
87.255.31.241's thoughts on question 1
публичные компьютеры
87.255.31.241's thoughts on question 2
вики-сферы - рабочие зоны.
203.205.28.13
Response by 203.205.28.13
203.205.28.13's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
203.205.28.13's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
I am a junior student( grade 7) and I often use wikipedia to find information, but sometimes I have to find on another webpages.With me, instead of asking your visitors do add information, why don't you study or hire some historians and scientists to add your correct and reliable information? Once I am looking for information about bat and the information is not enough. Keeping checking Wikipedia, asking your customers their thoughts(like this), what do they want...OR you show everybody how much important you are on Internet. But snyway at the moment, you are doing a very good job and I have to say that Wikipedia is the key word of my searching list! ^_^
93.72.10.62
Response by 93.72.10.62
Думки 93.72.10.62 щодо питання 1
...пишіть тут…
Думки 93.72.10.62 щодо питання 2
...пишіть Думаю ніяк, бо наступного мільярда користувачів може і не бути, бо вони для мого Бога нічого доброго не зробили.
RA je nejmenovaná dívka z 9.A. Jen řve a bere láhve.Byla také v republice.ČAU.
74.15.94.116
Response by 74.15.94.116
74.15.94.116's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
74.15.94.116's thoughts on question 2
...write here… L'existence de Dieu ne peut être ni prouvée ni réfutée. La Bible dit clairement que nous croyons doit accepter que Dieu existe: «Or sans la foi il est impossible de lui plaire; car celui qui se approche de Dieu doit croire qu'il existe et récompense ceux qui le cherchent» (Hébreux 11: 6). Si Dieu voulait, il pourrait immédiatement prouver au monde entier, et ainsi prouver qu'il existe. Mais se il le faisait, il n'y aurait pas besoin de la foi. "Jésus lui dit:« Vous croyez parce que vous me avez vu. Heureux ceux qui ne ont pas vu et qui ont cru »(Jean 20:29). Cela ne signifie pas qu'il n'y a aucune preuve de l'existence de Dieu. La Bible déclare que« les cieux racontent la gloire de Dieu et le firmament Fait foi de ses mains; Aujourd'hui proclame à jour, de nuit proclame au soir. Vous entendrez pas de mots, pas de parole, sans entendre leur voix; leur voix à travers toute la terre, leurs mots à la fin du monde "(Psaume 19: 1-5). Nous regardons les étoiles, et de comprendre l'univers grandeur infinie, nous observons les merveilles de la nature, et en regardant la la beauté d'un coucher de soleil - toutes ces choses pointent vers un Dieu Créateur Et si ces choses ne sont pas assez, Montrer du doigt nos propres cœurs aussi que Dieu existe dans Ecclésiaste 3:11 dit, "Il a également mis l'éternité dans le cœur humain».. (traduction anglaise). Au plus profond de nous, il ya une reconnaissance qu'il ya quelque chose au-delà de cette vie et quelqu'un au-delà de ce monde. Nous ne peut nier cette connaissance intellectuellement, mais la présence de Dieu en nous et autour de nous reste encore évidente. En dépit de cette Bible avertit que certaines personnes seront toujours nier l'existence de Dieu: «L'insensé dit lui-même:« Dieu ne est pas "! (Psaume 14: 1). Depuis la majorité des gens dans l'histoire, dans toutes les cultures, les civilisations et les continents ont cru en une forme de Dieu existe, alors il doit y avoir quelque chose (ou quelqu'un) qui est la cause de cette croyance. En plus des arguments bibliques pour l'existence de Dieu, il ya aussi des arguments logiques. Il est tout d'abord l'argument ontologique. Le plus célèbre preuve ontologique de Dieu, utilise l'idée de Dieu pour prouver l'existence de Dieu. Il commence par une définition de Dieu comme «la plus grande créature que vous pouvez imaginer." Ensuite, il fait valoir que ce est plus d'exister que de ne pas exister, et que la plus grande créature imaginables doit donc exister. Si Dieu ne existait pas, alors Dieu ne serait pas le plus grand être envisageable, et ce serait en contradiction avec la définition même de Dieu. Un deuxième argument est le téléologique. L'argument téléologique souligne que puisque l'univers affiche une telle conception étonnante, comme il le fait, il doit y avoir un concepteur divine derrière elle. Si, par exemple. le soleil était juste un peu plus près ou plus loin de la terre, de sorte qu'il ne serait pas donner vie à tellement comme il le fait. Si les éléments dans notre atmosphère étaient quelques points de pourcentage inférieur, comme le ferait presque toute la vie sur la planète meurent. Le risque d'une seule molécule de protéine proliférer au hasard, est égal à 1 à 10: 243 (ce est-dizaines, suivie de 243 zéros). Une cellule unique est composé de millions de molécules de protéines. Un troisième argument logique pour Dieu existe, appelé l'argument cosmologique. Chaque effet doit avoir une cause. L'univers et tout ce qu'il est un effet. Il doit y avoir quelque chose qui a fait que tout a été créé. Il peut finalement être quelque chose qui n'a pas eu un impact, mais qui a fait que tout le reste a été créé. Cette "sans effet", ou la cause est Dieu. Un quatrième argument est appelé l'argument moral. Chaque culture dans l'histoire a eu une certaine forme de loi. Tout le monde a un sens de ce qui est bien et le mal. Meurtre, le mensonge, le vol et acte immoral est presque universellement inacceptable. D'où vient ce sens du bien et du mal viennent de si pas d'un Dieu saint? En dépit de tout cela, la Bible nous dit que les gens vont rejeter la connaissance claire et indéniable de Dieu et de croire un mensonge place. Dans Romains 1:25 dit, "Ils ont échangé la vérité de Dieu en mensonge et ont adoré et servi la créature au lieu du Créateur -. Qui est béni éternellement Amen" La Bible déclare aussi que les gens ne ont aucune excuse pour ne pas croire en Dieu : "Pour ses attributs invisibles, sa puissance éternelle et sa divinité, a été vu depuis la création du monde et est connu par ses actes Ils sont sans excuse." (Romains 1:20). Les gens rejettent Dieu existe, en l'appelant «non-scientifique» ou parce que «il n'y a aucune preuve» pour elle. La vérité est qu'une fois qu'ils admettent que Dieu existe, de sorte qu'ils doivent aussi se rendent compte qu'ils sont responsables devant Dieu et son pardon besoin (Romains 3:23; 6:23). Si Dieu existe, alors nous sommes responsables devant lui avec nos actions. Si Dieu ne existe pas, alors nous pouvons faire exactement ce que nous voulons, sans Dieu pour nous juger. Ce est la raison pour laquelle tant de gens se accrochent à la théorie de l'évolution - il leur donne une alternative à croire en un Dieu créateur. Dieu existe, et tous les gens savent à la fin qu'il existe. Le fait que tant de gens avec des échantillons de peau et de cheveux de la réfuter son existence est en soi un bon argument qu'il existe. Comment savons-nous que Dieu existe? Comme chrétiens, nous savons que Dieu existe parce que nous parlons avec lui tous les jours. Nous entendons parler de nous audible, mais nous sentons sa présence, nous connaissons son leadership, nous savons son amour, et nous aspirons à sa grâce. Les choses ont eu lieu dans nos vies qui ne peuvent se expliquer par le fait que Dieu existe. Dieu a fait le grand miracle qu'il nous a sauvés et changé nos vies, nous ne pouvons pas faire autrement que de reconnaître et de féliciter son existence. Aucun de ces arguments peut convaincre ceux qui refusent de reconnaître ce qui est déjà tellement évident. L'existence de Dieu doit finalement être acceptée par la foi (Hébreux 11: 6). La foi en Dieu ne est pas le même que l'intensification aveuglément dans une pièce sombre; Ce est une étape sûre dans une pièce bien éclairée, où la majorité des gens sont déjà présents.
81.110.136.226
Response by 81.110.136.226
81.110.136.226's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
81.110.136.226's thoughts on question 2
...write here… gtyfftyfftfkutyfufyo876yrorfuyfuyhfuyfyfyfyufjkhguyfnhvyfhju7ruytfdutnbfjklbfjkbgjkgfdhbljksbunturbutnburtntgnnjdnjfuckurehbgfeurbgrbgrbebbrugbhvnbfuebigyfbuvhnbuhghgoegwbjgnfjnhkthgewungkgmbrtgehsjlfrekjemwiuoehgebgwuygruygfwuygqigfnqogyuqomrgqorg nmuoryqgmiucygxunt,ymt,ymt,ymbvybybeytbmviybiyebvmoyiebvmxyueoqwuivbym
fufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufuffufuffufufufufufuffuffufu
伊東基成
Response by 伊東基成
質問1への私の考え
今まではデジタルデバイドで取り残されることの多かった高齢者だったが、ネットに詳しい老人が増えてくる。引退後の十分な自由時間を使って自宅で出来るボランティア活動や、ネットビジネスで現役以上の生産性を上げる老人が目立ってくるのではないでしょうか。
質問2への私の考え
...こちらに記入してください... 今はすぐに良いアイデアが浮かびませんでした。日本語のページに限っていえば警告も含めて客観性が保たれていると思います。これはこのまま継続していって欲しいです。それを踏まえた上で得意分野の事前登録などを行ってみてはどうでしょうか。
85.255.46.227
Response by 85.255.46.227
85.255.46.227's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
85.255.46.227's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
I think its a pretty good site! It help me alot! thanks bro! Heil.
Semdewinter
Response by Semdewinter
Semdewinter's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
Semdewinter's thoughts on question 2
...write here… semdewinter: I believe that education should be a fundamental right. Today however it is expensive and inefficient. free tutorials already exist but can be beter implemented in wiki, both internal and extarnal (with a link to sites).
217.247.249.57
Response by 217.247.249.57
217.247.249.57's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.247.249.57's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Big Advice! Please do this! It's dire!!
124.149.30.219
Response by 124.149.30.219
124.149.30.219's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
124.149.30.219's thoughts on question 2
...write here… Hey! Quick advice, one reason people prefer other sources of internet information is that Wikipedia looks horrible, absolutely disgusting, It's daunting and confusing to use, hard to find what you want and everything just doesn't look how it should, it is 2015 so you should get with the times, go for a more vivid, metro, clean look, a better font, different logos and make everything modern, choose a style and stick with it, for example, Google's Lollipop Material Design, Windows Metro UI design, Apples iOS 7/8 Flat transparency design, Do something 2015, otherwise people will just assume this is a website from before and numbers will decline, I've already asked some people and they say Wikipedia is hard to use and looks bad.
Do something.
103.224.147.146
Response by 103.224.147.146
103.224.147.146's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
103.224.147.146's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
launch a wiki app which can support mobile phones.
115.246.84.8
Response by 115.246.84.8
115.246.84.8's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
115.246.84.8's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Regarding Wikipedia.
148.83.134.47
Response by 148.83.134.47
148.83.134.47's thoughts on question 1
Internet censorship. Setting up a Tor hidden service for Wikipedia would be nice.
148.83.134.47's thoughts on question 2
A project where objectivity is valued above anything else. Transparency is also key. Also run all the wikipedia servers on free software.
đéĘĢģĞĞğğĠǓǓůůũÚ
217.225.72.163
Response by 217.225.72.163
217.225.72.163's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.225.72.163's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
112.133.199.194
Response by 112.133.199.194
112.133.199.194's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
112.133.199.194's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
193.246.111.18
Response by 193.246.111.18
193.246.111.18's thoughts on question 1
Stay awesome.
193.246.111.18's thoughts on question 2
Stay hungry.
213.172.118.190
Response by 213.172.118.190 === 213.172.118.190s Gedanken zu Frage 1 === deine mutter ...bitte hier angeben...
=== 213.172.118.190s Gedanken zu Frage 2 === dein vater ...bitte hier angeben...
zghbkrapv;csnkg[p0g;ozsdfk bnazsdlijfzdfh
213.87.139.210
Response by 213.87.139.210
213.87.139.210's thoughts on question 1
...write here…'fdpjvboi;zdfgvbodsafmgvpojvbadfpgbjFSD|P}vjodS)fgvbujdf['zjvBzdgn'biosjb[ahjv[oisz cjnspo] bn]drtbm;kj vnszdlc
213.87.139.210's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Collect
Response by Collect
Collect's thoughts on question 1
The trend appears to be going from "written word with thousands of references" into "short declarative statements, capable of being transmitted orally, with visual material as needed" For those users of mobile devices who want "quick information" the articles which are "too long" or which have abstruse wording are going to be avoided, and those which have a larger gallery of images than is currently the rule become of more interest (noting the emphasis on visuals in all the social media now) In addition, we will have to provide an audio version of many articles - which will be a major technological challenge.
Collect's thoughts on question 2
Any thriving (?) project will simply have to reflect quick changes - no one here can make a sensible prediction even five years out. They will, in my view, continue some current trends - a tendency to be more clearly written, and (because of the vagaries of international political situations) likely be more carefully written in accord with being "pure information" rather than the current "reflect the proper answers" standard. Lastly, they will have to provide a great deal more visual information, which will then have to be far more carefully vetted.
Tell us what you think
Help shape the future of the Wikimedia Foundation by clicking the button below. Your input is appreciated as we begin this process.
Please remember that all answers are publicly posted and that by submitting them here you are releasing them in the public domain,[1] so that we may use or release them for research or other purposes. Please do not provide private data here.
The questions to be answered are:
- What major trends would you identify in addition to mobile and the next billion users?
- Based on the future trends that you think are important, what would thriving and healthy Wikimedia projects look like?
In order to keep the discussion manageable sections will be archived when there has been no answer for 3 days (72 hours) or more. If the page gets especially large a section may be archived earlier if it appears that the discussion is complete or has moved to a different, related, section.
- Note
- ↑ (Comment/Discussion moved to #Public domain section)
|
|
Please click here to share your thoughts, or send email to improve@wikimedia.org.
|
|
Template loop detected: Talk:2015 Strategy/Community consultation/Day 1 Template loop detected: Talk:2015 Strategy/Community consultation/Day 2 Template loop detected: Talk:2015 Strategy/Community consultation/Day 3 Template loop detected: Talk:2015 Strategy/Community consultation/Day 4
75.143.54.195
Response by 75.143.54.195
75.143.54.195's thoughts on question 2
nên nhớ khi tạo web là phải nên tạo một sự chú ý đặc biệt để được nhiều người biết đén
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "remember when creating web is to create a special attention to be known"
KATHREN THE GREAT
Response by KATHREN THE GREAT
A very different view of the world.
KATHREN THE GREAT's thoughts on question 1
...write here… I have a unique view nationally and globally. I began studying Sociology, Psychology, and Human Behavior in my early 20's as a way to understand the World, Life, the Insanity in my family, and myself. It was a survival instinct which has given me my unique outlook, and beliefs. Although it was "Self Education", my study of these subjects has 32 years, and is still going on. I see the global trends, not in terms of what people will be going gaga over, but in terms of how the current technology craze will effect the course of human history. As was noted, most people use mobile devices a great deal. There are some who use only mobile devices. This is where my view truly splits off from the average.... The current, and future- Mobile only- people are interested in two things...constant Communication; with anyone really. This phenomenon is far less "The future of the internet" and a lot more "The emotional instability of the users themselves. Because of technology... the last couple generations of Ignored, neglected, forgotten, and some even verbally abused... young people turn inward, electronically when their home lives are not what they should be. Constant use of mobile tech is more of an ADDICTION/COMPULSION than a MARKETING TREND. Those who are so attached to their mobile devices generally do not do well in the work place, and therefore climb the corporate ladder slowly if at all. They are not interested in knowledge, research, or READING anything other than texts, and the like. This demographic group will always exist, and are increasing only because the population is increasing. There will be decades when it is larger, and others when it is smaller. They simply replaced the "non-lethal" disgruntled and hard to control teen, the mischief makers. Instead of soothing their angst by smoking pot, hanging out, and spray painting the school buildings... they chat incessantly with other unhappy kids...turned twenty-something, turned thirty-something, and on. The constant "NEW THING" technology we have today will not be able to continue on. True advancements in technology is being made in many corners of the world, and it is only a matter of time before announcement after announcement of major breakthroughs on many fronts... will stop the current trend dead in its tracks. A new reality will be born out of the ashes.... more balanced, and accessible... out of necessity. Our markets, our Governments even, will not be able to continue functioning without becoming more balanced. As for the rest of society, who are not attached to their mobile devices 24/7... The younger crowd tend to like the mobile gadgets a great deal more than those in ; say their 40's and 50's. The smaller devices are harder to use, requires the person to sit in odd positions for hours while the painstakingly attempt to write a business plan, or??? Devices as small as a spiral tablet, to a medium laptop will always be around.... for all us grown-ups whom have gotten tired of the novelty of doing everything on a Blackberry, Iphones, Androids, ect. Its already happening. cells larger than a box of Everlasting Gobstoppers are common. Many of my friends are looking forward to cells that can replace Netbooks, and Kindles, and still be a phone. They simply got tired of lugging a briefcase full of electronics. The most important trend in the future will be for DEPENDABLE, EASY TO ACCESS KNOWLEDGE BASES. AND WEATHER THEY ARE 30 WITH THEIR GOBSTOPPER CELL/KINDEL, OR 50 WITH A LARGE DATA BASE/LAPTOP AT HOME THEY CAN CONNECT TO ANYWHERE... A SINGLE, DEPENDABLE, ACCURATE SOURCE OF INFORMATION WILL BE ON ALL THEIR MINDS. The days of having 200 accounts with different websites are over... it isn't the 'FUN' that counts, its what you can get done, and wht you know.
KATHREN THE GREAT's thoughts on question 2
...write here… I think it would be a single site with a page, or pages of links to every kind of knowledge database available. Perhaps links also to reliable journalism, as in BBC; links to webcams in The U.S. Congress, UK's Parliament, and such, where the latest political silliness is easily accessed. Wikipedia articles that have been verified as accurate, written by people whom have also been verified as experts. For the most part, wikipedia has been a wonderful, groundbreaking success. But as time has past, and more people have become aware of it, along with real experts, and good journalistic writing... there are also major crackpots whom have bluffed their way in, written articles that are not even remotely accurate... and no one at Wiki knows because they too, are not experts in that particular field, nor should they be expected to. I know this would mean a major increase in Wiki staff, so as to pre-qualify those who want to volunteer their time. However; many organizations make use of volunteers and use a verification process. A good friend of mine is a Volunteer Coordinator for a local Hospice. And if that isn't the hardest recruitment job, I don't what would be. She took time to set up online training, and some verification processes she does on line as well. For her field, they also have to fun NCIC checks to ensure the person isn't a felon, or a fake. Other than paying her salary, and miles she is required to drive... there is very little cost to her company. Another trend I see is need for more varied knowledge databases. For instance... I was trying to find a reliable dictionary for First Nation blackfoot, or cree languages. There isn't one. But if your volunteer recruitment was more aggressive... as in making calls to Chief's office, or anyone of several very good Native American, and First Nation Colleges: Explain your purpose of making important knowledge available to all without cost, as knowledge should be... I bet you would have many new recruits you wouldn't have to put through a verification process. In fact- Colleges and Universities world wide are full of knowledgeable people whom might never have thought of contributing, or perhaps the Heads of University departments, who have students needing things to do for extra credit, or simply to keep them out of the Deans hair, they could assign THE WRITING, EDITING, OR DOING VERIFICATION WORK FOR WIKI, Organizations like World Health Organization, who are trying to get information out to the public, might assign Undergrad interns to set up, and update a page, or section on their work. The same goes for Law schools, and students... anywhere getting their name out would help them, there are sure to be individuals ready, willing and able to volunteer. Archeologists, Historians, Language Professors... especially those of dead, or nearly so, native languages. Doing there things, I believe would keep Wiki in the top spot for information. Perhaps open an investigative unit... example. I ran a search on U.S. Government Organizations. I was shocked to see the number there were. What do they do? , Is it redundant, or unnecessary information they are gathering? How much are the employees of each organization being paid-or how much does it cost, overall, to keep it going? Is it important to the functioning of our nation? Who started it? That would be a section all its own, it would have so much information in ti. here is another... There is a Native American, and First Nation reservation just east of the Great Lakes that covers both sides of the border with Canada. They are restricted a great deal when it comes to crossing the river to the others side of their own land. Canada has one set of reasons tfor not allowing them free access, the U.S. has another. I venture very few know about it... but if a Wiki investigator looked into it, and wrote a report for ..."NEGLECTED HUMAN ISSUES WORLDWIDE" section, lots more people would know, and ask questions, and poke at politicians until something is done. These are the ways Wiki, can gain the top spot, and all the respect, and always be known to wvwry family, every school. I did not put my email on my account because I do not want it to be available to everyone. But I will leave it here if anyone wishes to ask me questions, or continue the conversation... it is only meant for top Wiki personal. I do not wish to get emails from volunteers, or others whom have left comments here. And I do check to insure the identity of everyone I corresponded with. I am very willing to share ideas, but only with those who can bring about change, be respectful , and please do not intrude where you are not invited. Thank You. k.ann3824@yahoo.com
212.154.61.126
Response by 212.154.61.126
AI ready wikipedia
212.154.61.126's thoughts on question 2
As the AI progress, wikipedia may play major role as an open database for AI applications. In this context, the database has to be organized and created to support applications to connect, search and even modify it. Such as: "apple" fruit, yellow or red color, eatable, cultivated,... authors should specify these using the html database interface. And also several silhouette drawings(or even a 3d model since there are many 3d artists in this planet) can be useful for future pattern recognition projects. Thanks.
202.3.92.218
Response by 202.3.92.218
202.3.92.218's thoughts on question 2
i recommend to make gallery for sharing information on real time. that could be very helpful for a armatures to develop their skills and able to get a confidence from experts. who knows, you(the founder of wikipedia) could be a winner of the Nobel Prize. lol
My Thoughts
Response by 203.104.11.21
You could probably start by adding in a questionare so people cauld ask what every questions instead of having to read them. cause most of it people cant get feedback on assignments on this sight cause it doesnt have what they need. And also you should have more information on the topics illistrated in your website, there is NOT enough.
173.58.94.127
Response by 173.58.94.127
The information contained in the articles I read are of great importance to people of Norwegian ancestry. With 12 grandcgildren and 9 great grandchildren you can be sure this info wuill be passed along to most all, of them. While are all, patriotic Amercans we have not forgotten our great heritage, Today Norway is the most prosperous country on the planet and according to United Nations one of the most livable and desireable countries inthe world. Granpa Holter came over here in 1895 and would be amazed at the way things have changed since his day.It's to bad there are so few of us in the world!
Rolf Holter
87.209.111.167
Response by 87.209.111.167
87.209.111.167's thoughts on question 1
More emphasis on Wikimedia commons and on translation. The upload wizard is convenient for adding languages.
The gap in know how is big.
87.209.111.167's thoughts on question 2
Bril>
108.56.204.224's thoughts on question 1
"And then there are the powerful pharmaceutical interests that deftly use Wikipedia to distribute their propaganda and control the message. They maniacally troll specific Wikipedia pages to promulgate positive but sometimes-false information about medicines, vaccines, and their manufacturers; and delete negative but often-true information about the same topics. They unabatedly violate Wikipedia’s own rules and disparage scientists, advocates, and reporters who research medical and vaccine controversies by controlling their Wikipedia biographical pages. Conversely, they scrub all of the controversial information from the biographical pages of those pharmaceutical and research officials whom they are paid to defend. This phenomenon is surely one factor contributing to shameful study results that compared several Wikipedia articles about medical conditions to peer-reviewed research papers, and found that Wikipedia contradicted medical research 90 percent of the time. You may never fully trust what you read on Wikipedia again. Nor should you. | SPIN CYCLE
Attkisson, Sharyl (2014-11-04). Stonewalled: My Fight for Truth Against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation, and Harassment in Obama's Washington (Kindle Locations 920-928). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition. "
108.56.204.224's thoughts on question 2
I love what you guys do, but sometimes not "how" you do it
218.94.132.84
Response by 218.94.132.84
218.94.132.84's thoughts on question 1
建立兴趣圈子、兴趣小组机制，把拥有共同兴趣点的高品质用户聚拢起来。积极开展众多的线下交流活动、定制品把维基百科打造成为一个拥有众多粉丝的明星品牌。维基百科网友见面会，网友野营、旅行聚会，带有维基百科大佬签字的维基百科纪念衫、纪念杯子、维基百科限量精装版图书、邀请学术领域顶尖专家与幸运网友共进晚餐。——维基百科的权威性、知识的广泛并不具有唯一性，例如，百度百科已经成为维基百科一个强有力的对手。我们只有把握时代的脉搏，与时俱进才能活出我们自己的风格。总之，想在中国打出市场一方面需要注重本土化，另一方面需要会炒作。
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "Build interest circles, interest groups mechanisms to share a common point of interest, high-quality user gather together. Actively carry out exchanges under many lines, fixed products Wikipedia build into a star brand has many fans. Wikipedia will meet friends, friends camping, travel party, Wikipedia commemorative T-shirt with a big brother signed Wikipedia, the Memorial Cup, Wikipedia limited edition hardcover books, invited leading experts in the academic field and lucky friends for dinner. - Wikipedia, the authority does not have extensive knowledge of the unique, for example, Baidu encyclopedia Wikipedia has become a strong opponent. We only grasp the pulse of the times, the times in order to live out our own style. In short, want to hit the market in China need to focus on the one hand, localization, on the other hand need to be speculation."
218.94.132.84's thoughts on question 2
1、引进等级激励机制，对于优秀的编辑人才，给予等级上的、头衔上的或者证书形式的荣誉奖励。 2、邀请学术专业领域人士、行业专家对各种条目进行指导和顾问，使之更具有权威性。 3、与微博大V、企业开展友好互利的合作。我认为不接受企业名义的赞助，不放置企业广告，不能代表需要拒绝一切与企业的合作。我觉得企业有可能会成为维基百科的助推器。
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "1, introduce a grading system for editors with outstanding editing skills, give awards to them in the form of grades, prefixes, or certificates.
- 2, invite academic professionals and industry experts for guidance and consultancy on a variety of articles, to make it more authoritative.
- 3, develop friendly and mutually beneficial cooperation with micro blog authorized users and enterprises. I think that not accepting sponsorship from enterprises and not putting ads does not mean that refusing cooperation with any enterprises. I think the enterprises could become Wikipedia's booster."
71.89.72.163
Response by 71.89.72.163
add more swag
RaidenB1
Response by RaidenB1
RaidenB1's thoughts on question 1
add more flash stuff
RaidenB1's thoughts on question 2
none
107.152.11.3
Response by 107.152.11.3 === 107.152.11.3's thoughts on question 1 === I am not qulified to answer this. "In order to know your enemy, you must be your enemy." Sun Tzu
107.152.11.3's thoughts on question 2
Most educational institutions do not recognize any wikimedia projects as credible despite my arguments. As a student whenever I am researching something the first result is always a very in depth wikimedia article. If students could use wikipedia as a source many more people would visit the site. A study / poll might need to be done on what teachers believe would make wikipedia a credible source. I know i have turned to visiting the wikipedia sources as my cited information.
- Hello, @107.152.11.3:, Did you check our education programs page before? We have been running an education program in collaboration with different volunteers and institutes. The program doesn't promote Wikipedia as a source, but rather encourages more academics to contribute, understand the dynamics of how WP works, and help add more cited resources. --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 10:56, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
76.169.56.120
Response by 76.169.56.120
76.169.56.120's thoughts on question 2
First thought, is make it easier to add articles. This is archaic. Second, Images are becoming more and more the thing of the internet. Make it easier for people to add pictures (with text and suggested use) and then develop ways of sorting them for value and categorization (which article) Third, Wikipedia needs to become as much an educational tool as knowledge source. There is a big difference and only some of your articles are really educational. Fourth, Reduce commercial/advertising entries. Too many Companies, sports organizations, use Wikipedia as a documentation tool or worse, for advertising.
- Hello, regarding editing articles, did you know about our visual editor? It is coming soon, and is supposed to make life easier. As for content, it is controlled via these policies. Thanks --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 11:08, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
128.199.41.249
Response by 128.199.41.249
128.199.41.249's thoughts on question 2
Почему админы сего сайта не русские люди?Почему вы не админы еврейской вики?
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "Why admins of this site is not the Russian people? Why do not Jewish wiki admins?"
202.100.20.110
Response by 202.100.20.110
202.100.20.110对问题一的想法
云端的出现可能意味着互联网会更加智能化
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "The emergence of the Internet cloud will likely mean more intelligent"
202.100.20.110对问题二的想法
对于移动客户端的设计需要更加符合当地用户的使用习惯，版面设计应更加丰富。对于涉及到政治敏感问题有可能影响维基在特殊地区的推广，一定要坚持还原事件真相，不可委曲求全。
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "For mobile client design needs to be more in line with the local user's habits, the layout should be more abundant. For politically sensitive issues related to the possible impact on special areas wiki promotion, we must adhere to restore the truth, not compromises."
76.11.94.94
Response by 76.11.94.94
76.11.94.94's thoughts on question 1
It seems the future of Wikipedia was debated in exactly these terms years ago. Some best cases and worst cases for Wikipedia growth were outlined. Those facing the one billionth user, even 4.5 billionth user were a matter of concern as early as 2010. Is the five hundred millionth user really "the worst user of English on Earth", making vocabulary and even a defining vocabulary the major concerns? Why was she or he never named as the hundred millionth user was? Interestingly, governance did evolve more or less as predicted then, though the ideal Wikimedia board of trustees is always a work in progress.
Some of this stuff is prescient. Clearly problems arising from systemic bias of Wikipedia were anticipated at that time, and conflicts like the recent one between gamers and feminists. The idea of a "natural point of view" anticipates conflicts like science versus religion perspectives that cannot be easily resolved by NPOV alone but require intervention at all twelve leverage points to ensure that neutral editors familiar with science and philosophy have some status. What is rather amazing is that Jimmy Wales is arguing adamantly against the very idea of systemic bias at that time, Larry Sanger is arguing adamantly against needing some referees with priveleged perspective, but both reversed their positions utterly. Florence Devouard was probably most reponsible for recognizing the systemic bias issue as Wikimedia Chair, setting up ArbCom in its current form, and it seems she was doing so largely in reference to this material from 2003-10.
Of all this the questions in Five hundred millionth user seem most interesting, and they point to the more extensive discussion on vocabulary/defining vocabulary and systemic bias of Wikipedia more expansively those listed in Wikipedia:systemic bias. Perhaps a project to extensively update the list of systemic biases would be worthwhile to start?
76.11.94.94's thoughts on question 2
The best cases and wackier visions for Wikipedia from that same time period are much more interesting in the present context than more prosaic "The future of Wikipedia" nuts and bolts discussions. Perhaps expanding a best case list and reviewing value systems that apply to Wikimedia projects, what motivates users for instance, how they achieve autonomy, mastery, purpose, satisfaction, etc., would be a useful start?
It seems Wikipedia is a thriving and healthy project now largely because of these early debates. Maybe this structure of laying out visions, threats, best cases, worst cases and an updated status quo had merit? Keeping them updated over ten years or so surely would have given more useful perspective now.
Perhaps the history of Wikipedia needs to be rewritten also to reflect the fact that people arguing against Wales and Sanger had probably more influence on the project's current form than they ever did. And that Florence Devouard is an organizational genius, if only for getting all these loons to work together. An honest assessment of history is a very good place to start with any vision. Devouard "Anthere" wrote the main articles on twelve leverage points in English and French originally so perhaps those organizing principles were important in the shift from squabbling trolls (Wales, Sanger, "24", etc.) to a more standard NGO board as Wikimedia has now.
And would be equally or more important in future evolution.
74.196.105.62
Response by 74.196.105.62
74.196.105.62's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
74.196.105.62's thoughts on question 2
...write here…I love this. we all have our own thoughts on what is real and true. i know what happened here. and it seems very unreal .
Menschenrechte, Religion, Frieden
217.7.216.10
Response by 217.7.216.10
217.7.216.10's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.7.216.10's thoughts on question 2
Es gibt immer mehr Konflikte auf der Welt. Menschenrechte werden teils mit Füßen getreten, Religionen werden missverstenden. Ein gutter Beitrag von WIKI wäre, eigene Rubriken für "Menschenrechte" und "Religionen der Welt" damit jeder Mensch weiß was man ihm zumuten kann und was nicht (in den "neuen Regionen" wie Teile Asiens, Afrika und Südamerika fehlt generelles Wissen über Menschenrechte) Die Religionen sollten auch eine eigene Rubrik bekommen. Denn nur wer das Denken seines Gegenüber kennt, kann ihn auch verstehen.
Filceolaire
Response by Filceolaire
Filceolaire's thoughts on question 1
The commodification of knowledge. A future where the only knowledge that gets taught is that which can be tested by a multiple choice question. Please not follow this trend. I am an active participant in wikidata but I am conscious that all the metadata in even the best wikidata page put together would barely make a stub article. Continue to develop wikidata and use it to fill infoboxes. Make sure the lead sections really are beginner level summaries of the articles. Make both of these available to others to reuse in varied formats but never forget that these are just appetisers for the main article.
A specific trend I can foresee is the collapse of the school textbook industry, replaced by CC-BY-SA licensed textbooks, compiled on wikiversity, based on wikipedia articles, with new editions reviewed and certified each year by a teams of educators appointed by the various ministries of education. This may take a little longer to happen in Texas.
Another thing I can foresee is "Voice references". WMF has already done work on this and must think of more ways to incorporate information for which there is not a traditional academic reference - first hand accounts of events by the people who were there, quick before they die - a 'Wiki loves grannies' project. This may have to be filtered through another project - Commons perhaps or maybe WikiNews - but it is, I believe, important work which the WMF may well be better placed to do than anyone else.
Filceolaire's thoughts on question 2
Thriving and healthy wikimedia projects will have their content reused in a thousand different formats with different skins available even to not logged in users, with portals promoted to act as the front page of specialised sections, with sites offering verified versions as school textbooks. Think of Open street maps. One set of data available through lots of different routes with corrections and additions steered back to the central repository and made available to all the other versions. We have the start of this with the Google graph reusing our info; in future there will be a load of other sites doing this just as many already use photos from Commons - Wikipedia as a public utility.
What is important is the quality of the information in the articles. Google has recently stated that they will start offering medical advice on search pages which has been checked for quality. This will be the holy grail in future, in my opinion - quality - and as other sites get corrupted by their need to kowtow to advertisers I believe that there is a real niche that wikipedia is poised to fill, supported by the other WMF sites. Many people complain about the quality of wikipedia but look at what they write. Mostly they are complaining that we are failing to live up to the high standards we set ourselves. Few are claiming that others do the job better.
Please murder all deletionists.
203.213.82.212
Response by 203.213.82.212
203.213.82.212's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
203.213.82.212's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Guy Macon
Response by Guy Macon
Guy Macon's thoughts on question 1
As background , I would call your attention to Page Weight Matters, by Chris Zacharias:
- "Three years ago, while I was a web developer at YouTube, one of the senior engineers began a rant about the page weight of the video watch page being far too large. The page had ballooned to as high as 1.2MB and dozens of requests. This engineer openly vented that “if they can write an entire Quake clone in under 100KB, we have no excuse for this!” Given that I agreed with him and I was excited to find a new project, I decided to champion the cause of getting the YouTube watch page to weigh in under 100KB. On the shuttle home from San Bruno that night, I coded up a prototype. I decided to limit the functionality to just a basic masthead, the video player, five related videos, a sharing button, a flagging tool, and ten comments loaded in via AJAX. I code-named the project “Feather”.
- "Even with such a limited set of features, the page was weighing in at 250KB. I dug into the code and realized that our optimization tools (i.e. Closure compilation) were unable to exclude code that was never actually used in the page itself (which would be an unfair expectation of any tool under the circumstances). The only way to reduce the code further was to optimize by hand the CSS, Javascript, and image sprites myself. After three painstaking days, I had arrived at a much leaner solution. It still was not under 100KB though. Having just finished writing the HTML5 video player, I decided to plug it in instead of the far heavier Flash player. Bam! 98KB and only 14 requests. I threaded the code with some basic monitoring and launched an opt-in to a fraction of our traffic.
- "After a week of data collection, the numbers came back… and they were baffling. The average aggregate page latency under Feather had actually INCREASED. I had decreased the total page weight and number of requests to a tenth of what they were previously and somehow the numbers were showing that it was taking LONGER for videos to load on Feather. This could not be possible. Digging through the numbers more and after browser testing repeatedly, nothing made sense. I was just about to give up on the project, with my world view completely shattered, when my colleague discovered the answer: geography.
- "When we plotted the data geographically and compared it to our total numbers broken out by region, there was a disproportionate increase in traffic from places like Southeast Asia, South America, Africa, and even remote regions of Siberia. Further investigation revealed that, in these places, the average page load time under Feather was over TWO MINUTES! This meant that a regular video page, at over a megabyte, was taking more than TWENTY MINUTES to load! This was the penalty incurred before the video stream even had a chance to show the first frame. Correspondingly, entire populations of people simply could not use YouTube because it took too long to see anything. Under Feather, despite it taking over two minutes to get to the first frame of video, watching a video actually became a real possibility. Over the week, word of Feather had spread in these areas and our numbers were completely skewed as a result. Large numbers of people who were previously unable to use YouTube before were suddenly able to.
- "Through Feather, I learned a valuable lesson about the state of the Internet throughout the rest of the world. Many of us are fortunate to live in high bandwidth regions, but there are still large portions of the world that do not. By keeping your client side code small and lightweight, you can literally open your product up to new markets."
Source: [ http://blog.chriszacharias.com/page-weight-matters ]
(Emphasis added, capitalization in original.)
(Reproduced under fair use: "The first factor is regarding whether the use in question helps fulfill the intention of copyright law to stimulate creativity for the enrichment of the general public, or whether it aims to only 'supersede the objects' of the original for reasons of personal profit.")
In addition to the above, keeping our pages small and lightweight will have a significant impact on the energy we and our readers use and thus the amount of carbon we add to the atmosphere. --Guy Macon (talk) 07:03, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Guy Macon's thoughts on question 2
Given the above, we need a project with the specific goal of serving pages with the fewest bytes and requests possible. --Guy Macon (talk) 07:03, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
1.000.000.000 of people-in the 2025 - platform extensive for argoment science logical mathematic
151.61.250.37
Response by 151.61.250.37
151.61.250.37's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
151.61.250.37's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
I like
217.87.119.89
Response by 217.87.119.89
217.87.119.89's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.87.119.89's thoughts on question 2
...Ich mag die Seite weil wegen isso.
Strategy 2015
Anonym's thoughts on question 1
Да, мобильные устройства очень быстро развиваются и распространяются! Неплохо было бы если вы разработаете приложения для таких платформ как: iOS, Android, Symbian, Windows phone... Это будет большим плюсом для вашей стратегии 2015.
Anonym's thoughts on question 2
Wikimedia развивался бы очень быстро если вы разработаете приложения для устройств и улучшите дизайн сайтов wikimedia & wikipedia...
5.138.64.137
Response by 5.138.64.137
5.138.64.137's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
5.138.64.137's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
175.137.158.140
Response by 175.137.158.140
175.137.158.140's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
If Wikipedia was an mobile app, it will be like a walking encyclopedia. It will be much easier for users to find out the answers that has been bugging them for hours.
But that is not the issue here, the issue is that Wikipedia has always been deemed an unreliable source for school, college and university. Reasons may be because of the easy accessibility of the website and information available on Wikipedia.
Imagine if wikipedia was made into a popular and convenient mobile app. Everyone will be using the app for answers not only for personal self-enhancement usage but also for destructive usage such as cheating during a test or assignment. It also makes people lazy to search for answers the good old fashion way.
But long story short, people are getting lazy nowadays and there's no changing. Either way the Wikipedia mobile app will be a big hit without any innovation and with minimum effort, younger generations will be reliant on Wikipedia on EVERYTHING and so begins the destruction of the human race.
- We do have apps, for both Andriod and iOs. Thanks! --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 11:29, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
=== 175.137.158.140's thoughts on question 2 ===c
...write here…
Google glasses? How about WIKI GLASSES??? Genius....
NO MORE COMMENTS!!!
Sinjoro Ajnulo
Sinjoro Ajnulo's thoughts on question 1
I think in the coming decade:
- world will be more polarized and more mathematical than ever.
- the number of active Wikipedia editors will increase.
- the rate of increase of quality of content will remain same.
- Wikipedia will survive.
Sinjoro Ajnulo's thoughts on question 2
I think Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that is:
- free as in trying (although we all know yoda’s opinion on this.)
- initiated by the right people.
- edited by both people who should and shouldn’t edit.
- merely a gift of the editors to the world.
I think Wikimedia movement may be interested in strategies for a better:
- fundraising (I’ll skip)
- better management/operating (I’ll skip)
- better content (I could bite)
1. Grandma's badge
An apolitical way to gain and share knowledge constitutes a frame of reference on its own, which is required to define any “movement” (or motion) since there are no absolute frames of reference, which was Einstein's way of being apolitical I suspect. I suggest editors let their "apolitical" reference be approximately the most knowledge-deprived portion of Wikipedia's audience, and on that purpose, a "grandma's badge" could be awarded to the ones who have a stronger command on the living force, in the physical sense of course, in Latin if you want. I know quite a lot of people are badge freaks around here, but grandma's badge would be THE badge: "You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother". You did triple major (preferably one soft plus two hard) in a platinum grade school, and have a verified IQ of 140? That’s quite alright, and it should not be too difficult for you to sympathize with the idea that editing Wikipedia is not a challenge to understand, it is a challenge to explain (although these two can be viewed as a bi-instability for editors).
I might also suggest that all baby editors learn to walk sufficiently well (or develop “x-ray vision”) before they learn directions (or play north & south, preferably on C64).
Wikipedia is not moving? It should.
We don't care in which direction? We should.
We can't understand the direction? Nobody can.
We can't do anything? Anything but what we are doing.
Do heaven and earth move? Sure.
(Did Jupiter really sleep with his sister? \\/o/man, please!)
2. Wikipedia school of defensive arts: From inception to extraction no longer than a hundred years!
I have a sister, who is studying law in one of those eevee schools. She showed me a talk page the other day, and said "if you are looking for something, there is a good chance it is in the talk pages", although I suspect she said that because she knew me well. Frankly spoken, I have no idea why she was reading that article, or the editor chitchat about the subject matter. It is (probably) true that we share more than 45% (and less than 56%) of our genes, but it reminded me that I've never seen my father, and neither did she. After I read the section, I immediately thought about an improvement to Wikipedia: I remember somebody said something about forming a team for community engagement in one of below comments. I could suggest forming another specialized team to extract case-studies from talk pages to constitute a set of examples for interested editors, to illustrate the kind of editors that could help Wikipedia more effectively than others; don't worry, information in public domain can be modified freely; free as in freedom. Another reason not to worry is, as Lincoln said, "We cannot escape history".
I think Wikipedia doesn't need all kinds of editors. Let me make absolutely clear, if I can (this would be the time I wasn’t being neutral), that "neutrality" hasn't been found yet among fundamental forces of nature, and if it had been, that would not only be "big" but it could also perturb the concept of "mission", although I'd be perfectly comfortable with Wikipedia being mission-less. In fact, having a sense of fundamental neutrality at the moment of this writing would be even better; it would be like teaching a graduate level thermodynamics course, and talking about reversible processes as if you have seen one.
3. Public-in-contact rating
I saw somebody suggested public rating of articles. I also seem to remember the words twitter and youtube for some reason. I don't think public rating would work for "freedom" in Wikipedia scale, although a smart guy, who is living in somebody else’s shoes, could keep working on his mutating algorithm (or whatever). I think public wouldn’t give a "free" indicator. Perhaps a good-enough and easy to implement solution could be to involve editors' (non-editor) folks to rate articles; they are ‘public’ after all. Think of it like those human-computer interaction people hanging around with a prototype, letting people touch it and feel it you know, or like code-breaking challenges published publicly in gchq website, if you will. Of course, no editors should turn this into a community service; keep it to a dozen reviewer per editor, which would effectively enlarge the reviewer space by an order-of-magnitude. Knowing how to serve would be a critical requirement of community service, I imagine, although I’m fairly certain I don’t know how to do it properly.
4. Emphasis on cross-reivew: review of articles on hard-sciences by softies and vice-versa
I don’t know about articles on hard-sciences, but articles on social sciences quite often make me ask the question “is there a point in writing fifty billion pages if less than half will make sense?” I guess a philosopher could always have a statistician handy, although I always vote yes for people from maths, physics, EECS, and astro/aero disciplines.
[[Special:MyLanguage/#REDIRECT[[]]]]
203.25.82.62
Response by 203.25.82.62
203.25.82.62's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
203.25.82.62's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
- REDIRECT[[
]]#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[2]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
50.174.102.18
Response by 50.174.102.18
50.174.102.18's thoughts on question 1
- A dramatic shift in education with a smaller percent of people able to attend/afford college, more frequent need for career (re)education, and education in much smaller increments, esp. in technical domains.
- More people reading articles not in their mother tongue.
50.174.102.18's thoughts on question 2
Redesign the structure of Wikipedia articles -- esp. technical articles -- for more effective pedagogy and to speak to a general audience. Readers with a wide range of backgrounds should be able to understand Wikipedia articles.
Many current Wikipedia articles in technical domains such as mathematics, engineering, and science begin with a definition that's difficult or impossible to understand by people who are not already steeped in the topic. The first paragraph often depends on citations to several other Wikipedia and Wiktionary pages, making the reader have to trace through a web of interdependent articles. Too few articles begin at the beginning.
After the beginning, such articles assume the reader understands graduate level mathematics. They assume the reader already knows and remembers the mathematical notation used in the article, even though mathematicians do not agree on notation.
Some Wikipedia discussion pages debate whether the purpose of the article is to "inform" vs. "teach." That's silly. You cannot inform people about a new (to them) topic without teaching! You don't have to test them on it (although I won't entirely discard that idea) or connect them to other students, but you do have to explain it.
Article design for pedagogy:
- Write for a general audience, including people without a college education and people from other disciplines than the article.
- Don't lose the reader in a web of articles to get started. Begin at the beginning or link to an introduction/background article for that domain.
- Orient the reader with some background and the simplest possible explanation possible first, then fill in more detail, then give a precise definition. Do not begin with a precise definition that's only readable by experts.
- Don't require more mathematics or other background than necessary.
- Introduce the notation used.
- ...
Wikipedia design for pedagogy:
- Add material and structure that's broader than a single article but richer than a portal to many articles. This should organize micro-domains into approachable batches with background, recommended reading order for several articles, and connective material. Minimize external and forward references in these recommended articles.
- Add how-to articles?
- ...
offline condensed wiki dictionary
91.99.224.116
Response by 91.99.224.116
91.99.224.116's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
91.99.224.116's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
i think you'd better build an offline condensed wiki dictionary .
84.144.66.72
Response by 84.144.66.72
84.144.66.72s Gedanken zu Frage 1
...bitte hier angeben...
84.144.66.72s Gedanken zu Frage 2
...bitte hier angeben... penis
24.21.218.73
Response by 24.21.218.73
24.21.218.73's thoughts on question 1
One trend might be toward increasing use of smart bots not only to correct grammar and sort categories but also to write text, cite references, and automatically archive every external link. There may come a time when the encyclopedia encounters a Humpty Dumpty moment where we are not in control of content. Another trend might be toward commercialization of the encyclopedia where content is controlled by marketers. In some parts of the world our content might be managed by the ministry of information. For now, the encyclopedia is well connected online, but we could be just another image of Myspace before Facebook was invented.
24.21.218.73's thoughts on question 2
A thriving and healthy Wikimedia is able to avoid the eventualities mentioned in my answer to question one, but it takes a village.
Effect on the internet as a result of increased numbers of users, and particularly with the use of mobile devices:
2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66
Response by 2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66
2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66's thoughts on question 1
...write here…You have asked an interesting question. My initial thought reverts back to what is common today. My answer is opinionated. It seems that an increasing number of people wage in on subjects to which they are not necessarily adequately acquainted. This insures that their response will be less than useful. It is also disconcerting to read responses from people who are grammatically incoherent.
I would guess that you are going to see more of the same, thus making intelligence greatly masked, if not entirely missing.
Richard G. Alps, Colorado, USA
2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66's thoughts on question 2
...write here…I dare not think. Mass confusion??
UI and search engine
Response by 103.242.150.17
103.242.150.17's thoughts on question 1
UI and search engine - people like nice looking pages to make it interesting
103.242.150.17's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
59.136.210.211
Response by 59.136.210.211
質問1への私の考え
...例えば、間違った情報を共有してしまうと正しい情報が認識されにくくなると思う。私は政治家が隠しているUFO技術を公開して欲しいと強く願う。UFO技術を戦争に使用することは許されないと思うからだ。それから正しい翻訳ソフトが発達して欲しいけど、それは難しいと思う。...
質問2への私の考え
...ウィキペディアは今後、様々な変化をしたとしても商業目的でページを閲覧されるのは好ましくないと思う。知識を共有するという点でウィキペディアは全ての人に平等の権利をもたらす事ができる重要な場所になると思う。...
91.90.65.192
Response by 91.90.65.192
91.90.65.192's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
91.90.65.192's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
1: More people willing to learn 2: Honestly you guys are doing great, just keep on doing what you're doing. One thing though, idk how to fix it, is making it so that not everybody can edit everything. Kind of a cooldown system where if your edits get thumbs ups for factual correctness you would get a shorter cooldown, and if got downvotes, for for example miss-information, you would get a longer cooldown.
more pawn
78.33.14.82
Response by 78.33.14.82
78.33.14.82's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
78.33.14.82's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
202.65.183.3
Response by 202.65.183.3
202.65.183.3's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
202.65.183.3's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Uring mangagawa hukbong mapagpalaya
Mrwellnaulak
Response by Mrwellnaulak
Mrwellnaulak's thoughts on question 1
...For the Zo people/Zomi family to harmonise in a nation. The Zo people were three groups; Kuki,Chin,Mizo. The kukies is Zomi and absorb some of the clan. The chin is also said itself zomi and absorb some clan. The mizo also absorb some clan by a key. In this therefore why i see the zo people cannot harmonise in a nation in any one of these. Besides,among these three groups(Kuki,Mizo,Chin) equal number of members cannot enter in the groups. But the new constraction is greatly opposed. My action is all the distinction are suppress with human right.
Mrwellnaulak's thoughts on question 2
...Protection of to distinc important events,culture,etc
88.247.104.79
Response by 88.247.104.79
88.247.104.79's thoughts on question 1
...tulis di sini...
88.247.104.79's thoughts on question 2
...tulis di sini...
KISITLAMAYI KALDIRIN. İSTEYEN İSTEDİĞİ KADAR BİLGİ VEREBİLSİN. BU REKLAM DAHİ OLSA. EĞER BİR YERDE KISIT VARSA ORADA BÜYÜMEDE DE KISTLAMA VARDIR DEMEKTİR BENCE
ngb uuj
117.0.33.133
Response by 117.0.33.133
117.0.33.133's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
117.0.33.133's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
79.241.158.174
Response by 79.241.158.174
79.241.158.174's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
79.241.158.174's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
ihr seit behindert
Jdz mediA Spitfire Chin gang going in Hold tight Tbone on cam nottingham shottingham begin
46.18.178.21
Response by 46.18.178.21
46.18.178.21's thoughts on question 1
...write here… People need to know about this. It has changed my life for the better and it can others too if you give it a chance
46.18.178.21's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
81.218.251.251
Response by 81.218.251.251
81.218.251.251's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
81.218.251.251's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
i very likee
159.255.77.74
Response by 159.255.77.74
159.255.77.74's thoughts on question 1
Продолжение массового перехода на мобильные устройства
159.255.77.74's thoughts on question 2
Развитие мобильной версии сайта и приложений для разных мобильных платформ,возможно больше проектов где возможно задействовать участников без регистрации
62.178.250.9
Response by 62.178.250.9
62.178.250.9's thoughts on question 1
- Further "proletarization" - more mass, less class. (I'm not sure if this is the right word.) International public use of Internet started mostly between students and university staff, tech faculties first. Then big companies (and their employees) joined and Internet changed. Then small companies and their employees joined and Internet changed. Then most of them got Internet at home, so spouse and kids and their friends joined - and Internet changed again. Then my mother and her friends joined, and Internet didn't change much ... well it did for the kids now getting daily e-mails from their parents ;)
I'd say Internet will change, the mass will grow, but the quality won't grow that much. Now all age groups participate - and it will take less time for the older to join within that next billion.
- More global village effects. Which means more opportunity to experience other cultures, but also more war on the Internet, more spam, more scam.
62.178.250.9's thoughts on question 2
- Try to build a natural project / social structure to answer the challenges. Stick to high standards of open society. Avoid bureaucratic approaches, avoid and prevent bureaucratic mindset. Fight racism. Always show quality. Stay true to the goals. Provide for the people to enable their development and exchange.
- Some of the answers above give very good ideas about what to do. E.g. online education for editors where they can learn about the best practices, about caveats and pitfalls.
62.255.14.178
Response by 62.255.14.178
62.255.14.178님의 질문 1에 대한 생각
...여기 써 주세요…
62.255.14.178님의 질문 2에 대한 생각
...여기 써 주세요… yah sick mate this is seckk!!!!
2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62
Response by 2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62
2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62s Gedanken zu Frage 1
Bedeutend wäre wenn die nächste Milliarde persönliche Gegebenheiten gleichermaßen einfließen lassen könnte als nur das rein Wissenschaftliche Denken, Das bloße ansammeln von Wissen ohne den Spiegel der Person erzeugt zwar reines Uran sollte aber die Pluto "Seelische" Umsetzung implementieren.Ob das Echtzeit Internet mit Lichtgeschwindigkeit ab 2020 Seelische Gerechtigkeit erzeugt ist lediglich zu hoffen meier Meinung nach lediglich eine Veränderung im Unveränderlichen. Seelische Gesundheit bleibt auch nach 2020 eine Persönliche Realität und lässt sich nicht ausschließlich in Plutonisches Plasma transformieren.
2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62s Gedanken zu Frage 2
Erfolgreich ist wenn der Leser dieser Zeilen bedenkt das nicht nur eine Html Seite einen Kopf und Körper hat und es ein privat leben in Lichtgeschwindigkeit schon jetzt gibt. Selbstlernende Computersysteme erzeugen nicht immer die Luft die der evulutionären Reise der Seele behagt.
Rberchie
Response by Rberchie
Rberchie's thoughts on question 1
...write here…I think Wikipedia should be more audio visual for instance we can have a software fro reading articles again some articles may need self explanatory videos.
Rberchie's thoughts on question 2
...write here…Thriving Wikimedia project should have audio visuals and disability friendly apps.--Rberchie (talk) 10:20, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
78.174.63.56
Response by 78.174.63.56
78.174.63.56's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
78.174.63.56's thoughts on question 2
... get rid of your ass faggot mods and man up Wales. Democracy and internet does not go too well you know, take the harness and tame wikipedia…
123.236.196.70
Response by 123.236.196.70
123.236.196.70's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
I dont see any major trend other than those mentioned.
123.236.196.70's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
(1) Writing / editing articles should be easy. I find it quite technical and think it requires website programming knowledge.
(2) More stress and importance should be given to authenticity of articles published.
87.255.31.241
Response by 87.255.31.241
87.255.31.241's thoughts on question 1
публичные компьютеры
87.255.31.241's thoughts on question 2
вики-сферы - рабочие зоны.
203.205.28.13
Response by 203.205.28.13
203.205.28.13's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
203.205.28.13's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
I am a junior student( grade 7) and I often use wikipedia to find information, but sometimes I have to find on another webpages.With me, instead of asking your visitors do add information, why don't you study or hire some historians and scientists to add your correct and reliable information? Once I am looking for information about bat and the information is not enough. Keeping checking Wikipedia, asking your customers their thoughts(like this), what do they want...OR you show everybody how much important you are on Internet. But snyway at the moment, you are doing a very good job and I have to say that Wikipedia is the key word of my searching list! ^_^
93.72.10.62
Response by 93.72.10.62
Думки 93.72.10.62 щодо питання 1
...пишіть тут…
Думки 93.72.10.62 щодо питання 2
...пишіть Думаю ніяк, бо наступного мільярда користувачів може і не бути, бо вони для мого Бога нічого доброго не зробили.
RA je nejmenovaná dívka z 9.A. Jen řve a bere láhve.Byla také v republice.ČAU.
74.15.94.116
Response by 74.15.94.116
74.15.94.116's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
74.15.94.116's thoughts on question 2
...write here… L'existence de Dieu ne peut être ni prouvée ni réfutée. La Bible dit clairement que nous croyons doit accepter que Dieu existe: «Or sans la foi il est impossible de lui plaire; car celui qui se approche de Dieu doit croire qu'il existe et récompense ceux qui le cherchent» (Hébreux 11: 6). Si Dieu voulait, il pourrait immédiatement prouver au monde entier, et ainsi prouver qu'il existe. Mais se il le faisait, il n'y aurait pas besoin de la foi. "Jésus lui dit:« Vous croyez parce que vous me avez vu. Heureux ceux qui ne ont pas vu et qui ont cru »(Jean 20:29). Cela ne signifie pas qu'il n'y a aucune preuve de l'existence de Dieu. La Bible déclare que« les cieux racontent la gloire de Dieu et le firmament Fait foi de ses mains; Aujourd'hui proclame à jour, de nuit proclame au soir. Vous entendrez pas de mots, pas de parole, sans entendre leur voix; leur voix à travers toute la terre, leurs mots à la fin du monde "(Psaume 19: 1-5). Nous regardons les étoiles, et de comprendre l'univers grandeur infinie, nous observons les merveilles de la nature, et en regardant la la beauté d'un coucher de soleil - toutes ces choses pointent vers un Dieu Créateur Et si ces choses ne sont pas assez, Montrer du doigt nos propres cœurs aussi que Dieu existe dans Ecclésiaste 3:11 dit, "Il a également mis l'éternité dans le cœur humain».. (traduction anglaise). Au plus profond de nous, il ya une reconnaissance qu'il ya quelque chose au-delà de cette vie et quelqu'un au-delà de ce monde. Nous ne peut nier cette connaissance intellectuellement, mais la présence de Dieu en nous et autour de nous reste encore évidente. En dépit de cette Bible avertit que certaines personnes seront toujours nier l'existence de Dieu: «L'insensé dit lui-même:« Dieu ne est pas "! (Psaume 14: 1). Depuis la majorité des gens dans l'histoire, dans toutes les cultures, les civilisations et les continents ont cru en une forme de Dieu existe, alors il doit y avoir quelque chose (ou quelqu'un) qui est la cause de cette croyance. En plus des arguments bibliques pour l'existence de Dieu, il ya aussi des arguments logiques. Il est tout d'abord l'argument ontologique. Le plus célèbre preuve ontologique de Dieu, utilise l'idée de Dieu pour prouver l'existence de Dieu. Il commence par une définition de Dieu comme «la plus grande créature que vous pouvez imaginer." Ensuite, il fait valoir que ce est plus d'exister que de ne pas exister, et que la plus grande créature imaginables doit donc exister. Si Dieu ne existait pas, alors Dieu ne serait pas le plus grand être envisageable, et ce serait en contradiction avec la définition même de Dieu. Un deuxième argument est le téléologique. L'argument téléologique souligne que puisque l'univers affiche une telle conception étonnante, comme il le fait, il doit y avoir un concepteur divine derrière elle. Si, par exemple. le soleil était juste un peu plus près ou plus loin de la terre, de sorte qu'il ne serait pas donner vie à tellement comme il le fait. Si les éléments dans notre atmosphère étaient quelques points de pourcentage inférieur, comme le ferait presque toute la vie sur la planète meurent. Le risque d'une seule molécule de protéine proliférer au hasard, est égal à 1 à 10: 243 (ce est-dizaines, suivie de 243 zéros). Une cellule unique est composé de millions de molécules de protéines. Un troisième argument logique pour Dieu existe, appelé l'argument cosmologique. Chaque effet doit avoir une cause. L'univers et tout ce qu'il est un effet. Il doit y avoir quelque chose qui a fait que tout a été créé. Il peut finalement être quelque chose qui n'a pas eu un impact, mais qui a fait que tout le reste a été créé. Cette "sans effet", ou la cause est Dieu. Un quatrième argument est appelé l'argument moral. Chaque culture dans l'histoire a eu une certaine forme de loi. Tout le monde a un sens de ce qui est bien et le mal. Meurtre, le mensonge, le vol et acte immoral est presque universellement inacceptable. D'où vient ce sens du bien et du mal viennent de si pas d'un Dieu saint? En dépit de tout cela, la Bible nous dit que les gens vont rejeter la connaissance claire et indéniable de Dieu et de croire un mensonge place. Dans Romains 1:25 dit, "Ils ont échangé la vérité de Dieu en mensonge et ont adoré et servi la créature au lieu du Créateur -. Qui est béni éternellement Amen" La Bible déclare aussi que les gens ne ont aucune excuse pour ne pas croire en Dieu : "Pour ses attributs invisibles, sa puissance éternelle et sa divinité, a été vu depuis la création du monde et est connu par ses actes Ils sont sans excuse." (Romains 1:20). Les gens rejettent Dieu existe, en l'appelant «non-scientifique» ou parce que «il n'y a aucune preuve» pour elle. La vérité est qu'une fois qu'ils admettent que Dieu existe, de sorte qu'ils doivent aussi se rendent compte qu'ils sont responsables devant Dieu et son pardon besoin (Romains 3:23; 6:23). Si Dieu existe, alors nous sommes responsables devant lui avec nos actions. Si Dieu ne existe pas, alors nous pouvons faire exactement ce que nous voulons, sans Dieu pour nous juger. Ce est la raison pour laquelle tant de gens se accrochent à la théorie de l'évolution - il leur donne une alternative à croire en un Dieu créateur. Dieu existe, et tous les gens savent à la fin qu'il existe. Le fait que tant de gens avec des échantillons de peau et de cheveux de la réfuter son existence est en soi un bon argument qu'il existe. Comment savons-nous que Dieu existe? Comme chrétiens, nous savons que Dieu existe parce que nous parlons avec lui tous les jours. Nous entendons parler de nous audible, mais nous sentons sa présence, nous connaissons son leadership, nous savons son amour, et nous aspirons à sa grâce. Les choses ont eu lieu dans nos vies qui ne peuvent se expliquer par le fait que Dieu existe. Dieu a fait le grand miracle qu'il nous a sauvés et changé nos vies, nous ne pouvons pas faire autrement que de reconnaître et de féliciter son existence. Aucun de ces arguments peut convaincre ceux qui refusent de reconnaître ce qui est déjà tellement évident. L'existence de Dieu doit finalement être acceptée par la foi (Hébreux 11: 6). La foi en Dieu ne est pas le même que l'intensification aveuglément dans une pièce sombre; Ce est une étape sûre dans une pièce bien éclairée, où la majorité des gens sont déjà présents.
81.110.136.226
Response by 81.110.136.226
81.110.136.226's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
81.110.136.226's thoughts on question 2
...write here… gtyfftyfftfkutyfufyo876yrorfuyfuyhfuyfyfyfyufjkhguyfnhvyfhju7ruytfdutnbfjklbfjkbgjkgfdhbljksbunturbutnburtntgnnjdnjfuckurehbgfeurbgrbgrbebbrugbhvnbfuebigyfbuvhnbuhghgoegwbjgnfjnhkthgewungkgmbrtgehsjlfrekjemwiuoehgebgwuygruygfwuygqigfnqogyuqomrgqorg nmuoryqgmiucygxunt,ymt,ymt,ymbvybybeytbmviybiyebvmoyiebvmxyueoqwuivbym
fufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufuffufuffufufufufufuffuffufu
伊東基成
Response by 伊東基成
質問1への私の考え
今まではデジタルデバイドで取り残されることの多かった高齢者だったが、ネットに詳しい老人が増えてくる。引退後の十分な自由時間を使って自宅で出来るボランティア活動や、ネットビジネスで現役以上の生産性を上げる老人が目立ってくるのではないでしょうか。
質問2への私の考え
...こちらに記入してください... 今はすぐに良いアイデアが浮かびませんでした。日本語のページに限っていえば警告も含めて客観性が保たれていると思います。これはこのまま継続していって欲しいです。それを踏まえた上で得意分野の事前登録などを行ってみてはどうでしょうか。
85.255.46.227
Response by 85.255.46.227
85.255.46.227's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
85.255.46.227's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
I think its a pretty good site! It help me alot! thanks bro! Heil.
Semdewinter
Response by Semdewinter
Semdewinter's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
Semdewinter's thoughts on question 2
...write here… semdewinter: I believe that education should be a fundamental right. Today however it is expensive and inefficient. free tutorials already exist but can be beter implemented in wiki, both internal and extarnal (with a link to sites).
217.247.249.57
Response by 217.247.249.57
217.247.249.57's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.247.249.57's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Big Advice! Please do this! It's dire!!
124.149.30.219
Response by 124.149.30.219
124.149.30.219's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
124.149.30.219's thoughts on question 2
...write here… Hey! Quick advice, one reason people prefer other sources of internet information is that Wikipedia looks horrible, absolutely disgusting, It's daunting and confusing to use, hard to find what you want and everything just doesn't look how it should, it is 2015 so you should get with the times, go for a more vivid, metro, clean look, a better font, different logos and make everything modern, choose a style and stick with it, for example, Google's Lollipop Material Design, Windows Metro UI design, Apples iOS 7/8 Flat transparency design, Do something 2015, otherwise people will just assume this is a website from before and numbers will decline, I've already asked some people and they say Wikipedia is hard to use and looks bad.
Do something.
103.224.147.146
Response by 103.224.147.146
103.224.147.146's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
103.224.147.146's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
launch a wiki app which can support mobile phones.
115.246.84.8
Response by 115.246.84.8
115.246.84.8's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
115.246.84.8's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Regarding Wikipedia.
148.83.134.47
Response by 148.83.134.47
148.83.134.47's thoughts on question 1
Internet censorship. Setting up a Tor hidden service for Wikipedia would be nice.
148.83.134.47's thoughts on question 2
A project where objectivity is valued above anything else. Transparency is also key. Also run all the wikipedia servers on free software.
đéĘĢģĞĞğğĠǓǓůůũÚ
217.225.72.163
Response by 217.225.72.163
217.225.72.163's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.225.72.163's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
112.133.199.194
Response by 112.133.199.194
112.133.199.194's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
112.133.199.194's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
193.246.111.18
Response by 193.246.111.18
193.246.111.18's thoughts on question 1
Stay awesome.
193.246.111.18's thoughts on question 2
Stay hungry.
213.172.118.190
Response by 213.172.118.190 === 213.172.118.190s Gedanken zu Frage 1 === deine mutter ...bitte hier angeben...
=== 213.172.118.190s Gedanken zu Frage 2 === dein vater ...bitte hier angeben...
zghbkrapv;csnkg[p0g;ozsdfk bnazsdlijfzdfh
213.87.139.210
Response by 213.87.139.210
213.87.139.210's thoughts on question 1
...write here…'fdpjvboi;zdfgvbodsafmgvpojvbadfpgbjFSD|P}vjodS)fgvbujdf['zjvBzdgn'biosjb[ahjv[oisz cjnspo] bn]drtbm;kj vnszdlc
213.87.139.210's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Collect
Response by Collect
Collect's thoughts on question 1
The trend appears to be going from "written word with thousands of references" into "short declarative statements, capable of being transmitted orally, with visual material as needed" For those users of mobile devices who want "quick information" the articles which are "too long" or which have abstruse wording are going to be avoided, and those which have a larger gallery of images than is currently the rule become of more interest (noting the emphasis on visuals in all the social media now) In addition, we will have to provide an audio version of many articles - which will be a major technological challenge.
Collect's thoughts on question 2
Any thriving (?) project will simply have to reflect quick changes - no one here can make a sensible prediction even five years out. They will, in my view, continue some current trends - a tendency to be more clearly written, and (because of the vagaries of international political situations) likely be more carefully written in accord with being "pure information" rather than the current "reflect the proper answers" standard. Lastly, they will have to provide a great deal more visual information, which will then have to be far more carefully vetted.
Tell us what you think
Help shape the future of the Wikimedia Foundation by clicking the button below. Your input is appreciated as we begin this process.
Please remember that all answers are publicly posted and that by submitting them here you are releasing them in the public domain,[1] so that we may use or release them for research or other purposes. Please do not provide private data here.
The questions to be answered are:
- What major trends would you identify in addition to mobile and the next billion users?
- Based on the future trends that you think are important, what would thriving and healthy Wikimedia projects look like?
In order to keep the discussion manageable sections will be archived when there has been no answer for 3 days (72 hours) or more. If the page gets especially large a section may be archived earlier if it appears that the discussion is complete or has moved to a different, related, section.
- Note
- ↑ (Comment/Discussion moved to #Public domain section)
|
|
Please click here to share your thoughts, or send email to improve@wikimedia.org.
|
|
Template loop detected: Talk:2015 Strategy/Community consultation/Day 1 Template loop detected: Talk:2015 Strategy/Community consultation/Day 2 Template loop detected: Talk:2015 Strategy/Community consultation/Day 3 Template loop detected: Talk:2015 Strategy/Community consultation/Day 4
75.143.54.195
Response by 75.143.54.195
75.143.54.195's thoughts on question 2
nên nhớ khi tạo web là phải nên tạo một sự chú ý đặc biệt để được nhiều người biết đén
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "remember when creating web is to create a special attention to be known"
KATHREN THE GREAT
Response by KATHREN THE GREAT
A very different view of the world.
KATHREN THE GREAT's thoughts on question 1
...write here… I have a unique view nationally and globally. I began studying Sociology, Psychology, and Human Behavior in my early 20's as a way to understand the World, Life, the Insanity in my family, and myself. It was a survival instinct which has given me my unique outlook, and beliefs. Although it was "Self Education", my study of these subjects has 32 years, and is still going on. I see the global trends, not in terms of what people will be going gaga over, but in terms of how the current technology craze will effect the course of human history. As was noted, most people use mobile devices a great deal. There are some who use only mobile devices. This is where my view truly splits off from the average.... The current, and future- Mobile only- people are interested in two things...constant Communication; with anyone really. This phenomenon is far less "The future of the internet" and a lot more "The emotional instability of the users themselves. Because of technology... the last couple generations of Ignored, neglected, forgotten, and some even verbally abused... young people turn inward, electronically when their home lives are not what they should be. Constant use of mobile tech is more of an ADDICTION/COMPULSION than a MARKETING TREND. Those who are so attached to their mobile devices generally do not do well in the work place, and therefore climb the corporate ladder slowly if at all. They are not interested in knowledge, research, or READING anything other than texts, and the like. This demographic group will always exist, and are increasing only because the population is increasing. There will be decades when it is larger, and others when it is smaller. They simply replaced the "non-lethal" disgruntled and hard to control teen, the mischief makers. Instead of soothing their angst by smoking pot, hanging out, and spray painting the school buildings... they chat incessantly with other unhappy kids...turned twenty-something, turned thirty-something, and on. The constant "NEW THING" technology we have today will not be able to continue on. True advancements in technology is being made in many corners of the world, and it is only a matter of time before announcement after announcement of major breakthroughs on many fronts... will stop the current trend dead in its tracks. A new reality will be born out of the ashes.... more balanced, and accessible... out of necessity. Our markets, our Governments even, will not be able to continue functioning without becoming more balanced. As for the rest of society, who are not attached to their mobile devices 24/7... The younger crowd tend to like the mobile gadgets a great deal more than those in ; say their 40's and 50's. The smaller devices are harder to use, requires the person to sit in odd positions for hours while the painstakingly attempt to write a business plan, or??? Devices as small as a spiral tablet, to a medium laptop will always be around.... for all us grown-ups whom have gotten tired of the novelty of doing everything on a Blackberry, Iphones, Androids, ect. Its already happening. cells larger than a box of Everlasting Gobstoppers are common. Many of my friends are looking forward to cells that can replace Netbooks, and Kindles, and still be a phone. They simply got tired of lugging a briefcase full of electronics. The most important trend in the future will be for DEPENDABLE, EASY TO ACCESS KNOWLEDGE BASES. AND WEATHER THEY ARE 30 WITH THEIR GOBSTOPPER CELL/KINDEL, OR 50 WITH A LARGE DATA BASE/LAPTOP AT HOME THEY CAN CONNECT TO ANYWHERE... A SINGLE, DEPENDABLE, ACCURATE SOURCE OF INFORMATION WILL BE ON ALL THEIR MINDS. The days of having 200 accounts with different websites are over... it isn't the 'FUN' that counts, its what you can get done, and wht you know.
KATHREN THE GREAT's thoughts on question 2
...write here… I think it would be a single site with a page, or pages of links to every kind of knowledge database available. Perhaps links also to reliable journalism, as in BBC; links to webcams in The U.S. Congress, UK's Parliament, and such, where the latest political silliness is easily accessed. Wikipedia articles that have been verified as accurate, written by people whom have also been verified as experts. For the most part, wikipedia has been a wonderful, groundbreaking success. But as time has past, and more people have become aware of it, along with real experts, and good journalistic writing... there are also major crackpots whom have bluffed their way in, written articles that are not even remotely accurate... and no one at Wiki knows because they too, are not experts in that particular field, nor should they be expected to. I know this would mean a major increase in Wiki staff, so as to pre-qualify those who want to volunteer their time. However; many organizations make use of volunteers and use a verification process. A good friend of mine is a Volunteer Coordinator for a local Hospice. And if that isn't the hardest recruitment job, I don't what would be. She took time to set up online training, and some verification processes she does on line as well. For her field, they also have to fun NCIC checks to ensure the person isn't a felon, or a fake. Other than paying her salary, and miles she is required to drive... there is very little cost to her company. Another trend I see is need for more varied knowledge databases. For instance... I was trying to find a reliable dictionary for First Nation blackfoot, or cree languages. There isn't one. But if your volunteer recruitment was more aggressive... as in making calls to Chief's office, or anyone of several very good Native American, and First Nation Colleges: Explain your purpose of making important knowledge available to all without cost, as knowledge should be... I bet you would have many new recruits you wouldn't have to put through a verification process. In fact- Colleges and Universities world wide are full of knowledgeable people whom might never have thought of contributing, or perhaps the Heads of University departments, who have students needing things to do for extra credit, or simply to keep them out of the Deans hair, they could assign THE WRITING, EDITING, OR DOING VERIFICATION WORK FOR WIKI, Organizations like World Health Organization, who are trying to get information out to the public, might assign Undergrad interns to set up, and update a page, or section on their work. The same goes for Law schools, and students... anywhere getting their name out would help them, there are sure to be individuals ready, willing and able to volunteer. Archeologists, Historians, Language Professors... especially those of dead, or nearly so, native languages. Doing there things, I believe would keep Wiki in the top spot for information. Perhaps open an investigative unit... example. I ran a search on U.S. Government Organizations. I was shocked to see the number there were. What do they do? , Is it redundant, or unnecessary information they are gathering? How much are the employees of each organization being paid-or how much does it cost, overall, to keep it going? Is it important to the functioning of our nation? Who started it? That would be a section all its own, it would have so much information in ti. here is another... There is a Native American, and First Nation reservation just east of the Great Lakes that covers both sides of the border with Canada. They are restricted a great deal when it comes to crossing the river to the others side of their own land. Canada has one set of reasons tfor not allowing them free access, the U.S. has another. I venture very few know about it... but if a Wiki investigator looked into it, and wrote a report for ..."NEGLECTED HUMAN ISSUES WORLDWIDE" section, lots more people would know, and ask questions, and poke at politicians until something is done. These are the ways Wiki, can gain the top spot, and all the respect, and always be known to wvwry family, every school. I did not put my email on my account because I do not want it to be available to everyone. But I will leave it here if anyone wishes to ask me questions, or continue the conversation... it is only meant for top Wiki personal. I do not wish to get emails from volunteers, or others whom have left comments here. And I do check to insure the identity of everyone I corresponded with. I am very willing to share ideas, but only with those who can bring about change, be respectful , and please do not intrude where you are not invited. Thank You. k.ann3824@yahoo.com
212.154.61.126
Response by 212.154.61.126
AI ready wikipedia
212.154.61.126's thoughts on question 2
As the AI progress, wikipedia may play major role as an open database for AI applications. In this context, the database has to be organized and created to support applications to connect, search and even modify it. Such as: "apple" fruit, yellow or red color, eatable, cultivated,... authors should specify these using the html database interface. And also several silhouette drawings(or even a 3d model since there are many 3d artists in this planet) can be useful for future pattern recognition projects. Thanks.
202.3.92.218
Response by 202.3.92.218
202.3.92.218's thoughts on question 2
i recommend to make gallery for sharing information on real time. that could be very helpful for a armatures to develop their skills and able to get a confidence from experts. who knows, you(the founder of wikipedia) could be a winner of the Nobel Prize. lol
My Thoughts
Response by 203.104.11.21
You could probably start by adding in a questionare so people cauld ask what every questions instead of having to read them. cause most of it people cant get feedback on assignments on this sight cause it doesnt have what they need. And also you should have more information on the topics illistrated in your website, there is NOT enough.
173.58.94.127
Response by 173.58.94.127
The information contained in the articles I read are of great importance to people of Norwegian ancestry. With 12 grandcgildren and 9 great grandchildren you can be sure this info wuill be passed along to most all, of them. While are all, patriotic Amercans we have not forgotten our great heritage, Today Norway is the most prosperous country on the planet and according to United Nations one of the most livable and desireable countries inthe world. Granpa Holter came over here in 1895 and would be amazed at the way things have changed since his day.It's to bad there are so few of us in the world!
Rolf Holter
87.209.111.167
Response by 87.209.111.167
87.209.111.167's thoughts on question 1
More emphasis on Wikimedia commons and on translation. The upload wizard is convenient for adding languages.
The gap in know how is big.
87.209.111.167's thoughts on question 2
Bril>
108.56.204.224's thoughts on question 1
"And then there are the powerful pharmaceutical interests that deftly use Wikipedia to distribute their propaganda and control the message. They maniacally troll specific Wikipedia pages to promulgate positive but sometimes-false information about medicines, vaccines, and their manufacturers; and delete negative but often-true information about the same topics. They unabatedly violate Wikipedia’s own rules and disparage scientists, advocates, and reporters who research medical and vaccine controversies by controlling their Wikipedia biographical pages. Conversely, they scrub all of the controversial information from the biographical pages of those pharmaceutical and research officials whom they are paid to defend. This phenomenon is surely one factor contributing to shameful study results that compared several Wikipedia articles about medical conditions to peer-reviewed research papers, and found that Wikipedia contradicted medical research 90 percent of the time. You may never fully trust what you read on Wikipedia again. Nor should you. | SPIN CYCLE
Attkisson, Sharyl (2014-11-04). Stonewalled: My Fight for Truth Against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation, and Harassment in Obama's Washington (Kindle Locations 920-928). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition. "
108.56.204.224's thoughts on question 2
I love what you guys do, but sometimes not "how" you do it
218.94.132.84
Response by 218.94.132.84
218.94.132.84's thoughts on question 1
建立兴趣圈子、兴趣小组机制，把拥有共同兴趣点的高品质用户聚拢起来。积极开展众多的线下交流活动、定制品把维基百科打造成为一个拥有众多粉丝的明星品牌。维基百科网友见面会，网友野营、旅行聚会，带有维基百科大佬签字的维基百科纪念衫、纪念杯子、维基百科限量精装版图书、邀请学术领域顶尖专家与幸运网友共进晚餐。——维基百科的权威性、知识的广泛并不具有唯一性，例如，百度百科已经成为维基百科一个强有力的对手。我们只有把握时代的脉搏，与时俱进才能活出我们自己的风格。总之，想在中国打出市场一方面需要注重本土化，另一方面需要会炒作。
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "Build interest circles, interest groups mechanisms to share a common point of interest, high-quality user gather together. Actively carry out exchanges under many lines, fixed products Wikipedia build into a star brand has many fans. Wikipedia will meet friends, friends camping, travel party, Wikipedia commemorative T-shirt with a big brother signed Wikipedia, the Memorial Cup, Wikipedia limited edition hardcover books, invited leading experts in the academic field and lucky friends for dinner. - Wikipedia, the authority does not have extensive knowledge of the unique, for example, Baidu encyclopedia Wikipedia has become a strong opponent. We only grasp the pulse of the times, the times in order to live out our own style. In short, want to hit the market in China need to focus on the one hand, localization, on the other hand need to be speculation."
218.94.132.84's thoughts on question 2
1、引进等级激励机制，对于优秀的编辑人才，给予等级上的、头衔上的或者证书形式的荣誉奖励。 2、邀请学术专业领域人士、行业专家对各种条目进行指导和顾问，使之更具有权威性。 3、与微博大V、企业开展友好互利的合作。我认为不接受企业名义的赞助，不放置企业广告，不能代表需要拒绝一切与企业的合作。我觉得企业有可能会成为维基百科的助推器。
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "1, introduce a grading system for editors with outstanding editing skills, give awards to them in the form of grades, prefixes, or certificates.
- 2, invite academic professionals and industry experts for guidance and consultancy on a variety of articles, to make it more authoritative.
- 3, develop friendly and mutually beneficial cooperation with micro blog authorized users and enterprises. I think that not accepting sponsorship from enterprises and not putting ads does not mean that refusing cooperation with any enterprises. I think the enterprises could become Wikipedia's booster."
71.89.72.163
Response by 71.89.72.163
add more swag
RaidenB1
Response by RaidenB1
RaidenB1's thoughts on question 1
add more flash stuff
RaidenB1's thoughts on question 2
none
107.152.11.3
Response by 107.152.11.3 === 107.152.11.3's thoughts on question 1 === I am not qulified to answer this. "In order to know your enemy, you must be your enemy." Sun Tzu
107.152.11.3's thoughts on question 2
Most educational institutions do not recognize any wikimedia projects as credible despite my arguments. As a student whenever I am researching something the first result is always a very in depth wikimedia article. If students could use wikipedia as a source many more people would visit the site. A study / poll might need to be done on what teachers believe would make wikipedia a credible source. I know i have turned to visiting the wikipedia sources as my cited information.
- Hello, @107.152.11.3:, Did you check our education programs page before? We have been running an education program in collaboration with different volunteers and institutes. The program doesn't promote Wikipedia as a source, but rather encourages more academics to contribute, understand the dynamics of how WP works, and help add more cited resources. --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 10:56, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
76.169.56.120
Response by 76.169.56.120
76.169.56.120's thoughts on question 2
First thought, is make it easier to add articles. This is archaic. Second, Images are becoming more and more the thing of the internet. Make it easier for people to add pictures (with text and suggested use) and then develop ways of sorting them for value and categorization (which article) Third, Wikipedia needs to become as much an educational tool as knowledge source. There is a big difference and only some of your articles are really educational. Fourth, Reduce commercial/advertising entries. Too many Companies, sports organizations, use Wikipedia as a documentation tool or worse, for advertising.
- Hello, regarding editing articles, did you know about our visual editor? It is coming soon, and is supposed to make life easier. As for content, it is controlled via these policies. Thanks --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 11:08, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
128.199.41.249
Response by 128.199.41.249
128.199.41.249's thoughts on question 2
Почему админы сего сайта не русские люди?Почему вы не админы еврейской вики?
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "Why admins of this site is not the Russian people? Why do not Jewish wiki admins?"
202.100.20.110
Response by 202.100.20.110
202.100.20.110对问题一的想法
云端的出现可能意味着互联网会更加智能化
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "The emergence of the Internet cloud will likely mean more intelligent"
202.100.20.110对问题二的想法
对于移动客户端的设计需要更加符合当地用户的使用习惯，版面设计应更加丰富。对于涉及到政治敏感问题有可能影响维基在特殊地区的推广，一定要坚持还原事件真相，不可委曲求全。
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "For mobile client design needs to be more in line with the local user's habits, the layout should be more abundant. For politically sensitive issues related to the possible impact on special areas wiki promotion, we must adhere to restore the truth, not compromises."
76.11.94.94
Response by 76.11.94.94
76.11.94.94's thoughts on question 1
It seems the future of Wikipedia was debated in exactly these terms years ago. Some best cases and worst cases for Wikipedia growth were outlined. Those facing the one billionth user, even 4.5 billionth user were a matter of concern as early as 2010. Is the five hundred millionth user really "the worst user of English on Earth", making vocabulary and even a defining vocabulary the major concerns? Why was she or he never named as the hundred millionth user was? Interestingly, governance did evolve more or less as predicted then, though the ideal Wikimedia board of trustees is always a work in progress.
Some of this stuff is prescient. Clearly problems arising from systemic bias of Wikipedia were anticipated at that time, and conflicts like the recent one between gamers and feminists. The idea of a "natural point of view" anticipates conflicts like science versus religion perspectives that cannot be easily resolved by NPOV alone but require intervention at all twelve leverage points to ensure that neutral editors familiar with science and philosophy have some status. What is rather amazing is that Jimmy Wales is arguing adamantly against the very idea of systemic bias at that time, Larry Sanger is arguing adamantly against needing some referees with priveleged perspective, but both reversed their positions utterly. Florence Devouard was probably most reponsible for recognizing the systemic bias issue as Wikimedia Chair, setting up ArbCom in its current form, and it seems she was doing so largely in reference to this material from 2003-10.
Of all this the questions in Five hundred millionth user seem most interesting, and they point to the more extensive discussion on vocabulary/defining vocabulary and systemic bias of Wikipedia more expansively those listed in Wikipedia:systemic bias. Perhaps a project to extensively update the list of systemic biases would be worthwhile to start?
76.11.94.94's thoughts on question 2
The best cases and wackier visions for Wikipedia from that same time period are much more interesting in the present context than more prosaic "The future of Wikipedia" nuts and bolts discussions. Perhaps expanding a best case list and reviewing value systems that apply to Wikimedia projects, what motivates users for instance, how they achieve autonomy, mastery, purpose, satisfaction, etc., would be a useful start?
It seems Wikipedia is a thriving and healthy project now largely because of these early debates. Maybe this structure of laying out visions, threats, best cases, worst cases and an updated status quo had merit? Keeping them updated over ten years or so surely would have given more useful perspective now.
Perhaps the history of Wikipedia needs to be rewritten also to reflect the fact that people arguing against Wales and Sanger had probably more influence on the project's current form than they ever did. And that Florence Devouard is an organizational genius, if only for getting all these loons to work together. An honest assessment of history is a very good place to start with any vision. Devouard "Anthere" wrote the main articles on twelve leverage points in English and French originally so perhaps those organizing principles were important in the shift from squabbling trolls (Wales, Sanger, "24", etc.) to a more standard NGO board as Wikimedia has now.
And would be equally or more important in future evolution.
74.196.105.62
Response by 74.196.105.62
74.196.105.62's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
74.196.105.62's thoughts on question 2
...write here…I love this. we all have our own thoughts on what is real and true. i know what happened here. and it seems very unreal .
Menschenrechte, Religion, Frieden
217.7.216.10
Response by 217.7.216.10
217.7.216.10's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.7.216.10's thoughts on question 2
Es gibt immer mehr Konflikte auf der Welt. Menschenrechte werden teils mit Füßen getreten, Religionen werden missverstenden. Ein gutter Beitrag von WIKI wäre, eigene Rubriken für "Menschenrechte" und "Religionen der Welt" damit jeder Mensch weiß was man ihm zumuten kann und was nicht (in den "neuen Regionen" wie Teile Asiens, Afrika und Südamerika fehlt generelles Wissen über Menschenrechte) Die Religionen sollten auch eine eigene Rubrik bekommen. Denn nur wer das Denken seines Gegenüber kennt, kann ihn auch verstehen.
Filceolaire
Response by Filceolaire
Filceolaire's thoughts on question 1
The commodification of knowledge. A future where the only knowledge that gets taught is that which can be tested by a multiple choice question. Please not follow this trend. I am an active participant in wikidata but I am conscious that all the metadata in even the best wikidata page put together would barely make a stub article. Continue to develop wikidata and use it to fill infoboxes. Make sure the lead sections really are beginner level summaries of the articles. Make both of these available to others to reuse in varied formats but never forget that these are just appetisers for the main article.
A specific trend I can foresee is the collapse of the school textbook industry, replaced by CC-BY-SA licensed textbooks, compiled on wikiversity, based on wikipedia articles, with new editions reviewed and certified each year by a teams of educators appointed by the various ministries of education. This may take a little longer to happen in Texas.
Another thing I can foresee is "Voice references". WMF has already done work on this and must think of more ways to incorporate information for which there is not a traditional academic reference - first hand accounts of events by the people who were there, quick before they die - a 'Wiki loves grannies' project. This may have to be filtered through another project - Commons perhaps or maybe WikiNews - but it is, I believe, important work which the WMF may well be better placed to do than anyone else.
Filceolaire's thoughts on question 2
Thriving and healthy wikimedia projects will have their content reused in a thousand different formats with different skins available even to not logged in users, with portals promoted to act as the front page of specialised sections, with sites offering verified versions as school textbooks. Think of Open street maps. One set of data available through lots of different routes with corrections and additions steered back to the central repository and made available to all the other versions. We have the start of this with the Google graph reusing our info; in future there will be a load of other sites doing this just as many already use photos from Commons - Wikipedia as a public utility.
What is important is the quality of the information in the articles. Google has recently stated that they will start offering medical advice on search pages which has been checked for quality. This will be the holy grail in future, in my opinion - quality - and as other sites get corrupted by their need to kowtow to advertisers I believe that there is a real niche that wikipedia is poised to fill, supported by the other WMF sites. Many people complain about the quality of wikipedia but look at what they write. Mostly they are complaining that we are failing to live up to the high standards we set ourselves. Few are claiming that others do the job better.
Please murder all deletionists.
203.213.82.212
Response by 203.213.82.212
203.213.82.212's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
203.213.82.212's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Guy Macon
Response by Guy Macon
Guy Macon's thoughts on question 1
As background , I would call your attention to Page Weight Matters, by Chris Zacharias:
- "Three years ago, while I was a web developer at YouTube, one of the senior engineers began a rant about the page weight of the video watch page being far too large. The page had ballooned to as high as 1.2MB and dozens of requests. This engineer openly vented that “if they can write an entire Quake clone in under 100KB, we have no excuse for this!” Given that I agreed with him and I was excited to find a new project, I decided to champion the cause of getting the YouTube watch page to weigh in under 100KB. On the shuttle home from San Bruno that night, I coded up a prototype. I decided to limit the functionality to just a basic masthead, the video player, five related videos, a sharing button, a flagging tool, and ten comments loaded in via AJAX. I code-named the project “Feather”.
- "Even with such a limited set of features, the page was weighing in at 250KB. I dug into the code and realized that our optimization tools (i.e. Closure compilation) were unable to exclude code that was never actually used in the page itself (which would be an unfair expectation of any tool under the circumstances). The only way to reduce the code further was to optimize by hand the CSS, Javascript, and image sprites myself. After three painstaking days, I had arrived at a much leaner solution. It still was not under 100KB though. Having just finished writing the HTML5 video player, I decided to plug it in instead of the far heavier Flash player. Bam! 98KB and only 14 requests. I threaded the code with some basic monitoring and launched an opt-in to a fraction of our traffic.
- "After a week of data collection, the numbers came back… and they were baffling. The average aggregate page latency under Feather had actually INCREASED. I had decreased the total page weight and number of requests to a tenth of what they were previously and somehow the numbers were showing that it was taking LONGER for videos to load on Feather. This could not be possible. Digging through the numbers more and after browser testing repeatedly, nothing made sense. I was just about to give up on the project, with my world view completely shattered, when my colleague discovered the answer: geography.
- "When we plotted the data geographically and compared it to our total numbers broken out by region, there was a disproportionate increase in traffic from places like Southeast Asia, South America, Africa, and even remote regions of Siberia. Further investigation revealed that, in these places, the average page load time under Feather was over TWO MINUTES! This meant that a regular video page, at over a megabyte, was taking more than TWENTY MINUTES to load! This was the penalty incurred before the video stream even had a chance to show the first frame. Correspondingly, entire populations of people simply could not use YouTube because it took too long to see anything. Under Feather, despite it taking over two minutes to get to the first frame of video, watching a video actually became a real possibility. Over the week, word of Feather had spread in these areas and our numbers were completely skewed as a result. Large numbers of people who were previously unable to use YouTube before were suddenly able to.
- "Through Feather, I learned a valuable lesson about the state of the Internet throughout the rest of the world. Many of us are fortunate to live in high bandwidth regions, but there are still large portions of the world that do not. By keeping your client side code small and lightweight, you can literally open your product up to new markets."
Source: [ http://blog.chriszacharias.com/page-weight-matters ]
(Emphasis added, capitalization in original.)
(Reproduced under fair use: "The first factor is regarding whether the use in question helps fulfill the intention of copyright law to stimulate creativity for the enrichment of the general public, or whether it aims to only 'supersede the objects' of the original for reasons of personal profit.")
In addition to the above, keeping our pages small and lightweight will have a significant impact on the energy we and our readers use and thus the amount of carbon we add to the atmosphere. --Guy Macon (talk) 07:03, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Guy Macon's thoughts on question 2
Given the above, we need a project with the specific goal of serving pages with the fewest bytes and requests possible. --Guy Macon (talk) 07:03, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
1.000.000.000 of people-in the 2025 - platform extensive for argoment science logical mathematic
151.61.250.37
Response by 151.61.250.37
151.61.250.37's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
151.61.250.37's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
I like
217.87.119.89
Response by 217.87.119.89
217.87.119.89's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.87.119.89's thoughts on question 2
...Ich mag die Seite weil wegen isso.
Strategy 2015
Anonym's thoughts on question 1
Да, мобильные устройства очень быстро развиваются и распространяются! Неплохо было бы если вы разработаете приложения для таких платформ как: iOS, Android, Symbian, Windows phone... Это будет большим плюсом для вашей стратегии 2015.
Anonym's thoughts on question 2
Wikimedia развивался бы очень быстро если вы разработаете приложения для устройств и улучшите дизайн сайтов wikimedia & wikipedia...
5.138.64.137
Response by 5.138.64.137
5.138.64.137's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
5.138.64.137's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
175.137.158.140
Response by 175.137.158.140
175.137.158.140's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
If Wikipedia was an mobile app, it will be like a walking encyclopedia. It will be much easier for users to find out the answers that has been bugging them for hours.
But that is not the issue here, the issue is that Wikipedia has always been deemed an unreliable source for school, college and university. Reasons may be because of the easy accessibility of the website and information available on Wikipedia.
Imagine if wikipedia was made into a popular and convenient mobile app. Everyone will be using the app for answers not only for personal self-enhancement usage but also for destructive usage such as cheating during a test or assignment. It also makes people lazy to search for answers the good old fashion way.
But long story short, people are getting lazy nowadays and there's no changing. Either way the Wikipedia mobile app will be a big hit without any innovation and with minimum effort, younger generations will be reliant on Wikipedia on EVERYTHING and so begins the destruction of the human race.
- We do have apps, for both Andriod and iOs. Thanks! --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 11:29, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
=== 175.137.158.140's thoughts on question 2 ===c
...write here…
Google glasses? How about WIKI GLASSES??? Genius....
NO MORE COMMENTS!!!
Sinjoro Ajnulo
Sinjoro Ajnulo's thoughts on question 1
I think in the coming decade:
- world will be more polarized and more mathematical than ever.
- the number of active Wikipedia editors will increase.
- the rate of increase of quality of content will remain same.
- Wikipedia will survive.
Sinjoro Ajnulo's thoughts on question 2
I think Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that is:
- free as in trying (although we all know yoda’s opinion on this.)
- initiated by the right people.
- edited by both people who should and shouldn’t edit.
- merely a gift of the editors to the world.
I think Wikimedia movement may be interested in strategies for a better:
- fundraising (I’ll skip)
- better management/operating (I’ll skip)
- better content (I could bite)
1. Grandma's badge
An apolitical way to gain and share knowledge constitutes a frame of reference on its own, which is required to define any “movement” (or motion) since there are no absolute frames of reference, which was Einstein's way of being apolitical I suspect. I suggest editors let their "apolitical" reference be approximately the most knowledge-deprived portion of Wikipedia's audience, and on that purpose, a "grandma's badge" could be awarded to the ones who have a stronger command on the living force, in the physical sense of course, in Latin if you want. I know quite a lot of people are badge freaks around here, but grandma's badge would be THE badge: "You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother". You did triple major (preferably one soft plus two hard) in a platinum grade school, and have a verified IQ of 140? That’s quite alright, and it should not be too difficult for you to sympathize with the idea that editing Wikipedia is not a challenge to understand, it is a challenge to explain (although these two can be viewed as a bi-instability for editors).
I might also suggest that all baby editors learn to walk sufficiently well (or develop “x-ray vision”) before they learn directions (or play north & south, preferably on C64).
Wikipedia is not moving? It should.
We don't care in which direction? We should.
We can't understand the direction? Nobody can.
We can't do anything? Anything but what we are doing.
Do heaven and earth move? Sure.
(Did Jupiter really sleep with his sister? \\/o/man, please!)
2. Wikipedia school of defensive arts: From inception to extraction no longer than a hundred years!
I have a sister, who is studying law in one of those eevee schools. She showed me a talk page the other day, and said "if you are looking for something, there is a good chance it is in the talk pages", although I suspect she said that because she knew me well. Frankly spoken, I have no idea why she was reading that article, or the editor chitchat about the subject matter. It is (probably) true that we share more than 45% (and less than 56%) of our genes, but it reminded me that I've never seen my father, and neither did she. After I read the section, I immediately thought about an improvement to Wikipedia: I remember somebody said something about forming a team for community engagement in one of below comments. I could suggest forming another specialized team to extract case-studies from talk pages to constitute a set of examples for interested editors, to illustrate the kind of editors that could help Wikipedia more effectively than others; don't worry, information in public domain can be modified freely; free as in freedom. Another reason not to worry is, as Lincoln said, "We cannot escape history".
I think Wikipedia doesn't need all kinds of editors. Let me make absolutely clear, if I can (this would be the time I wasn’t being neutral), that "neutrality" hasn't been found yet among fundamental forces of nature, and if it had been, that would not only be "big" but it could also perturb the concept of "mission", although I'd be perfectly comfortable with Wikipedia being mission-less. In fact, having a sense of fundamental neutrality at the moment of this writing would be even better; it would be like teaching a graduate level thermodynamics course, and talking about reversible processes as if you have seen one.
3. Public-in-contact rating
I saw somebody suggested public rating of articles. I also seem to remember the words twitter and youtube for some reason. I don't think public rating would work for "freedom" in Wikipedia scale, although a smart guy, who is living in somebody else’s shoes, could keep working on his mutating algorithm (or whatever). I think public wouldn’t give a "free" indicator. Perhaps a good-enough and easy to implement solution could be to involve editors' (non-editor) folks to rate articles; they are ‘public’ after all. Think of it like those human-computer interaction people hanging around with a prototype, letting people touch it and feel it you know, or like code-breaking challenges published publicly in gchq website, if you will. Of course, no editors should turn this into a community service; keep it to a dozen reviewer per editor, which would effectively enlarge the reviewer space by an order-of-magnitude. Knowing how to serve would be a critical requirement of community service, I imagine, although I’m fairly certain I don’t know how to do it properly.
4. Emphasis on cross-reivew: review of articles on hard-sciences by softies and vice-versa
I don’t know about articles on hard-sciences, but articles on social sciences quite often make me ask the question “is there a point in writing fifty billion pages if less than half will make sense?” I guess a philosopher could always have a statistician handy, although I always vote yes for people from maths, physics, EECS, and astro/aero disciplines.
[[Special:MyLanguage/#REDIRECT[[]]]]
203.25.82.62
Response by 203.25.82.62
203.25.82.62's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
203.25.82.62's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
- REDIRECT[[
]]#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[3]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
50.174.102.18
Response by 50.174.102.18
50.174.102.18's thoughts on question 1
- A dramatic shift in education with a smaller percent of people able to attend/afford college, more frequent need for career (re)education, and education in much smaller increments, esp. in technical domains.
- More people reading articles not in their mother tongue.
50.174.102.18's thoughts on question 2
Redesign the structure of Wikipedia articles -- esp. technical articles -- for more effective pedagogy and to speak to a general audience. Readers with a wide range of backgrounds should be able to understand Wikipedia articles.
Many current Wikipedia articles in technical domains such as mathematics, engineering, and science begin with a definition that's difficult or impossible to understand by people who are not already steeped in the topic. The first paragraph often depends on citations to several other Wikipedia and Wiktionary pages, making the reader have to trace through a web of interdependent articles. Too few articles begin at the beginning.
After the beginning, such articles assume the reader understands graduate level mathematics. They assume the reader already knows and remembers the mathematical notation used in the article, even though mathematicians do not agree on notation.
Some Wikipedia discussion pages debate whether the purpose of the article is to "inform" vs. "teach." That's silly. You cannot inform people about a new (to them) topic without teaching! You don't have to test them on it (although I won't entirely discard that idea) or connect them to other students, but you do have to explain it.
Article design for pedagogy:
- Write for a general audience, including people without a college education and people from other disciplines than the article.
- Don't lose the reader in a web of articles to get started. Begin at the beginning or link to an introduction/background article for that domain.
- Orient the reader with some background and the simplest possible explanation possible first, then fill in more detail, then give a precise definition. Do not begin with a precise definition that's only readable by experts.
- Don't require more mathematics or other background than necessary.
- Introduce the notation used.
- ...
Wikipedia design for pedagogy:
- Add material and structure that's broader than a single article but richer than a portal to many articles. This should organize micro-domains into approachable batches with background, recommended reading order for several articles, and connective material. Minimize external and forward references in these recommended articles.
- Add how-to articles?
- ...
offline condensed wiki dictionary
91.99.224.116
Response by 91.99.224.116
91.99.224.116's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
91.99.224.116's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
i think you'd better build an offline condensed wiki dictionary .
84.144.66.72
Response by 84.144.66.72
84.144.66.72s Gedanken zu Frage 1
...bitte hier angeben...
84.144.66.72s Gedanken zu Frage 2
...bitte hier angeben... penis
24.21.218.73
Response by 24.21.218.73
24.21.218.73's thoughts on question 1
One trend might be toward increasing use of smart bots not only to correct grammar and sort categories but also to write text, cite references, and automatically archive every external link. There may come a time when the encyclopedia encounters a Humpty Dumpty moment where we are not in control of content. Another trend might be toward commercialization of the encyclopedia where content is controlled by marketers. In some parts of the world our content might be managed by the ministry of information. For now, the encyclopedia is well connected online, but we could be just another image of Myspace before Facebook was invented.
24.21.218.73's thoughts on question 2
A thriving and healthy Wikimedia is able to avoid the eventualities mentioned in my answer to question one, but it takes a village.
Effect on the internet as a result of increased numbers of users, and particularly with the use of mobile devices:
2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66
Response by 2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66
2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66's thoughts on question 1
...write here…You have asked an interesting question. My initial thought reverts back to what is common today. My answer is opinionated. It seems that an increasing number of people wage in on subjects to which they are not necessarily adequately acquainted. This insures that their response will be less than useful. It is also disconcerting to read responses from people who are grammatically incoherent.
I would guess that you are going to see more of the same, thus making intelligence greatly masked, if not entirely missing.
Richard G. Alps, Colorado, USA
2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66's thoughts on question 2
...write here…I dare not think. Mass confusion??
UI and search engine
Response by 103.242.150.17
103.242.150.17's thoughts on question 1
UI and search engine - people like nice looking pages to make it interesting
103.242.150.17's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
59.136.210.211
Response by 59.136.210.211
質問1への私の考え
...例えば、間違った情報を共有してしまうと正しい情報が認識されにくくなると思う。私は政治家が隠しているUFO技術を公開して欲しいと強く願う。UFO技術を戦争に使用することは許されないと思うからだ。それから正しい翻訳ソフトが発達して欲しいけど、それは難しいと思う。...
質問2への私の考え
...ウィキペディアは今後、様々な変化をしたとしても商業目的でページを閲覧されるのは好ましくないと思う。知識を共有するという点でウィキペディアは全ての人に平等の権利をもたらす事ができる重要な場所になると思う。...
91.90.65.192
Response by 91.90.65.192
91.90.65.192's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
91.90.65.192's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
1: More people willing to learn 2: Honestly you guys are doing great, just keep on doing what you're doing. One thing though, idk how to fix it, is making it so that not everybody can edit everything. Kind of a cooldown system where if your edits get thumbs ups for factual correctness you would get a shorter cooldown, and if got downvotes, for for example miss-information, you would get a longer cooldown.
more pawn
78.33.14.82
Response by 78.33.14.82
78.33.14.82's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
78.33.14.82's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
202.65.183.3
Response by 202.65.183.3
202.65.183.3's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
202.65.183.3's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Uring mangagawa hukbong mapagpalaya
Mrwellnaulak
Response by Mrwellnaulak
Mrwellnaulak's thoughts on question 1
...For the Zo people/Zomi family to harmonise in a nation. The Zo people were three groups; Kuki,Chin,Mizo. The kukies is Zomi and absorb some of the clan. The chin is also said itself zomi and absorb some clan. The mizo also absorb some clan by a key. In this therefore why i see the zo people cannot harmonise in a nation in any one of these. Besides,among these three groups(Kuki,Mizo,Chin) equal number of members cannot enter in the groups. But the new constraction is greatly opposed. My action is all the distinction are suppress with human right.
Mrwellnaulak's thoughts on question 2
...Protection of to distinc important events,culture,etc
88.247.104.79
Response by 88.247.104.79
88.247.104.79's thoughts on question 1
...tulis di sini...
88.247.104.79's thoughts on question 2
...tulis di sini...
KISITLAMAYI KALDIRIN. İSTEYEN İSTEDİĞİ KADAR BİLGİ VEREBİLSİN. BU REKLAM DAHİ OLSA. EĞER BİR YERDE KISIT VARSA ORADA BÜYÜMEDE DE KISTLAMA VARDIR DEMEKTİR BENCE
ngb uuj
117.0.33.133
Response by 117.0.33.133
117.0.33.133's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
117.0.33.133's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
79.241.158.174
Response by 79.241.158.174
79.241.158.174's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
79.241.158.174's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
ihr seit behindert
Jdz mediA Spitfire Chin gang going in Hold tight Tbone on cam nottingham shottingham begin
46.18.178.21
Response by 46.18.178.21
46.18.178.21's thoughts on question 1
...write here… People need to know about this. It has changed my life for the better and it can others too if you give it a chance
46.18.178.21's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
81.218.251.251
Response by 81.218.251.251
81.218.251.251's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
81.218.251.251's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
i very likee
159.255.77.74
Response by 159.255.77.74
159.255.77.74's thoughts on question 1
Продолжение массового перехода на мобильные устройства
159.255.77.74's thoughts on question 2
Развитие мобильной версии сайта и приложений для разных мобильных платформ,возможно больше проектов где возможно задействовать участников без регистрации
62.178.250.9
Response by 62.178.250.9
62.178.250.9's thoughts on question 1
- Further "proletarization" - more mass, less class. (I'm not sure if this is the right word.) International public use of Internet started mostly between students and university staff, tech faculties first. Then big companies (and their employees) joined and Internet changed. Then small companies and their employees joined and Internet changed. Then most of them got Internet at home, so spouse and kids and their friends joined - and Internet changed again. Then my mother and her friends joined, and Internet didn't change much ... well it did for the kids now getting daily e-mails from their parents ;)
I'd say Internet will change, the mass will grow, but the quality won't grow that much. Now all age groups participate - and it will take less time for the older to join within that next billion.
- More global village effects. Which means more opportunity to experience other cultures, but also more war on the Internet, more spam, more scam.
62.178.250.9's thoughts on question 2
- Try to build a natural project / social structure to answer the challenges. Stick to high standards of open society. Avoid bureaucratic approaches, avoid and prevent bureaucratic mindset. Fight racism. Always show quality. Stay true to the goals. Provide for the people to enable their development and exchange.
- Some of the answers above give very good ideas about what to do. E.g. online education for editors where they can learn about the best practices, about caveats and pitfalls.
62.255.14.178
Response by 62.255.14.178
62.255.14.178님의 질문 1에 대한 생각
...여기 써 주세요…
62.255.14.178님의 질문 2에 대한 생각
...여기 써 주세요… yah sick mate this is seckk!!!!
2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62
Response by 2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62
2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62s Gedanken zu Frage 1
Bedeutend wäre wenn die nächste Milliarde persönliche Gegebenheiten gleichermaßen einfließen lassen könnte als nur das rein Wissenschaftliche Denken, Das bloße ansammeln von Wissen ohne den Spiegel der Person erzeugt zwar reines Uran sollte aber die Pluto "Seelische" Umsetzung implementieren.Ob das Echtzeit Internet mit Lichtgeschwindigkeit ab 2020 Seelische Gerechtigkeit erzeugt ist lediglich zu hoffen meier Meinung nach lediglich eine Veränderung im Unveränderlichen. Seelische Gesundheit bleibt auch nach 2020 eine Persönliche Realität und lässt sich nicht ausschließlich in Plutonisches Plasma transformieren.
2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62s Gedanken zu Frage 2
Erfolgreich ist wenn der Leser dieser Zeilen bedenkt das nicht nur eine Html Seite einen Kopf und Körper hat und es ein privat leben in Lichtgeschwindigkeit schon jetzt gibt. Selbstlernende Computersysteme erzeugen nicht immer die Luft die der evulutionären Reise der Seele behagt.
Rberchie
Response by Rberchie
Rberchie's thoughts on question 1
...write here…I think Wikipedia should be more audio visual for instance we can have a software fro reading articles again some articles may need self explanatory videos.
Rberchie's thoughts on question 2
...write here…Thriving Wikimedia project should have audio visuals and disability friendly apps.--Rberchie (talk) 10:20, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
78.174.63.56
Response by 78.174.63.56
78.174.63.56's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
78.174.63.56's thoughts on question 2
... get rid of your ass faggot mods and man up Wales. Democracy and internet does not go too well you know, take the harness and tame wikipedia…
123.236.196.70
Response by 123.236.196.70
123.236.196.70's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
I dont see any major trend other than those mentioned.
123.236.196.70's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
(1) Writing / editing articles should be easy. I find it quite technical and think it requires website programming knowledge.
(2) More stress and importance should be given to authenticity of articles published.
87.255.31.241
Response by 87.255.31.241
87.255.31.241's thoughts on question 1
публичные компьютеры
87.255.31.241's thoughts on question 2
вики-сферы - рабочие зоны.
203.205.28.13
Response by 203.205.28.13
203.205.28.13's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
203.205.28.13's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
I am a junior student( grade 7) and I often use wikipedia to find information, but sometimes I have to find on another webpages.With me, instead of asking your visitors do add information, why don't you study or hire some historians and scientists to add your correct and reliable information? Once I am looking for information about bat and the information is not enough. Keeping checking Wikipedia, asking your customers their thoughts(like this), what do they want...OR you show everybody how much important you are on Internet. But snyway at the moment, you are doing a very good job and I have to say that Wikipedia is the key word of my searching list! ^_^
93.72.10.62
Response by 93.72.10.62
Думки 93.72.10.62 щодо питання 1
...пишіть тут…
Думки 93.72.10.62 щодо питання 2
...пишіть Думаю ніяк, бо наступного мільярда користувачів може і не бути, бо вони для мого Бога нічого доброго не зробили.
RA je nejmenovaná dívka z 9.A. Jen řve a bere láhve.Byla také v republice.ČAU.
74.15.94.116
Response by 74.15.94.116
74.15.94.116's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
74.15.94.116's thoughts on question 2
...write here… L'existence de Dieu ne peut être ni prouvée ni réfutée. La Bible dit clairement que nous croyons doit accepter que Dieu existe: «Or sans la foi il est impossible de lui plaire; car celui qui se approche de Dieu doit croire qu'il existe et récompense ceux qui le cherchent» (Hébreux 11: 6). Si Dieu voulait, il pourrait immédiatement prouver au monde entier, et ainsi prouver qu'il existe. Mais se il le faisait, il n'y aurait pas besoin de la foi. "Jésus lui dit:« Vous croyez parce que vous me avez vu. Heureux ceux qui ne ont pas vu et qui ont cru »(Jean 20:29). Cela ne signifie pas qu'il n'y a aucune preuve de l'existence de Dieu. La Bible déclare que« les cieux racontent la gloire de Dieu et le firmament Fait foi de ses mains; Aujourd'hui proclame à jour, de nuit proclame au soir. Vous entendrez pas de mots, pas de parole, sans entendre leur voix; leur voix à travers toute la terre, leurs mots à la fin du monde "(Psaume 19: 1-5). Nous regardons les étoiles, et de comprendre l'univers grandeur infinie, nous observons les merveilles de la nature, et en regardant la la beauté d'un coucher de soleil - toutes ces choses pointent vers un Dieu Créateur Et si ces choses ne sont pas assez, Montrer du doigt nos propres cœurs aussi que Dieu existe dans Ecclésiaste 3:11 dit, "Il a également mis l'éternité dans le cœur humain».. (traduction anglaise). Au plus profond de nous, il ya une reconnaissance qu'il ya quelque chose au-delà de cette vie et quelqu'un au-delà de ce monde. Nous ne peut nier cette connaissance intellectuellement, mais la présence de Dieu en nous et autour de nous reste encore évidente. En dépit de cette Bible avertit que certaines personnes seront toujours nier l'existence de Dieu: «L'insensé dit lui-même:« Dieu ne est pas "! (Psaume 14: 1). Depuis la majorité des gens dans l'histoire, dans toutes les cultures, les civilisations et les continents ont cru en une forme de Dieu existe, alors il doit y avoir quelque chose (ou quelqu'un) qui est la cause de cette croyance. En plus des arguments bibliques pour l'existence de Dieu, il ya aussi des arguments logiques. Il est tout d'abord l'argument ontologique. Le plus célèbre preuve ontologique de Dieu, utilise l'idée de Dieu pour prouver l'existence de Dieu. Il commence par une définition de Dieu comme «la plus grande créature que vous pouvez imaginer." Ensuite, il fait valoir que ce est plus d'exister que de ne pas exister, et que la plus grande créature imaginables doit donc exister. Si Dieu ne existait pas, alors Dieu ne serait pas le plus grand être envisageable, et ce serait en contradiction avec la définition même de Dieu. Un deuxième argument est le téléologique. L'argument téléologique souligne que puisque l'univers affiche une telle conception étonnante, comme il le fait, il doit y avoir un concepteur divine derrière elle. Si, par exemple. le soleil était juste un peu plus près ou plus loin de la terre, de sorte qu'il ne serait pas donner vie à tellement comme il le fait. Si les éléments dans notre atmosphère étaient quelques points de pourcentage inférieur, comme le ferait presque toute la vie sur la planète meurent. Le risque d'une seule molécule de protéine proliférer au hasard, est égal à 1 à 10: 243 (ce est-dizaines, suivie de 243 zéros). Une cellule unique est composé de millions de molécules de protéines. Un troisième argument logique pour Dieu existe, appelé l'argument cosmologique. Chaque effet doit avoir une cause. L'univers et tout ce qu'il est un effet. Il doit y avoir quelque chose qui a fait que tout a été créé. Il peut finalement être quelque chose qui n'a pas eu un impact, mais qui a fait que tout le reste a été créé. Cette "sans effet", ou la cause est Dieu. Un quatrième argument est appelé l'argument moral. Chaque culture dans l'histoire a eu une certaine forme de loi. Tout le monde a un sens de ce qui est bien et le mal. Meurtre, le mensonge, le vol et acte immoral est presque universellement inacceptable. D'où vient ce sens du bien et du mal viennent de si pas d'un Dieu saint? En dépit de tout cela, la Bible nous dit que les gens vont rejeter la connaissance claire et indéniable de Dieu et de croire un mensonge place. Dans Romains 1:25 dit, "Ils ont échangé la vérité de Dieu en mensonge et ont adoré et servi la créature au lieu du Créateur -. Qui est béni éternellement Amen" La Bible déclare aussi que les gens ne ont aucune excuse pour ne pas croire en Dieu : "Pour ses attributs invisibles, sa puissance éternelle et sa divinité, a été vu depuis la création du monde et est connu par ses actes Ils sont sans excuse." (Romains 1:20). Les gens rejettent Dieu existe, en l'appelant «non-scientifique» ou parce que «il n'y a aucune preuve» pour elle. La vérité est qu'une fois qu'ils admettent que Dieu existe, de sorte qu'ils doivent aussi se rendent compte qu'ils sont responsables devant Dieu et son pardon besoin (Romains 3:23; 6:23). Si Dieu existe, alors nous sommes responsables devant lui avec nos actions. Si Dieu ne existe pas, alors nous pouvons faire exactement ce que nous voulons, sans Dieu pour nous juger. Ce est la raison pour laquelle tant de gens se accrochent à la théorie de l'évolution - il leur donne une alternative à croire en un Dieu créateur. Dieu existe, et tous les gens savent à la fin qu'il existe. Le fait que tant de gens avec des échantillons de peau et de cheveux de la réfuter son existence est en soi un bon argument qu'il existe. Comment savons-nous que Dieu existe? Comme chrétiens, nous savons que Dieu existe parce que nous parlons avec lui tous les jours. Nous entendons parler de nous audible, mais nous sentons sa présence, nous connaissons son leadership, nous savons son amour, et nous aspirons à sa grâce. Les choses ont eu lieu dans nos vies qui ne peuvent se expliquer par le fait que Dieu existe. Dieu a fait le grand miracle qu'il nous a sauvés et changé nos vies, nous ne pouvons pas faire autrement que de reconnaître et de féliciter son existence. Aucun de ces arguments peut convaincre ceux qui refusent de reconnaître ce qui est déjà tellement évident. L'existence de Dieu doit finalement être acceptée par la foi (Hébreux 11: 6). La foi en Dieu ne est pas le même que l'intensification aveuglément dans une pièce sombre; Ce est une étape sûre dans une pièce bien éclairée, où la majorité des gens sont déjà présents.
81.110.136.226
Response by 81.110.136.226
81.110.136.226's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
81.110.136.226's thoughts on question 2
...write here… gtyfftyfftfkutyfufyo876yrorfuyfuyhfuyfyfyfyufjkhguyfnhvyfhju7ruytfdutnbfjklbfjkbgjkgfdhbljksbunturbutnburtntgnnjdnjfuckurehbgfeurbgrbgrbebbrugbhvnbfuebigyfbuvhnbuhghgoegwbjgnfjnhkthgewungkgmbrtgehsjlfrekjemwiuoehgebgwuygruygfwuygqigfnqogyuqomrgqorg nmuoryqgmiucygxunt,ymt,ymt,ymbvybybeytbmviybiyebvmoyiebvmxyueoqwuivbym
fufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufuffufuffufufufufufuffuffufu
伊東基成
Response by 伊東基成
質問1への私の考え
今まではデジタルデバイドで取り残されることの多かった高齢者だったが、ネットに詳しい老人が増えてくる。引退後の十分な自由時間を使って自宅で出来るボランティア活動や、ネットビジネスで現役以上の生産性を上げる老人が目立ってくるのではないでしょうか。
質問2への私の考え
...こちらに記入してください... 今はすぐに良いアイデアが浮かびませんでした。日本語のページに限っていえば警告も含めて客観性が保たれていると思います。これはこのまま継続していって欲しいです。それを踏まえた上で得意分野の事前登録などを行ってみてはどうでしょうか。
85.255.46.227
Response by 85.255.46.227
85.255.46.227's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
85.255.46.227's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
I think its a pretty good site! It help me alot! thanks bro! Heil.
Semdewinter
Response by Semdewinter
Semdewinter's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
Semdewinter's thoughts on question 2
...write here… semdewinter: I believe that education should be a fundamental right. Today however it is expensive and inefficient. free tutorials already exist but can be beter implemented in wiki, both internal and extarnal (with a link to sites).
217.247.249.57
Response by 217.247.249.57
217.247.249.57's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.247.249.57's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Big Advice! Please do this! It's dire!!
124.149.30.219
Response by 124.149.30.219
124.149.30.219's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
124.149.30.219's thoughts on question 2
...write here… Hey! Quick advice, one reason people prefer other sources of internet information is that Wikipedia looks horrible, absolutely disgusting, It's daunting and confusing to use, hard to find what you want and everything just doesn't look how it should, it is 2015 so you should get with the times, go for a more vivid, metro, clean look, a better font, different logos and make everything modern, choose a style and stick with it, for example, Google's Lollipop Material Design, Windows Metro UI design, Apples iOS 7/8 Flat transparency design, Do something 2015, otherwise people will just assume this is a website from before and numbers will decline, I've already asked some people and they say Wikipedia is hard to use and looks bad.
Do something.
103.224.147.146
Response by 103.224.147.146
103.224.147.146's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
103.224.147.146's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
launch a wiki app which can support mobile phones.
115.246.84.8
Response by 115.246.84.8
115.246.84.8's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
115.246.84.8's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Regarding Wikipedia.
148.83.134.47
Response by 148.83.134.47
148.83.134.47's thoughts on question 1
Internet censorship. Setting up a Tor hidden service for Wikipedia would be nice.
148.83.134.47's thoughts on question 2
A project where objectivity is valued above anything else. Transparency is also key. Also run all the wikipedia servers on free software.
đéĘĢģĞĞğğĠǓǓůůũÚ
217.225.72.163
Response by 217.225.72.163
217.225.72.163's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.225.72.163's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
112.133.199.194
Response by 112.133.199.194
112.133.199.194's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
112.133.199.194's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
193.246.111.18
Response by 193.246.111.18
193.246.111.18's thoughts on question 1
Stay awesome.
193.246.111.18's thoughts on question 2
Stay hungry.
213.172.118.190
Response by 213.172.118.190 === 213.172.118.190s Gedanken zu Frage 1 === deine mutter ...bitte hier angeben...
=== 213.172.118.190s Gedanken zu Frage 2 === dein vater ...bitte hier angeben...
zghbkrapv;csnkg[p0g;ozsdfk bnazsdlijfzdfh
213.87.139.210
Response by 213.87.139.210
213.87.139.210's thoughts on question 1
...write here…'fdpjvboi;zdfgvbodsafmgvpojvbadfpgbjFSD|P}vjodS)fgvbujdf['zjvBzdgn'biosjb[ahjv[oisz cjnspo] bn]drtbm;kj vnszdlc
213.87.139.210's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Collect
Response by Collect
Collect's thoughts on question 1
The trend appears to be going from "written word with thousands of references" into "short declarative statements, capable of being transmitted orally, with visual material as needed" For those users of mobile devices who want "quick information" the articles which are "too long" or which have abstruse wording are going to be avoided, and those which have a larger gallery of images than is currently the rule become of more interest (noting the emphasis on visuals in all the social media now) In addition, we will have to provide an audio version of many articles - which will be a major technological challenge.
Collect's thoughts on question 2
Any thriving (?) project will simply have to reflect quick changes - no one here can make a sensible prediction even five years out. They will, in my view, continue some current trends - a tendency to be more clearly written, and (because of the vagaries of international political situations) likely be more carefully written in accord with being "pure information" rather than the current "reflect the proper answers" standard. Lastly, they will have to provide a great deal more visual information, which will then have to be far more carefully vetted.
Tell us what you think
Help shape the future of the Wikimedia Foundation by clicking the button below. Your input is appreciated as we begin this process.
Please remember that all answers are publicly posted and that by submitting them here you are releasing them in the public domain,[1] so that we may use or release them for research or other purposes. Please do not provide private data here.
The questions to be answered are:
- What major trends would you identify in addition to mobile and the next billion users?
- Based on the future trends that you think are important, what would thriving and healthy Wikimedia projects look like?
In order to keep the discussion manageable sections will be archived when there has been no answer for 3 days (72 hours) or more. If the page gets especially large a section may be archived earlier if it appears that the discussion is complete or has moved to a different, related, section.
- Note
- ↑ (Comment/Discussion moved to #Public domain section)
|
|
Please click here to share your thoughts, or send email to improve@wikimedia.org.
|
|
Template loop detected: Talk:2015 Strategy/Community consultation/Day 1 Template loop detected: Talk:2015 Strategy/Community consultation/Day 2 Template loop detected: Talk:2015 Strategy/Community consultation/Day 3 Template loop detected: Talk:2015 Strategy/Community consultation/Day 4
75.143.54.195
Response by 75.143.54.195
75.143.54.195's thoughts on question 2
nên nhớ khi tạo web là phải nên tạo một sự chú ý đặc biệt để được nhiều người biết đén
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "remember when creating web is to create a special attention to be known"
KATHREN THE GREAT
Response by KATHREN THE GREAT
A very different view of the world.
KATHREN THE GREAT's thoughts on question 1
...write here… I have a unique view nationally and globally. I began studying Sociology, Psychology, and Human Behavior in my early 20's as a way to understand the World, Life, the Insanity in my family, and myself. It was a survival instinct which has given me my unique outlook, and beliefs. Although it was "Self Education", my study of these subjects has 32 years, and is still going on. I see the global trends, not in terms of what people will be going gaga over, but in terms of how the current technology craze will effect the course of human history. As was noted, most people use mobile devices a great deal. There are some who use only mobile devices. This is where my view truly splits off from the average.... The current, and future- Mobile only- people are interested in two things...constant Communication; with anyone really. This phenomenon is far less "The future of the internet" and a lot more "The emotional instability of the users themselves. Because of technology... the last couple generations of Ignored, neglected, forgotten, and some even verbally abused... young people turn inward, electronically when their home lives are not what they should be. Constant use of mobile tech is more of an ADDICTION/COMPULSION than a MARKETING TREND. Those who are so attached to their mobile devices generally do not do well in the work place, and therefore climb the corporate ladder slowly if at all. They are not interested in knowledge, research, or READING anything other than texts, and the like. This demographic group will always exist, and are increasing only because the population is increasing. There will be decades when it is larger, and others when it is smaller. They simply replaced the "non-lethal" disgruntled and hard to control teen, the mischief makers. Instead of soothing their angst by smoking pot, hanging out, and spray painting the school buildings... they chat incessantly with other unhappy kids...turned twenty-something, turned thirty-something, and on. The constant "NEW THING" technology we have today will not be able to continue on. True advancements in technology is being made in many corners of the world, and it is only a matter of time before announcement after announcement of major breakthroughs on many fronts... will stop the current trend dead in its tracks. A new reality will be born out of the ashes.... more balanced, and accessible... out of necessity. Our markets, our Governments even, will not be able to continue functioning without becoming more balanced. As for the rest of society, who are not attached to their mobile devices 24/7... The younger crowd tend to like the mobile gadgets a great deal more than those in ; say their 40's and 50's. The smaller devices are harder to use, requires the person to sit in odd positions for hours while the painstakingly attempt to write a business plan, or??? Devices as small as a spiral tablet, to a medium laptop will always be around.... for all us grown-ups whom have gotten tired of the novelty of doing everything on a Blackberry, Iphones, Androids, ect. Its already happening. cells larger than a box of Everlasting Gobstoppers are common. Many of my friends are looking forward to cells that can replace Netbooks, and Kindles, and still be a phone. They simply got tired of lugging a briefcase full of electronics. The most important trend in the future will be for DEPENDABLE, EASY TO ACCESS KNOWLEDGE BASES. AND WEATHER THEY ARE 30 WITH THEIR GOBSTOPPER CELL/KINDEL, OR 50 WITH A LARGE DATA BASE/LAPTOP AT HOME THEY CAN CONNECT TO ANYWHERE... A SINGLE, DEPENDABLE, ACCURATE SOURCE OF INFORMATION WILL BE ON ALL THEIR MINDS. The days of having 200 accounts with different websites are over... it isn't the 'FUN' that counts, its what you can get done, and wht you know.
KATHREN THE GREAT's thoughts on question 2
...write here… I think it would be a single site with a page, or pages of links to every kind of knowledge database available. Perhaps links also to reliable journalism, as in BBC; links to webcams in The U.S. Congress, UK's Parliament, and such, where the latest political silliness is easily accessed. Wikipedia articles that have been verified as accurate, written by people whom have also been verified as experts. For the most part, wikipedia has been a wonderful, groundbreaking success. But as time has past, and more people have become aware of it, along with real experts, and good journalistic writing... there are also major crackpots whom have bluffed their way in, written articles that are not even remotely accurate... and no one at Wiki knows because they too, are not experts in that particular field, nor should they be expected to. I know this would mean a major increase in Wiki staff, so as to pre-qualify those who want to volunteer their time. However; many organizations make use of volunteers and use a verification process. A good friend of mine is a Volunteer Coordinator for a local Hospice. And if that isn't the hardest recruitment job, I don't what would be. She took time to set up online training, and some verification processes she does on line as well. For her field, they also have to fun NCIC checks to ensure the person isn't a felon, or a fake. Other than paying her salary, and miles she is required to drive... there is very little cost to her company. Another trend I see is need for more varied knowledge databases. For instance... I was trying to find a reliable dictionary for First Nation blackfoot, or cree languages. There isn't one. But if your volunteer recruitment was more aggressive... as in making calls to Chief's office, or anyone of several very good Native American, and First Nation Colleges: Explain your purpose of making important knowledge available to all without cost, as knowledge should be... I bet you would have many new recruits you wouldn't have to put through a verification process. In fact- Colleges and Universities world wide are full of knowledgeable people whom might never have thought of contributing, or perhaps the Heads of University departments, who have students needing things to do for extra credit, or simply to keep them out of the Deans hair, they could assign THE WRITING, EDITING, OR DOING VERIFICATION WORK FOR WIKI, Organizations like World Health Organization, who are trying to get information out to the public, might assign Undergrad interns to set up, and update a page, or section on their work. The same goes for Law schools, and students... anywhere getting their name out would help them, there are sure to be individuals ready, willing and able to volunteer. Archeologists, Historians, Language Professors... especially those of dead, or nearly so, native languages. Doing there things, I believe would keep Wiki in the top spot for information. Perhaps open an investigative unit... example. I ran a search on U.S. Government Organizations. I was shocked to see the number there were. What do they do? , Is it redundant, or unnecessary information they are gathering? How much are the employees of each organization being paid-or how much does it cost, overall, to keep it going? Is it important to the functioning of our nation? Who started it? That would be a section all its own, it would have so much information in ti. here is another... There is a Native American, and First Nation reservation just east of the Great Lakes that covers both sides of the border with Canada. They are restricted a great deal when it comes to crossing the river to the others side of their own land. Canada has one set of reasons tfor not allowing them free access, the U.S. has another. I venture very few know about it... but if a Wiki investigator looked into it, and wrote a report for ..."NEGLECTED HUMAN ISSUES WORLDWIDE" section, lots more people would know, and ask questions, and poke at politicians until something is done. These are the ways Wiki, can gain the top spot, and all the respect, and always be known to wvwry family, every school. I did not put my email on my account because I do not want it to be available to everyone. But I will leave it here if anyone wishes to ask me questions, or continue the conversation... it is only meant for top Wiki personal. I do not wish to get emails from volunteers, or others whom have left comments here. And I do check to insure the identity of everyone I corresponded with. I am very willing to share ideas, but only with those who can bring about change, be respectful , and please do not intrude where you are not invited. Thank You. k.ann3824@yahoo.com
212.154.61.126
Response by 212.154.61.126
AI ready wikipedia
212.154.61.126's thoughts on question 2
As the AI progress, wikipedia may play major role as an open database for AI applications. In this context, the database has to be organized and created to support applications to connect, search and even modify it. Such as: "apple" fruit, yellow or red color, eatable, cultivated,... authors should specify these using the html database interface. And also several silhouette drawings(or even a 3d model since there are many 3d artists in this planet) can be useful for future pattern recognition projects. Thanks.
202.3.92.218
Response by 202.3.92.218
202.3.92.218's thoughts on question 2
i recommend to make gallery for sharing information on real time. that could be very helpful for a armatures to develop their skills and able to get a confidence from experts. who knows, you(the founder of wikipedia) could be a winner of the Nobel Prize. lol
My Thoughts
Response by 203.104.11.21
You could probably start by adding in a questionare so people cauld ask what every questions instead of having to read them. cause most of it people cant get feedback on assignments on this sight cause it doesnt have what they need. And also you should have more information on the topics illistrated in your website, there is NOT enough.
173.58.94.127
Response by 173.58.94.127
The information contained in the articles I read are of great importance to people of Norwegian ancestry. With 12 grandcgildren and 9 great grandchildren you can be sure this info wuill be passed along to most all, of them. While are all, patriotic Amercans we have not forgotten our great heritage, Today Norway is the most prosperous country on the planet and according to United Nations one of the most livable and desireable countries inthe world. Granpa Holter came over here in 1895 and would be amazed at the way things have changed since his day.It's to bad there are so few of us in the world!
Rolf Holter
87.209.111.167
Response by 87.209.111.167
87.209.111.167's thoughts on question 1
More emphasis on Wikimedia commons and on translation. The upload wizard is convenient for adding languages.
The gap in know how is big.
87.209.111.167's thoughts on question 2
Bril>
108.56.204.224's thoughts on question 1
"And then there are the powerful pharmaceutical interests that deftly use Wikipedia to distribute their propaganda and control the message. They maniacally troll specific Wikipedia pages to promulgate positive but sometimes-false information about medicines, vaccines, and their manufacturers; and delete negative but often-true information about the same topics. They unabatedly violate Wikipedia’s own rules and disparage scientists, advocates, and reporters who research medical and vaccine controversies by controlling their Wikipedia biographical pages. Conversely, they scrub all of the controversial information from the biographical pages of those pharmaceutical and research officials whom they are paid to defend. This phenomenon is surely one factor contributing to shameful study results that compared several Wikipedia articles about medical conditions to peer-reviewed research papers, and found that Wikipedia contradicted medical research 90 percent of the time. You may never fully trust what you read on Wikipedia again. Nor should you. | SPIN CYCLE
Attkisson, Sharyl (2014-11-04). Stonewalled: My Fight for Truth Against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation, and Harassment in Obama's Washington (Kindle Locations 920-928). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition. "
108.56.204.224's thoughts on question 2
I love what you guys do, but sometimes not "how" you do it
218.94.132.84
Response by 218.94.132.84
218.94.132.84's thoughts on question 1
建立兴趣圈子、兴趣小组机制，把拥有共同兴趣点的高品质用户聚拢起来。积极开展众多的线下交流活动、定制品把维基百科打造成为一个拥有众多粉丝的明星品牌。维基百科网友见面会，网友野营、旅行聚会，带有维基百科大佬签字的维基百科纪念衫、纪念杯子、维基百科限量精装版图书、邀请学术领域顶尖专家与幸运网友共进晚餐。——维基百科的权威性、知识的广泛并不具有唯一性，例如，百度百科已经成为维基百科一个强有力的对手。我们只有把握时代的脉搏，与时俱进才能活出我们自己的风格。总之，想在中国打出市场一方面需要注重本土化，另一方面需要会炒作。
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "Build interest circles, interest groups mechanisms to share a common point of interest, high-quality user gather together. Actively carry out exchanges under many lines, fixed products Wikipedia build into a star brand has many fans. Wikipedia will meet friends, friends camping, travel party, Wikipedia commemorative T-shirt with a big brother signed Wikipedia, the Memorial Cup, Wikipedia limited edition hardcover books, invited leading experts in the academic field and lucky friends for dinner. - Wikipedia, the authority does not have extensive knowledge of the unique, for example, Baidu encyclopedia Wikipedia has become a strong opponent. We only grasp the pulse of the times, the times in order to live out our own style. In short, want to hit the market in China need to focus on the one hand, localization, on the other hand need to be speculation."
218.94.132.84's thoughts on question 2
1、引进等级激励机制，对于优秀的编辑人才，给予等级上的、头衔上的或者证书形式的荣誉奖励。 2、邀请学术专业领域人士、行业专家对各种条目进行指导和顾问，使之更具有权威性。 3、与微博大V、企业开展友好互利的合作。我认为不接受企业名义的赞助，不放置企业广告，不能代表需要拒绝一切与企业的合作。我觉得企业有可能会成为维基百科的助推器。
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "1, introduce a grading system for editors with outstanding editing skills, give awards to them in the form of grades, prefixes, or certificates.
- 2, invite academic professionals and industry experts for guidance and consultancy on a variety of articles, to make it more authoritative.
- 3, develop friendly and mutually beneficial cooperation with micro blog authorized users and enterprises. I think that not accepting sponsorship from enterprises and not putting ads does not mean that refusing cooperation with any enterprises. I think the enterprises could become Wikipedia's booster."
71.89.72.163
Response by 71.89.72.163
add more swag
RaidenB1
Response by RaidenB1
RaidenB1's thoughts on question 1
add more flash stuff
RaidenB1's thoughts on question 2
none
107.152.11.3
Response by 107.152.11.3 === 107.152.11.3's thoughts on question 1 === I am not qulified to answer this. "In order to know your enemy, you must be your enemy." Sun Tzu
107.152.11.3's thoughts on question 2
Most educational institutions do not recognize any wikimedia projects as credible despite my arguments. As a student whenever I am researching something the first result is always a very in depth wikimedia article. If students could use wikipedia as a source many more people would visit the site. A study / poll might need to be done on what teachers believe would make wikipedia a credible source. I know i have turned to visiting the wikipedia sources as my cited information.
- Hello, @107.152.11.3:, Did you check our education programs page before? We have been running an education program in collaboration with different volunteers and institutes. The program doesn't promote Wikipedia as a source, but rather encourages more academics to contribute, understand the dynamics of how WP works, and help add more cited resources. --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 10:56, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
76.169.56.120
Response by 76.169.56.120
76.169.56.120's thoughts on question 2
First thought, is make it easier to add articles. This is archaic. Second, Images are becoming more and more the thing of the internet. Make it easier for people to add pictures (with text and suggested use) and then develop ways of sorting them for value and categorization (which article) Third, Wikipedia needs to become as much an educational tool as knowledge source. There is a big difference and only some of your articles are really educational. Fourth, Reduce commercial/advertising entries. Too many Companies, sports organizations, use Wikipedia as a documentation tool or worse, for advertising.
- Hello, regarding editing articles, did you know about our visual editor? It is coming soon, and is supposed to make life easier. As for content, it is controlled via these policies. Thanks --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 11:08, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
128.199.41.249
Response by 128.199.41.249
128.199.41.249's thoughts on question 2
Почему админы сего сайта не русские люди?Почему вы не админы еврейской вики?
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "Why admins of this site is not the Russian people? Why do not Jewish wiki admins?"
202.100.20.110
Response by 202.100.20.110
202.100.20.110对问题一的想法
云端的出现可能意味着互联网会更加智能化
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "The emergence of the Internet cloud will likely mean more intelligent"
202.100.20.110对问题二的想法
对于移动客户端的设计需要更加符合当地用户的使用习惯，版面设计应更加丰富。对于涉及到政治敏感问题有可能影响维基在特殊地区的推广，一定要坚持还原事件真相，不可委曲求全。
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "For mobile client design needs to be more in line with the local user's habits, the layout should be more abundant. For politically sensitive issues related to the possible impact on special areas wiki promotion, we must adhere to restore the truth, not compromises."
76.11.94.94
Response by 76.11.94.94
76.11.94.94's thoughts on question 1
It seems the future of Wikipedia was debated in exactly these terms years ago. Some best cases and worst cases for Wikipedia growth were outlined. Those facing the one billionth user, even 4.5 billionth user were a matter of concern as early as 2010. Is the five hundred millionth user really "the worst user of English on Earth", making vocabulary and even a defining vocabulary the major concerns? Why was she or he never named as the hundred millionth user was? Interestingly, governance did evolve more or less as predicted then, though the ideal Wikimedia board of trustees is always a work in progress.
Some of this stuff is prescient. Clearly problems arising from systemic bias of Wikipedia were anticipated at that time, and conflicts like the recent one between gamers and feminists. The idea of a "natural point of view" anticipates conflicts like science versus religion perspectives that cannot be easily resolved by NPOV alone but require intervention at all twelve leverage points to ensure that neutral editors familiar with science and philosophy have some status. What is rather amazing is that Jimmy Wales is arguing adamantly against the very idea of systemic bias at that time, Larry Sanger is arguing adamantly against needing some referees with priveleged perspective, but both reversed their positions utterly. Florence Devouard was probably most reponsible for recognizing the systemic bias issue as Wikimedia Chair, setting up ArbCom in its current form, and it seems she was doing so largely in reference to this material from 2003-10.
Of all this the questions in Five hundred millionth user seem most interesting, and they point to the more extensive discussion on vocabulary/defining vocabulary and systemic bias of Wikipedia more expansively those listed in Wikipedia:systemic bias. Perhaps a project to extensively update the list of systemic biases would be worthwhile to start?
76.11.94.94's thoughts on question 2
The best cases and wackier visions for Wikipedia from that same time period are much more interesting in the present context than more prosaic "The future of Wikipedia" nuts and bolts discussions. Perhaps expanding a best case list and reviewing value systems that apply to Wikimedia projects, what motivates users for instance, how they achieve autonomy, mastery, purpose, satisfaction, etc., would be a useful start?
It seems Wikipedia is a thriving and healthy project now largely because of these early debates. Maybe this structure of laying out visions, threats, best cases, worst cases and an updated status quo had merit? Keeping them updated over ten years or so surely would have given more useful perspective now.
Perhaps the history of Wikipedia needs to be rewritten also to reflect the fact that people arguing against Wales and Sanger had probably more influence on the project's current form than they ever did. And that Florence Devouard is an organizational genius, if only for getting all these loons to work together. An honest assessment of history is a very good place to start with any vision. Devouard "Anthere" wrote the main articles on twelve leverage points in English and French originally so perhaps those organizing principles were important in the shift from squabbling trolls (Wales, Sanger, "24", etc.) to a more standard NGO board as Wikimedia has now.
And would be equally or more important in future evolution.
74.196.105.62
Response by 74.196.105.62
74.196.105.62's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
74.196.105.62's thoughts on question 2
...write here…I love this. we all have our own thoughts on what is real and true. i know what happened here. and it seems very unreal .
Menschenrechte, Religion, Frieden
217.7.216.10
Response by 217.7.216.10
217.7.216.10's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.7.216.10's thoughts on question 2
Es gibt immer mehr Konflikte auf der Welt. Menschenrechte werden teils mit Füßen getreten, Religionen werden missverstenden. Ein gutter Beitrag von WIKI wäre, eigene Rubriken für "Menschenrechte" und "Religionen der Welt" damit jeder Mensch weiß was man ihm zumuten kann und was nicht (in den "neuen Regionen" wie Teile Asiens, Afrika und Südamerika fehlt generelles Wissen über Menschenrechte) Die Religionen sollten auch eine eigene Rubrik bekommen. Denn nur wer das Denken seines Gegenüber kennt, kann ihn auch verstehen.
Filceolaire
Response by Filceolaire
Filceolaire's thoughts on question 1
The commodification of knowledge. A future where the only knowledge that gets taught is that which can be tested by a multiple choice question. Please not follow this trend. I am an active participant in wikidata but I am conscious that all the metadata in even the best wikidata page put together would barely make a stub article. Continue to develop wikidata and use it to fill infoboxes. Make sure the lead sections really are beginner level summaries of the articles. Make both of these available to others to reuse in varied formats but never forget that these are just appetisers for the main article.
A specific trend I can foresee is the collapse of the school textbook industry, replaced by CC-BY-SA licensed textbooks, compiled on wikiversity, based on wikipedia articles, with new editions reviewed and certified each year by a teams of educators appointed by the various ministries of education. This may take a little longer to happen in Texas.
Another thing I can foresee is "Voice references". WMF has already done work on this and must think of more ways to incorporate information for which there is not a traditional academic reference - first hand accounts of events by the people who were there, quick before they die - a 'Wiki loves grannies' project. This may have to be filtered through another project - Commons perhaps or maybe WikiNews - but it is, I believe, important work which the WMF may well be better placed to do than anyone else.
Filceolaire's thoughts on question 2
Thriving and healthy wikimedia projects will have their content reused in a thousand different formats with different skins available even to not logged in users, with portals promoted to act as the front page of specialised sections, with sites offering verified versions as school textbooks. Think of Open street maps. One set of data available through lots of different routes with corrections and additions steered back to the central repository and made available to all the other versions. We have the start of this with the Google graph reusing our info; in future there will be a load of other sites doing this just as many already use photos from Commons - Wikipedia as a public utility.
What is important is the quality of the information in the articles. Google has recently stated that they will start offering medical advice on search pages which has been checked for quality. This will be the holy grail in future, in my opinion - quality - and as other sites get corrupted by their need to kowtow to advertisers I believe that there is a real niche that wikipedia is poised to fill, supported by the other WMF sites. Many people complain about the quality of wikipedia but look at what they write. Mostly they are complaining that we are failing to live up to the high standards we set ourselves. Few are claiming that others do the job better.
Please murder all deletionists.
203.213.82.212
Response by 203.213.82.212
203.213.82.212's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
203.213.82.212's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Guy Macon
Response by Guy Macon
Guy Macon's thoughts on question 1
As background , I would call your attention to Page Weight Matters, by Chris Zacharias:
- "Three years ago, while I was a web developer at YouTube, one of the senior engineers began a rant about the page weight of the video watch page being far too large. The page had ballooned to as high as 1.2MB and dozens of requests. This engineer openly vented that “if they can write an entire Quake clone in under 100KB, we have no excuse for this!” Given that I agreed with him and I was excited to find a new project, I decided to champion the cause of getting the YouTube watch page to weigh in under 100KB. On the shuttle home from San Bruno that night, I coded up a prototype. I decided to limit the functionality to just a basic masthead, the video player, five related videos, a sharing button, a flagging tool, and ten comments loaded in via AJAX. I code-named the project “Feather”.
- "Even with such a limited set of features, the page was weighing in at 250KB. I dug into the code and realized that our optimization tools (i.e. Closure compilation) were unable to exclude code that was never actually used in the page itself (which would be an unfair expectation of any tool under the circumstances). The only way to reduce the code further was to optimize by hand the CSS, Javascript, and image sprites myself. After three painstaking days, I had arrived at a much leaner solution. It still was not under 100KB though. Having just finished writing the HTML5 video player, I decided to plug it in instead of the far heavier Flash player. Bam! 98KB and only 14 requests. I threaded the code with some basic monitoring and launched an opt-in to a fraction of our traffic.
- "After a week of data collection, the numbers came back… and they were baffling. The average aggregate page latency under Feather had actually INCREASED. I had decreased the total page weight and number of requests to a tenth of what they were previously and somehow the numbers were showing that it was taking LONGER for videos to load on Feather. This could not be possible. Digging through the numbers more and after browser testing repeatedly, nothing made sense. I was just about to give up on the project, with my world view completely shattered, when my colleague discovered the answer: geography.
- "When we plotted the data geographically and compared it to our total numbers broken out by region, there was a disproportionate increase in traffic from places like Southeast Asia, South America, Africa, and even remote regions of Siberia. Further investigation revealed that, in these places, the average page load time under Feather was over TWO MINUTES! This meant that a regular video page, at over a megabyte, was taking more than TWENTY MINUTES to load! This was the penalty incurred before the video stream even had a chance to show the first frame. Correspondingly, entire populations of people simply could not use YouTube because it took too long to see anything. Under Feather, despite it taking over two minutes to get to the first frame of video, watching a video actually became a real possibility. Over the week, word of Feather had spread in these areas and our numbers were completely skewed as a result. Large numbers of people who were previously unable to use YouTube before were suddenly able to.
- "Through Feather, I learned a valuable lesson about the state of the Internet throughout the rest of the world. Many of us are fortunate to live in high bandwidth regions, but there are still large portions of the world that do not. By keeping your client side code small and lightweight, you can literally open your product up to new markets."
Source: [ http://blog.chriszacharias.com/page-weight-matters ]
(Emphasis added, capitalization in original.)
(Reproduced under fair use: "The first factor is regarding whether the use in question helps fulfill the intention of copyright law to stimulate creativity for the enrichment of the general public, or whether it aims to only 'supersede the objects' of the original for reasons of personal profit.")
In addition to the above, keeping our pages small and lightweight will have a significant impact on the energy we and our readers use and thus the amount of carbon we add to the atmosphere. --Guy Macon (talk) 07:03, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Guy Macon's thoughts on question 2
Given the above, we need a project with the specific goal of serving pages with the fewest bytes and requests possible. --Guy Macon (talk) 07:03, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
1.000.000.000 of people-in the 2025 - platform extensive for argoment science logical mathematic
151.61.250.37
Response by 151.61.250.37
151.61.250.37's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
151.61.250.37's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
I like
217.87.119.89
Response by 217.87.119.89
217.87.119.89's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.87.119.89's thoughts on question 2
...Ich mag die Seite weil wegen isso.
Strategy 2015
Anonym's thoughts on question 1
Да, мобильные устройства очень быстро развиваются и распространяются! Неплохо было бы если вы разработаете приложения для таких платформ как: iOS, Android, Symbian, Windows phone... Это будет большим плюсом для вашей стратегии 2015.
Anonym's thoughts on question 2
Wikimedia развивался бы очень быстро если вы разработаете приложения для устройств и улучшите дизайн сайтов wikimedia & wikipedia...
5.138.64.137
Response by 5.138.64.137
5.138.64.137's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
5.138.64.137's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
175.137.158.140
Response by 175.137.158.140
175.137.158.140's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
If Wikipedia was an mobile app, it will be like a walking encyclopedia. It will be much easier for users to find out the answers that has been bugging them for hours.
But that is not the issue here, the issue is that Wikipedia has always been deemed an unreliable source for school, college and university. Reasons may be because of the easy accessibility of the website and information available on Wikipedia.
Imagine if wikipedia was made into a popular and convenient mobile app. Everyone will be using the app for answers not only for personal self-enhancement usage but also for destructive usage such as cheating during a test or assignment. It also makes people lazy to search for answers the good old fashion way.
But long story short, people are getting lazy nowadays and there's no changing. Either way the Wikipedia mobile app will be a big hit without any innovation and with minimum effort, younger generations will be reliant on Wikipedia on EVERYTHING and so begins the destruction of the human race.
- We do have apps, for both Andriod and iOs. Thanks! --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 11:29, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
=== 175.137.158.140's thoughts on question 2 ===c
...write here…
Google glasses? How about WIKI GLASSES??? Genius....
NO MORE COMMENTS!!!
Sinjoro Ajnulo
Sinjoro Ajnulo's thoughts on question 1
I think in the coming decade:
- world will be more polarized and more mathematical than ever.
- the number of active Wikipedia editors will increase.
- the rate of increase of quality of content will remain same.
- Wikipedia will survive.
Sinjoro Ajnulo's thoughts on question 2
I think Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that is:
- free as in trying (although we all know yoda’s opinion on this.)
- initiated by the right people.
- edited by both people who should and shouldn’t edit.
- merely a gift of the editors to the world.
I think Wikimedia movement may be interested in strategies for a better:
- fundraising (I’ll skip)
- better management/operating (I’ll skip)
- better content (I could bite)
1. Grandma's badge
An apolitical way to gain and share knowledge constitutes a frame of reference on its own, which is required to define any “movement” (or motion) since there are no absolute frames of reference, which was Einstein's way of being apolitical I suspect. I suggest editors let their "apolitical" reference be approximately the most knowledge-deprived portion of Wikipedia's audience, and on that purpose, a "grandma's badge" could be awarded to the ones who have a stronger command on the living force, in the physical sense of course, in Latin if you want. I know quite a lot of people are badge freaks around here, but grandma's badge would be THE badge: "You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother". You did triple major (preferably one soft plus two hard) in a platinum grade school, and have a verified IQ of 140? That’s quite alright, and it should not be too difficult for you to sympathize with the idea that editing Wikipedia is not a challenge to understand, it is a challenge to explain (although these two can be viewed as a bi-instability for editors).
I might also suggest that all baby editors learn to walk sufficiently well (or develop “x-ray vision”) before they learn directions (or play north & south, preferably on C64).
Wikipedia is not moving? It should.
We don't care in which direction? We should.
We can't understand the direction? Nobody can.
We can't do anything? Anything but what we are doing.
Do heaven and earth move? Sure.
(Did Jupiter really sleep with his sister? \\/o/man, please!)
2. Wikipedia school of defensive arts: From inception to extraction no longer than a hundred years!
I have a sister, who is studying law in one of those eevee schools. She showed me a talk page the other day, and said "if you are looking for something, there is a good chance it is in the talk pages", although I suspect she said that because she knew me well. Frankly spoken, I have no idea why she was reading that article, or the editor chitchat about the subject matter. It is (probably) true that we share more than 45% (and less than 56%) of our genes, but it reminded me that I've never seen my father, and neither did she. After I read the section, I immediately thought about an improvement to Wikipedia: I remember somebody said something about forming a team for community engagement in one of below comments. I could suggest forming another specialized team to extract case-studies from talk pages to constitute a set of examples for interested editors, to illustrate the kind of editors that could help Wikipedia more effectively than others; don't worry, information in public domain can be modified freely; free as in freedom. Another reason not to worry is, as Lincoln said, "We cannot escape history".
I think Wikipedia doesn't need all kinds of editors. Let me make absolutely clear, if I can (this would be the time I wasn’t being neutral), that "neutrality" hasn't been found yet among fundamental forces of nature, and if it had been, that would not only be "big" but it could also perturb the concept of "mission", although I'd be perfectly comfortable with Wikipedia being mission-less. In fact, having a sense of fundamental neutrality at the moment of this writing would be even better; it would be like teaching a graduate level thermodynamics course, and talking about reversible processes as if you have seen one.
3. Public-in-contact rating
I saw somebody suggested public rating of articles. I also seem to remember the words twitter and youtube for some reason. I don't think public rating would work for "freedom" in Wikipedia scale, although a smart guy, who is living in somebody else’s shoes, could keep working on his mutating algorithm (or whatever). I think public wouldn’t give a "free" indicator. Perhaps a good-enough and easy to implement solution could be to involve editors' (non-editor) folks to rate articles; they are ‘public’ after all. Think of it like those human-computer interaction people hanging around with a prototype, letting people touch it and feel it you know, or like code-breaking challenges published publicly in gchq website, if you will. Of course, no editors should turn this into a community service; keep it to a dozen reviewer per editor, which would effectively enlarge the reviewer space by an order-of-magnitude. Knowing how to serve would be a critical requirement of community service, I imagine, although I’m fairly certain I don’t know how to do it properly.
4. Emphasis on cross-reivew: review of articles on hard-sciences by softies and vice-versa
I don’t know about articles on hard-sciences, but articles on social sciences quite often make me ask the question “is there a point in writing fifty billion pages if less than half will make sense?” I guess a philosopher could always have a statistician handy, although I always vote yes for people from maths, physics, EECS, and astro/aero disciplines.
[[Special:MyLanguage/#REDIRECT[[]]]]
203.25.82.62
Response by 203.25.82.62
203.25.82.62's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
203.25.82.62's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
- REDIRECT[[
]]#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[4]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
50.174.102.18
Response by 50.174.102.18
50.174.102.18's thoughts on question 1
- A dramatic shift in education with a smaller percent of people able to attend/afford college, more frequent need for career (re)education, and education in much smaller increments, esp. in technical domains.
- More people reading articles not in their mother tongue.
50.174.102.18's thoughts on question 2
Redesign the structure of Wikipedia articles -- esp. technical articles -- for more effective pedagogy and to speak to a general audience. Readers with a wide range of backgrounds should be able to understand Wikipedia articles.
Many current Wikipedia articles in technical domains such as mathematics, engineering, and science begin with a definition that's difficult or impossible to understand by people who are not already steeped in the topic. The first paragraph often depends on citations to several other Wikipedia and Wiktionary pages, making the reader have to trace through a web of interdependent articles. Too few articles begin at the beginning.
After the beginning, such articles assume the reader understands graduate level mathematics. They assume the reader already knows and remembers the mathematical notation used in the article, even though mathematicians do not agree on notation.
Some Wikipedia discussion pages debate whether the purpose of the article is to "inform" vs. "teach." That's silly. You cannot inform people about a new (to them) topic without teaching! You don't have to test them on it (although I won't entirely discard that idea) or connect them to other students, but you do have to explain it.
Article design for pedagogy:
- Write for a general audience, including people without a college education and people from other disciplines than the article.
- Don't lose the reader in a web of articles to get started. Begin at the beginning or link to an introduction/background article for that domain.
- Orient the reader with some background and the simplest possible explanation possible first, then fill in more detail, then give a precise definition. Do not begin with a precise definition that's only readable by experts.
- Don't require more mathematics or other background than necessary.
- Introduce the notation used.
- ...
Wikipedia design for pedagogy:
- Add material and structure that's broader than a single article but richer than a portal to many articles. This should organize micro-domains into approachable batches with background, recommended reading order for several articles, and connective material. Minimize external and forward references in these recommended articles.
- Add how-to articles?
- ...
offline condensed wiki dictionary
91.99.224.116
Response by 91.99.224.116
91.99.224.116's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
91.99.224.116's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
i think you'd better build an offline condensed wiki dictionary .
84.144.66.72
Response by 84.144.66.72
84.144.66.72s Gedanken zu Frage 1
...bitte hier angeben...
84.144.66.72s Gedanken zu Frage 2
...bitte hier angeben... penis
24.21.218.73
Response by 24.21.218.73
24.21.218.73's thoughts on question 1
One trend might be toward increasing use of smart bots not only to correct grammar and sort categories but also to write text, cite references, and automatically archive every external link. There may come a time when the encyclopedia encounters a Humpty Dumpty moment where we are not in control of content. Another trend might be toward commercialization of the encyclopedia where content is controlled by marketers. In some parts of the world our content might be managed by the ministry of information. For now, the encyclopedia is well connected online, but we could be just another image of Myspace before Facebook was invented.
24.21.218.73's thoughts on question 2
A thriving and healthy Wikimedia is able to avoid the eventualities mentioned in my answer to question one, but it takes a village.
Effect on the internet as a result of increased numbers of users, and particularly with the use of mobile devices:
2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66
Response by 2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66
2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66's thoughts on question 1
...write here…You have asked an interesting question. My initial thought reverts back to what is common today. My answer is opinionated. It seems that an increasing number of people wage in on subjects to which they are not necessarily adequately acquainted. This insures that their response will be less than useful. It is also disconcerting to read responses from people who are grammatically incoherent.
I would guess that you are going to see more of the same, thus making intelligence greatly masked, if not entirely missing.
Richard G. Alps, Colorado, USA
2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66's thoughts on question 2
...write here…I dare not think. Mass confusion??
UI and search engine
Response by 103.242.150.17
103.242.150.17's thoughts on question 1
UI and search engine - people like nice looking pages to make it interesting
103.242.150.17's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
59.136.210.211
Response by 59.136.210.211
質問1への私の考え
...例えば、間違った情報を共有してしまうと正しい情報が認識されにくくなると思う。私は政治家が隠しているUFO技術を公開して欲しいと強く願う。UFO技術を戦争に使用することは許されないと思うからだ。それから正しい翻訳ソフトが発達して欲しいけど、それは難しいと思う。...
質問2への私の考え
...ウィキペディアは今後、様々な変化をしたとしても商業目的でページを閲覧されるのは好ましくないと思う。知識を共有するという点でウィキペディアは全ての人に平等の権利をもたらす事ができる重要な場所になると思う。...
91.90.65.192
Response by 91.90.65.192
91.90.65.192's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
91.90.65.192's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
1: More people willing to learn 2: Honestly you guys are doing great, just keep on doing what you're doing. One thing though, idk how to fix it, is making it so that not everybody can edit everything. Kind of a cooldown system where if your edits get thumbs ups for factual correctness you would get a shorter cooldown, and if got downvotes, for for example miss-information, you would get a longer cooldown.
more pawn
78.33.14.82
Response by 78.33.14.82
78.33.14.82's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
78.33.14.82's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
202.65.183.3
Response by 202.65.183.3
202.65.183.3's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
202.65.183.3's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Uring mangagawa hukbong mapagpalaya
Mrwellnaulak
Response by Mrwellnaulak
Mrwellnaulak's thoughts on question 1
...For the Zo people/Zomi family to harmonise in a nation. The Zo people were three groups; Kuki,Chin,Mizo. The kukies is Zomi and absorb some of the clan. The chin is also said itself zomi and absorb some clan. The mizo also absorb some clan by a key. In this therefore why i see the zo people cannot harmonise in a nation in any one of these. Besides,among these three groups(Kuki,Mizo,Chin) equal number of members cannot enter in the groups. But the new constraction is greatly opposed. My action is all the distinction are suppress with human right.
Mrwellnaulak's thoughts on question 2
...Protection of to distinc important events,culture,etc
88.247.104.79
Response by 88.247.104.79
88.247.104.79's thoughts on question 1
...tulis di sini...
88.247.104.79's thoughts on question 2
...tulis di sini...
KISITLAMAYI KALDIRIN. İSTEYEN İSTEDİĞİ KADAR BİLGİ VEREBİLSİN. BU REKLAM DAHİ OLSA. EĞER BİR YERDE KISIT VARSA ORADA BÜYÜMEDE DE KISTLAMA VARDIR DEMEKTİR BENCE
ngb uuj
117.0.33.133
Response by 117.0.33.133
117.0.33.133's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
117.0.33.133's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
79.241.158.174
Response by 79.241.158.174
79.241.158.174's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
79.241.158.174's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
ihr seit behindert
Jdz mediA Spitfire Chin gang going in Hold tight Tbone on cam nottingham shottingham begin
46.18.178.21
Response by 46.18.178.21
46.18.178.21's thoughts on question 1
...write here… People need to know about this. It has changed my life for the better and it can others too if you give it a chance
46.18.178.21's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
81.218.251.251
Response by 81.218.251.251
81.218.251.251's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
81.218.251.251's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
i very likee
159.255.77.74
Response by 159.255.77.74
159.255.77.74's thoughts on question 1
Продолжение массового перехода на мобильные устройства
159.255.77.74's thoughts on question 2
Развитие мобильной версии сайта и приложений для разных мобильных платформ,возможно больше проектов где возможно задействовать участников без регистрации
62.178.250.9
Response by 62.178.250.9
62.178.250.9's thoughts on question 1
- Further "proletarization" - more mass, less class. (I'm not sure if this is the right word.) International public use of Internet started mostly between students and university staff, tech faculties first. Then big companies (and their employees) joined and Internet changed. Then small companies and their employees joined and Internet changed. Then most of them got Internet at home, so spouse and kids and their friends joined - and Internet changed again. Then my mother and her friends joined, and Internet didn't change much ... well it did for the kids now getting daily e-mails from their parents ;)
I'd say Internet will change, the mass will grow, but the quality won't grow that much. Now all age groups participate - and it will take less time for the older to join within that next billion.
- More global village effects. Which means more opportunity to experience other cultures, but also more war on the Internet, more spam, more scam.
62.178.250.9's thoughts on question 2
- Try to build a natural project / social structure to answer the challenges. Stick to high standards of open society. Avoid bureaucratic approaches, avoid and prevent bureaucratic mindset. Fight racism. Always show quality. Stay true to the goals. Provide for the people to enable their development and exchange.
- Some of the answers above give very good ideas about what to do. E.g. online education for editors where they can learn about the best practices, about caveats and pitfalls.
62.255.14.178
Response by 62.255.14.178
62.255.14.178님의 질문 1에 대한 생각
...여기 써 주세요…
62.255.14.178님의 질문 2에 대한 생각
...여기 써 주세요… yah sick mate this is seckk!!!!
2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62
Response by 2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62
2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62s Gedanken zu Frage 1
Bedeutend wäre wenn die nächste Milliarde persönliche Gegebenheiten gleichermaßen einfließen lassen könnte als nur das rein Wissenschaftliche Denken, Das bloße ansammeln von Wissen ohne den Spiegel der Person erzeugt zwar reines Uran sollte aber die Pluto "Seelische" Umsetzung implementieren.Ob das Echtzeit Internet mit Lichtgeschwindigkeit ab 2020 Seelische Gerechtigkeit erzeugt ist lediglich zu hoffen meier Meinung nach lediglich eine Veränderung im Unveränderlichen. Seelische Gesundheit bleibt auch nach 2020 eine Persönliche Realität und lässt sich nicht ausschließlich in Plutonisches Plasma transformieren.
2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62s Gedanken zu Frage 2
Erfolgreich ist wenn der Leser dieser Zeilen bedenkt das nicht nur eine Html Seite einen Kopf und Körper hat und es ein privat leben in Lichtgeschwindigkeit schon jetzt gibt. Selbstlernende Computersysteme erzeugen nicht immer die Luft die der evulutionären Reise der Seele behagt.
Rberchie
Response by Rberchie
Rberchie's thoughts on question 1
...write here…I think Wikipedia should be more audio visual for instance we can have a software fro reading articles again some articles may need self explanatory videos.
Rberchie's thoughts on question 2
...write here…Thriving Wikimedia project should have audio visuals and disability friendly apps.--Rberchie (talk) 10:20, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
78.174.63.56
Response by 78.174.63.56
78.174.63.56's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
78.174.63.56's thoughts on question 2
... get rid of your ass faggot mods and man up Wales. Democracy and internet does not go too well you know, take the harness and tame wikipedia…
123.236.196.70
Response by 123.236.196.70
123.236.196.70's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
I dont see any major trend other than those mentioned.
123.236.196.70's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
(1) Writing / editing articles should be easy. I find it quite technical and think it requires website programming knowledge.
(2) More stress and importance should be given to authenticity of articles published.
87.255.31.241
Response by 87.255.31.241
87.255.31.241's thoughts on question 1
публичные компьютеры
87.255.31.241's thoughts on question 2
вики-сферы - рабочие зоны.
203.205.28.13
Response by 203.205.28.13
203.205.28.13's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
203.205.28.13's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
I am a junior student( grade 7) and I often use wikipedia to find information, but sometimes I have to find on another webpages.With me, instead of asking your visitors do add information, why don't you study or hire some historians and scientists to add your correct and reliable information? Once I am looking for information about bat and the information is not enough. Keeping checking Wikipedia, asking your customers their thoughts(like this), what do they want...OR you show everybody how much important you are on Internet. But snyway at the moment, you are doing a very good job and I have to say that Wikipedia is the key word of my searching list! ^_^
93.72.10.62
Response by 93.72.10.62
Думки 93.72.10.62 щодо питання 1
...пишіть тут…
Думки 93.72.10.62 щодо питання 2
...пишіть Думаю ніяк, бо наступного мільярда користувачів може і не бути, бо вони для мого Бога нічого доброго не зробили.
RA je nejmenovaná dívka z 9.A. Jen řve a bere láhve.Byla také v republice.ČAU.
74.15.94.116
Response by 74.15.94.116
74.15.94.116's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
74.15.94.116's thoughts on question 2
...write here… L'existence de Dieu ne peut être ni prouvée ni réfutée. La Bible dit clairement que nous croyons doit accepter que Dieu existe: «Or sans la foi il est impossible de lui plaire; car celui qui se approche de Dieu doit croire qu'il existe et récompense ceux qui le cherchent» (Hébreux 11: 6). Si Dieu voulait, il pourrait immédiatement prouver au monde entier, et ainsi prouver qu'il existe. Mais se il le faisait, il n'y aurait pas besoin de la foi. "Jésus lui dit:« Vous croyez parce que vous me avez vu. Heureux ceux qui ne ont pas vu et qui ont cru »(Jean 20:29). Cela ne signifie pas qu'il n'y a aucune preuve de l'existence de Dieu. La Bible déclare que« les cieux racontent la gloire de Dieu et le firmament Fait foi de ses mains; Aujourd'hui proclame à jour, de nuit proclame au soir. Vous entendrez pas de mots, pas de parole, sans entendre leur voix; leur voix à travers toute la terre, leurs mots à la fin du monde "(Psaume 19: 1-5). Nous regardons les étoiles, et de comprendre l'univers grandeur infinie, nous observons les merveilles de la nature, et en regardant la la beauté d'un coucher de soleil - toutes ces choses pointent vers un Dieu Créateur Et si ces choses ne sont pas assez, Montrer du doigt nos propres cœurs aussi que Dieu existe dans Ecclésiaste 3:11 dit, "Il a également mis l'éternité dans le cœur humain».. (traduction anglaise). Au plus profond de nous, il ya une reconnaissance qu'il ya quelque chose au-delà de cette vie et quelqu'un au-delà de ce monde. Nous ne peut nier cette connaissance intellectuellement, mais la présence de Dieu en nous et autour de nous reste encore évidente. En dépit de cette Bible avertit que certaines personnes seront toujours nier l'existence de Dieu: «L'insensé dit lui-même:« Dieu ne est pas "! (Psaume 14: 1). Depuis la majorité des gens dans l'histoire, dans toutes les cultures, les civilisations et les continents ont cru en une forme de Dieu existe, alors il doit y avoir quelque chose (ou quelqu'un) qui est la cause de cette croyance. En plus des arguments bibliques pour l'existence de Dieu, il ya aussi des arguments logiques. Il est tout d'abord l'argument ontologique. Le plus célèbre preuve ontologique de Dieu, utilise l'idée de Dieu pour prouver l'existence de Dieu. Il commence par une définition de Dieu comme «la plus grande créature que vous pouvez imaginer." Ensuite, il fait valoir que ce est plus d'exister que de ne pas exister, et que la plus grande créature imaginables doit donc exister. Si Dieu ne existait pas, alors Dieu ne serait pas le plus grand être envisageable, et ce serait en contradiction avec la définition même de Dieu. Un deuxième argument est le téléologique. L'argument téléologique souligne que puisque l'univers affiche une telle conception étonnante, comme il le fait, il doit y avoir un concepteur divine derrière elle. Si, par exemple. le soleil était juste un peu plus près ou plus loin de la terre, de sorte qu'il ne serait pas donner vie à tellement comme il le fait. Si les éléments dans notre atmosphère étaient quelques points de pourcentage inférieur, comme le ferait presque toute la vie sur la planète meurent. Le risque d'une seule molécule de protéine proliférer au hasard, est égal à 1 à 10: 243 (ce est-dizaines, suivie de 243 zéros). Une cellule unique est composé de millions de molécules de protéines. Un troisième argument logique pour Dieu existe, appelé l'argument cosmologique. Chaque effet doit avoir une cause. L'univers et tout ce qu'il est un effet. Il doit y avoir quelque chose qui a fait que tout a été créé. Il peut finalement être quelque chose qui n'a pas eu un impact, mais qui a fait que tout le reste a été créé. Cette "sans effet", ou la cause est Dieu. Un quatrième argument est appelé l'argument moral. Chaque culture dans l'histoire a eu une certaine forme de loi. Tout le monde a un sens de ce qui est bien et le mal. Meurtre, le mensonge, le vol et acte immoral est presque universellement inacceptable. D'où vient ce sens du bien et du mal viennent de si pas d'un Dieu saint? En dépit de tout cela, la Bible nous dit que les gens vont rejeter la connaissance claire et indéniable de Dieu et de croire un mensonge place. Dans Romains 1:25 dit, "Ils ont échangé la vérité de Dieu en mensonge et ont adoré et servi la créature au lieu du Créateur -. Qui est béni éternellement Amen" La Bible déclare aussi que les gens ne ont aucune excuse pour ne pas croire en Dieu : "Pour ses attributs invisibles, sa puissance éternelle et sa divinité, a été vu depuis la création du monde et est connu par ses actes Ils sont sans excuse." (Romains 1:20). Les gens rejettent Dieu existe, en l'appelant «non-scientifique» ou parce que «il n'y a aucune preuve» pour elle. La vérité est qu'une fois qu'ils admettent que Dieu existe, de sorte qu'ils doivent aussi se rendent compte qu'ils sont responsables devant Dieu et son pardon besoin (Romains 3:23; 6:23). Si Dieu existe, alors nous sommes responsables devant lui avec nos actions. Si Dieu ne existe pas, alors nous pouvons faire exactement ce que nous voulons, sans Dieu pour nous juger. Ce est la raison pour laquelle tant de gens se accrochent à la théorie de l'évolution - il leur donne une alternative à croire en un Dieu créateur. Dieu existe, et tous les gens savent à la fin qu'il existe. Le fait que tant de gens avec des échantillons de peau et de cheveux de la réfuter son existence est en soi un bon argument qu'il existe. Comment savons-nous que Dieu existe? Comme chrétiens, nous savons que Dieu existe parce que nous parlons avec lui tous les jours. Nous entendons parler de nous audible, mais nous sentons sa présence, nous connaissons son leadership, nous savons son amour, et nous aspirons à sa grâce. Les choses ont eu lieu dans nos vies qui ne peuvent se expliquer par le fait que Dieu existe. Dieu a fait le grand miracle qu'il nous a sauvés et changé nos vies, nous ne pouvons pas faire autrement que de reconnaître et de féliciter son existence. Aucun de ces arguments peut convaincre ceux qui refusent de reconnaître ce qui est déjà tellement évident. L'existence de Dieu doit finalement être acceptée par la foi (Hébreux 11: 6). La foi en Dieu ne est pas le même que l'intensification aveuglément dans une pièce sombre; Ce est une étape sûre dans une pièce bien éclairée, où la majorité des gens sont déjà présents.
81.110.136.226
Response by 81.110.136.226
81.110.136.226's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
81.110.136.226's thoughts on question 2
...write here… gtyfftyfftfkutyfufyo876yrorfuyfuyhfuyfyfyfyufjkhguyfnhvyfhju7ruytfdutnbfjklbfjkbgjkgfdhbljksbunturbutnburtntgnnjdnjfuckurehbgfeurbgrbgrbebbrugbhvnbfuebigyfbuvhnbuhghgoegwbjgnfjnhkthgewungkgmbrtgehsjlfrekjemwiuoehgebgwuygruygfwuygqigfnqogyuqomrgqorg nmuoryqgmiucygxunt,ymt,ymt,ymbvybybeytbmviybiyebvmoyiebvmxyueoqwuivbym
fufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufuffufuffufufufufufuffuffufu
伊東基成
Response by 伊東基成
質問1への私の考え
今まではデジタルデバイドで取り残されることの多かった高齢者だったが、ネットに詳しい老人が増えてくる。引退後の十分な自由時間を使って自宅で出来るボランティア活動や、ネットビジネスで現役以上の生産性を上げる老人が目立ってくるのではないでしょうか。
質問2への私の考え
...こちらに記入してください... 今はすぐに良いアイデアが浮かびませんでした。日本語のページに限っていえば警告も含めて客観性が保たれていると思います。これはこのまま継続していって欲しいです。それを踏まえた上で得意分野の事前登録などを行ってみてはどうでしょうか。
85.255.46.227
Response by 85.255.46.227
85.255.46.227's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
85.255.46.227's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
I think its a pretty good site! It help me alot! thanks bro! Heil.
Semdewinter
Response by Semdewinter
Semdewinter's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
Semdewinter's thoughts on question 2
...write here… semdewinter: I believe that education should be a fundamental right. Today however it is expensive and inefficient. free tutorials already exist but can be beter implemented in wiki, both internal and extarnal (with a link to sites).
217.247.249.57
Response by 217.247.249.57
217.247.249.57's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.247.249.57's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Big Advice! Please do this! It's dire!!
124.149.30.219
Response by 124.149.30.219
124.149.30.219's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
124.149.30.219's thoughts on question 2
...write here… Hey! Quick advice, one reason people prefer other sources of internet information is that Wikipedia looks horrible, absolutely disgusting, It's daunting and confusing to use, hard to find what you want and everything just doesn't look how it should, it is 2015 so you should get with the times, go for a more vivid, metro, clean look, a better font, different logos and make everything modern, choose a style and stick with it, for example, Google's Lollipop Material Design, Windows Metro UI design, Apples iOS 7/8 Flat transparency design, Do something 2015, otherwise people will just assume this is a website from before and numbers will decline, I've already asked some people and they say Wikipedia is hard to use and looks bad.
Do something.
103.224.147.146
Response by 103.224.147.146
103.224.147.146's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
103.224.147.146's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
launch a wiki app which can support mobile phones.
115.246.84.8
Response by 115.246.84.8
115.246.84.8's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
115.246.84.8's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Regarding Wikipedia.
148.83.134.47
Response by 148.83.134.47
148.83.134.47's thoughts on question 1
Internet censorship. Setting up a Tor hidden service for Wikipedia would be nice.
148.83.134.47's thoughts on question 2
A project where objectivity is valued above anything else. Transparency is also key. Also run all the wikipedia servers on free software.
đéĘĢģĞĞğğĠǓǓůůũÚ
217.225.72.163
Response by 217.225.72.163
217.225.72.163's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.225.72.163's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
112.133.199.194
Response by 112.133.199.194
112.133.199.194's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
112.133.199.194's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
193.246.111.18
Response by 193.246.111.18
193.246.111.18's thoughts on question 1
Stay awesome.
193.246.111.18's thoughts on question 2
Stay hungry.
213.172.118.190
Response by 213.172.118.190 === 213.172.118.190s Gedanken zu Frage 1 === deine mutter ...bitte hier angeben...
=== 213.172.118.190s Gedanken zu Frage 2 === dein vater ...bitte hier angeben...
zghbkrapv;csnkg[p0g;ozsdfk bnazsdlijfzdfh
213.87.139.210
Response by 213.87.139.210
213.87.139.210's thoughts on question 1
...write here…'fdpjvboi;zdfgvbodsafmgvpojvbadfpgbjFSD|P}vjodS)fgvbujdf['zjvBzdgn'biosjb[ahjv[oisz cjnspo] bn]drtbm;kj vnszdlc
213.87.139.210's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Collect
Response by Collect
Collect's thoughts on question 1
The trend appears to be going from "written word with thousands of references" into "short declarative statements, capable of being transmitted orally, with visual material as needed" For those users of mobile devices who want "quick information" the articles which are "too long" or which have abstruse wording are going to be avoided, and those which have a larger gallery of images than is currently the rule become of more interest (noting the emphasis on visuals in all the social media now) In addition, we will have to provide an audio version of many articles - which will be a major technological challenge.
Collect's thoughts on question 2
Any thriving (?) project will simply have to reflect quick changes - no one here can make a sensible prediction even five years out. They will, in my view, continue some current trends - a tendency to be more clearly written, and (because of the vagaries of international political situations) likely be more carefully written in accord with being "pure information" rather than the current "reflect the proper answers" standard. Lastly, they will have to provide a great deal more visual information, which will then have to be far more carefully vetted.
75.143.54.195
Response by 75.143.54.195
75.143.54.195's thoughts on question 2
nên nhớ khi tạo web là phải nên tạo một sự chú ý đặc biệt để được nhiều người biết đén
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "remember when creating web is to create a special attention to be known"
KATHREN THE GREAT
Response by KATHREN THE GREAT
A very different view of the world.
KATHREN THE GREAT's thoughts on question 1
...write here… I have a unique view nationally and globally. I began studying Sociology, Psychology, and Human Behavior in my early 20's as a way to understand the World, Life, the Insanity in my family, and myself. It was a survival instinct which has given me my unique outlook, and beliefs. Although it was "Self Education", my study of these subjects has 32 years, and is still going on. I see the global trends, not in terms of what people will be going gaga over, but in terms of how the current technology craze will effect the course of human history. As was noted, most people use mobile devices a great deal. There are some who use only mobile devices. This is where my view truly splits off from the average.... The current, and future- Mobile only- people are interested in two things...constant Communication; with anyone really. This phenomenon is far less "The future of the internet" and a lot more "The emotional instability of the users themselves. Because of technology... the last couple generations of Ignored, neglected, forgotten, and some even verbally abused... young people turn inward, electronically when their home lives are not what they should be. Constant use of mobile tech is more of an ADDICTION/COMPULSION than a MARKETING TREND. Those who are so attached to their mobile devices generally do not do well in the work place, and therefore climb the corporate ladder slowly if at all. They are not interested in knowledge, research, or READING anything other than texts, and the like. This demographic group will always exist, and are increasing only because the population is increasing. There will be decades when it is larger, and others when it is smaller. They simply replaced the "non-lethal" disgruntled and hard to control teen, the mischief makers. Instead of soothing their angst by smoking pot, hanging out, and spray painting the school buildings... they chat incessantly with other unhappy kids...turned twenty-something, turned thirty-something, and on. The constant "NEW THING" technology we have today will not be able to continue on. True advancements in technology is being made in many corners of the world, and it is only a matter of time before announcement after announcement of major breakthroughs on many fronts... will stop the current trend dead in its tracks. A new reality will be born out of the ashes.... more balanced, and accessible... out of necessity. Our markets, our Governments even, will not be able to continue functioning without becoming more balanced. As for the rest of society, who are not attached to their mobile devices 24/7... The younger crowd tend to like the mobile gadgets a great deal more than those in ; say their 40's and 50's. The smaller devices are harder to use, requires the person to sit in odd positions for hours while the painstakingly attempt to write a business plan, or??? Devices as small as a spiral tablet, to a medium laptop will always be around.... for all us grown-ups whom have gotten tired of the novelty of doing everything on a Blackberry, Iphones, Androids, ect. Its already happening. cells larger than a box of Everlasting Gobstoppers are common. Many of my friends are looking forward to cells that can replace Netbooks, and Kindles, and still be a phone. They simply got tired of lugging a briefcase full of electronics. The most important trend in the future will be for DEPENDABLE, EASY TO ACCESS KNOWLEDGE BASES. AND WEATHER THEY ARE 30 WITH THEIR GOBSTOPPER CELL/KINDEL, OR 50 WITH A LARGE DATA BASE/LAPTOP AT HOME THEY CAN CONNECT TO ANYWHERE... A SINGLE, DEPENDABLE, ACCURATE SOURCE OF INFORMATION WILL BE ON ALL THEIR MINDS. The days of having 200 accounts with different websites are over... it isn't the 'FUN' that counts, its what you can get done, and wht you know.
KATHREN THE GREAT's thoughts on question 2
...write here… I think it would be a single site with a page, or pages of links to every kind of knowledge database available. Perhaps links also to reliable journalism, as in BBC; links to webcams in The U.S. Congress, UK's Parliament, and such, where the latest political silliness is easily accessed. Wikipedia articles that have been verified as accurate, written by people whom have also been verified as experts. For the most part, wikipedia has been a wonderful, groundbreaking success. But as time has past, and more people have become aware of it, along with real experts, and good journalistic writing... there are also major crackpots whom have bluffed their way in, written articles that are not even remotely accurate... and no one at Wiki knows because they too, are not experts in that particular field, nor should they be expected to. I know this would mean a major increase in Wiki staff, so as to pre-qualify those who want to volunteer their time. However; many organizations make use of volunteers and use a verification process. A good friend of mine is a Volunteer Coordinator for a local Hospice. And if that isn't the hardest recruitment job, I don't what would be. She took time to set up online training, and some verification processes she does on line as well. For her field, they also have to fun NCIC checks to ensure the person isn't a felon, or a fake. Other than paying her salary, and miles she is required to drive... there is very little cost to her company. Another trend I see is need for more varied knowledge databases. For instance... I was trying to find a reliable dictionary for First Nation blackfoot, or cree languages. There isn't one. But if your volunteer recruitment was more aggressive... as in making calls to Chief's office, or anyone of several very good Native American, and First Nation Colleges: Explain your purpose of making important knowledge available to all without cost, as knowledge should be... I bet you would have many new recruits you wouldn't have to put through a verification process. In fact- Colleges and Universities world wide are full of knowledgeable people whom might never have thought of contributing, or perhaps the Heads of University departments, who have students needing things to do for extra credit, or simply to keep them out of the Deans hair, they could assign THE WRITING, EDITING, OR DOING VERIFICATION WORK FOR WIKI, Organizations like World Health Organization, who are trying to get information out to the public, might assign Undergrad interns to set up, and update a page, or section on their work. The same goes for Law schools, and students... anywhere getting their name out would help them, there are sure to be individuals ready, willing and able to volunteer. Archeologists, Historians, Language Professors... especially those of dead, or nearly so, native languages. Doing there things, I believe would keep Wiki in the top spot for information. Perhaps open an investigative unit... example. I ran a search on U.S. Government Organizations. I was shocked to see the number there were. What do they do? , Is it redundant, or unnecessary information they are gathering? How much are the employees of each organization being paid-or how much does it cost, overall, to keep it going? Is it important to the functioning of our nation? Who started it? That would be a section all its own, it would have so much information in ti. here is another... There is a Native American, and First Nation reservation just east of the Great Lakes that covers both sides of the border with Canada. They are restricted a great deal when it comes to crossing the river to the others side of their own land. Canada has one set of reasons tfor not allowing them free access, the U.S. has another. I venture very few know about it... but if a Wiki investigator looked into it, and wrote a report for ..."NEGLECTED HUMAN ISSUES WORLDWIDE" section, lots more people would know, and ask questions, and poke at politicians until something is done. These are the ways Wiki, can gain the top spot, and all the respect, and always be known to wvwry family, every school. I did not put my email on my account because I do not want it to be available to everyone. But I will leave it here if anyone wishes to ask me questions, or continue the conversation... it is only meant for top Wiki personal. I do not wish to get emails from volunteers, or others whom have left comments here. And I do check to insure the identity of everyone I corresponded with. I am very willing to share ideas, but only with those who can bring about change, be respectful , and please do not intrude where you are not invited. Thank You. k.ann3824@yahoo.com
212.154.61.126
Response by 212.154.61.126
AI ready wikipedia
212.154.61.126's thoughts on question 2
As the AI progress, wikipedia may play major role as an open database for AI applications. In this context, the database has to be organized and created to support applications to connect, search and even modify it. Such as: "apple" fruit, yellow or red color, eatable, cultivated,... authors should specify these using the html database interface. And also several silhouette drawings(or even a 3d model since there are many 3d artists in this planet) can be useful for future pattern recognition projects. Thanks.
202.3.92.218
Response by 202.3.92.218
202.3.92.218's thoughts on question 2
i recommend to make gallery for sharing information on real time. that could be very helpful for a armatures to develop their skills and able to get a confidence from experts. who knows, you(the founder of wikipedia) could be a winner of the Nobel Prize. lol
My Thoughts
Response by 203.104.11.21
You could probably start by adding in a questionare so people cauld ask what every questions instead of having to read them. cause most of it people cant get feedback on assignments on this sight cause it doesnt have what they need. And also you should have more information on the topics illistrated in your website, there is NOT enough.
173.58.94.127
Response by 173.58.94.127
The information contained in the articles I read are of great importance to people of Norwegian ancestry. With 12 grandcgildren and 9 great grandchildren you can be sure this info wuill be passed along to most all, of them. While are all, patriotic Amercans we have not forgotten our great heritage, Today Norway is the most prosperous country on the planet and according to United Nations one of the most livable and desireable countries inthe world. Granpa Holter came over here in 1895 and would be amazed at the way things have changed since his day.It's to bad there are so few of us in the world!
Rolf Holter
87.209.111.167
Response by 87.209.111.167
87.209.111.167's thoughts on question 1
More emphasis on Wikimedia commons and on translation. The upload wizard is convenient for adding languages.
The gap in know how is big.
87.209.111.167's thoughts on question 2
Bril>
108.56.204.224's thoughts on question 1
"And then there are the powerful pharmaceutical interests that deftly use Wikipedia to distribute their propaganda and control the message. They maniacally troll specific Wikipedia pages to promulgate positive but sometimes-false information about medicines, vaccines, and their manufacturers; and delete negative but often-true information about the same topics. They unabatedly violate Wikipedia’s own rules and disparage scientists, advocates, and reporters who research medical and vaccine controversies by controlling their Wikipedia biographical pages. Conversely, they scrub all of the controversial information from the biographical pages of those pharmaceutical and research officials whom they are paid to defend. This phenomenon is surely one factor contributing to shameful study results that compared several Wikipedia articles about medical conditions to peer-reviewed research papers, and found that Wikipedia contradicted medical research 90 percent of the time. You may never fully trust what you read on Wikipedia again. Nor should you. | SPIN CYCLE
Attkisson, Sharyl (2014-11-04). Stonewalled: My Fight for Truth Against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation, and Harassment in Obama's Washington (Kindle Locations 920-928). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition. "
108.56.204.224's thoughts on question 2
I love what you guys do, but sometimes not "how" you do it
218.94.132.84
Response by 218.94.132.84
218.94.132.84's thoughts on question 1
建立兴趣圈子、兴趣小组机制，把拥有共同兴趣点的高品质用户聚拢起来。积极开展众多的线下交流活动、定制品把维基百科打造成为一个拥有众多粉丝的明星品牌。维基百科网友见面会，网友野营、旅行聚会，带有维基百科大佬签字的维基百科纪念衫、纪念杯子、维基百科限量精装版图书、邀请学术领域顶尖专家与幸运网友共进晚餐。——维基百科的权威性、知识的广泛并不具有唯一性，例如，百度百科已经成为维基百科一个强有力的对手。我们只有把握时代的脉搏，与时俱进才能活出我们自己的风格。总之，想在中国打出市场一方面需要注重本土化，另一方面需要会炒作。
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "Build interest circles, interest groups mechanisms to share a common point of interest, high-quality user gather together. Actively carry out exchanges under many lines, fixed products Wikipedia build into a star brand has many fans. Wikipedia will meet friends, friends camping, travel party, Wikipedia commemorative T-shirt with a big brother signed Wikipedia, the Memorial Cup, Wikipedia limited edition hardcover books, invited leading experts in the academic field and lucky friends for dinner. - Wikipedia, the authority does not have extensive knowledge of the unique, for example, Baidu encyclopedia Wikipedia has become a strong opponent. We only grasp the pulse of the times, the times in order to live out our own style. In short, want to hit the market in China need to focus on the one hand, localization, on the other hand need to be speculation."
218.94.132.84's thoughts on question 2
1、引进等级激励机制，对于优秀的编辑人才，给予等级上的、头衔上的或者证书形式的荣誉奖励。 2、邀请学术专业领域人士、行业专家对各种条目进行指导和顾问，使之更具有权威性。 3、与微博大V、企业开展友好互利的合作。我认为不接受企业名义的赞助，不放置企业广告，不能代表需要拒绝一切与企业的合作。我觉得企业有可能会成为维基百科的助推器。
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "1, introduce a grading system for editors with outstanding editing skills, give awards to them in the form of grades, prefixes, or certificates.
- 2, invite academic professionals and industry experts for guidance and consultancy on a variety of articles, to make it more authoritative.
- 3, develop friendly and mutually beneficial cooperation with micro blog authorized users and enterprises. I think that not accepting sponsorship from enterprises and not putting ads does not mean that refusing cooperation with any enterprises. I think the enterprises could become Wikipedia's booster."
71.89.72.163
Response by 71.89.72.163
add more swag
RaidenB1
Response by RaidenB1
RaidenB1's thoughts on question 1
add more flash stuff
RaidenB1's thoughts on question 2
none
107.152.11.3
Response by 107.152.11.3 === 107.152.11.3's thoughts on question 1 === I am not qulified to answer this. "In order to know your enemy, you must be your enemy." Sun Tzu
107.152.11.3's thoughts on question 2
Most educational institutions do not recognize any wikimedia projects as credible despite my arguments. As a student whenever I am researching something the first result is always a very in depth wikimedia article. If students could use wikipedia as a source many more people would visit the site. A study / poll might need to be done on what teachers believe would make wikipedia a credible source. I know i have turned to visiting the wikipedia sources as my cited information.
- Hello, @107.152.11.3:, Did you check our education programs page before? We have been running an education program in collaboration with different volunteers and institutes. The program doesn't promote Wikipedia as a source, but rather encourages more academics to contribute, understand the dynamics of how WP works, and help add more cited resources. --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 10:56, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
76.169.56.120
Response by 76.169.56.120
76.169.56.120's thoughts on question 2
First thought, is make it easier to add articles. This is archaic. Second, Images are becoming more and more the thing of the internet. Make it easier for people to add pictures (with text and suggested use) and then develop ways of sorting them for value and categorization (which article) Third, Wikipedia needs to become as much an educational tool as knowledge source. There is a big difference and only some of your articles are really educational. Fourth, Reduce commercial/advertising entries. Too many Companies, sports organizations, use Wikipedia as a documentation tool or worse, for advertising.
- Hello, regarding editing articles, did you know about our visual editor? It is coming soon, and is supposed to make life easier. As for content, it is controlled via these policies. Thanks --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 11:08, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
128.199.41.249
Response by 128.199.41.249
128.199.41.249's thoughts on question 2
Почему админы сего сайта не русские люди?Почему вы не админы еврейской вики?
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "Why admins of this site is not the Russian people? Why do not Jewish wiki admins?"
202.100.20.110
Response by 202.100.20.110
202.100.20.110对问题一的想法
云端的出现可能意味着互联网会更加智能化
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "The emergence of the Internet cloud will likely mean more intelligent"
202.100.20.110对问题二的想法
对于移动客户端的设计需要更加符合当地用户的使用习惯，版面设计应更加丰富。对于涉及到政治敏感问题有可能影响维基在特殊地区的推广，一定要坚持还原事件真相，不可委曲求全。
- (Machine translation, please help improve...)
- "For mobile client design needs to be more in line with the local user's habits, the layout should be more abundant. For politically sensitive issues related to the possible impact on special areas wiki promotion, we must adhere to restore the truth, not compromises."
76.11.94.94
Response by 76.11.94.94
76.11.94.94's thoughts on question 1
It seems the future of Wikipedia was debated in exactly these terms years ago. Some best cases and worst cases for Wikipedia growth were outlined. Those facing the one billionth user, even 4.5 billionth user were a matter of concern as early as 2010. Is the five hundred millionth user really "the worst user of English on Earth", making vocabulary and even a defining vocabulary the major concerns? Why was she or he never named as the hundred millionth user was? Interestingly, governance did evolve more or less as predicted then, though the ideal Wikimedia board of trustees is always a work in progress.
Some of this stuff is prescient. Clearly problems arising from systemic bias of Wikipedia were anticipated at that time, and conflicts like the recent one between gamers and feminists. The idea of a "natural point of view" anticipates conflicts like science versus religion perspectives that cannot be easily resolved by NPOV alone but require intervention at all twelve leverage points to ensure that neutral editors familiar with science and philosophy have some status. What is rather amazing is that Jimmy Wales is arguing adamantly against the very idea of systemic bias at that time, Larry Sanger is arguing adamantly against needing some referees with priveleged perspective, but both reversed their positions utterly. Florence Devouard was probably most reponsible for recognizing the systemic bias issue as Wikimedia Chair, setting up ArbCom in its current form, and it seems she was doing so largely in reference to this material from 2003-10.
Of all this the questions in Five hundred millionth user seem most interesting, and they point to the more extensive discussion on vocabulary/defining vocabulary and systemic bias of Wikipedia more expansively those listed in Wikipedia:systemic bias. Perhaps a project to extensively update the list of systemic biases would be worthwhile to start?
76.11.94.94's thoughts on question 2
The best cases and wackier visions for Wikipedia from that same time period are much more interesting in the present context than more prosaic "The future of Wikipedia" nuts and bolts discussions. Perhaps expanding a best case list and reviewing value systems that apply to Wikimedia projects, what motivates users for instance, how they achieve autonomy, mastery, purpose, satisfaction, etc., would be a useful start?
It seems Wikipedia is a thriving and healthy project now largely because of these early debates. Maybe this structure of laying out visions, threats, best cases, worst cases and an updated status quo had merit? Keeping them updated over ten years or so surely would have given more useful perspective now.
Perhaps the history of Wikipedia needs to be rewritten also to reflect the fact that people arguing against Wales and Sanger had probably more influence on the project's current form than they ever did. And that Florence Devouard is an organizational genius, if only for getting all these loons to work together. An honest assessment of history is a very good place to start with any vision. Devouard "Anthere" wrote the main articles on twelve leverage points in English and French originally so perhaps those organizing principles were important in the shift from squabbling trolls (Wales, Sanger, "24", etc.) to a more standard NGO board as Wikimedia has now.
And would be equally or more important in future evolution.
74.196.105.62
Response by 74.196.105.62
74.196.105.62's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
74.196.105.62's thoughts on question 2
...write here…I love this. we all have our own thoughts on what is real and true. i know what happened here. and it seems very unreal .
Menschenrechte, Religion, Frieden
217.7.216.10
Response by 217.7.216.10
217.7.216.10's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.7.216.10's thoughts on question 2
Es gibt immer mehr Konflikte auf der Welt. Menschenrechte werden teils mit Füßen getreten, Religionen werden missverstenden. Ein gutter Beitrag von WIKI wäre, eigene Rubriken für "Menschenrechte" und "Religionen der Welt" damit jeder Mensch weiß was man ihm zumuten kann und was nicht (in den "neuen Regionen" wie Teile Asiens, Afrika und Südamerika fehlt generelles Wissen über Menschenrechte) Die Religionen sollten auch eine eigene Rubrik bekommen. Denn nur wer das Denken seines Gegenüber kennt, kann ihn auch verstehen.
Filceolaire
Response by Filceolaire
Filceolaire's thoughts on question 1
The commodification of knowledge. A future where the only knowledge that gets taught is that which can be tested by a multiple choice question. Please not follow this trend. I am an active participant in wikidata but I am conscious that all the metadata in even the best wikidata page put together would barely make a stub article. Continue to develop wikidata and use it to fill infoboxes. Make sure the lead sections really are beginner level summaries of the articles. Make both of these available to others to reuse in varied formats but never forget that these are just appetisers for the main article.
A specific trend I can foresee is the collapse of the school textbook industry, replaced by CC-BY-SA licensed textbooks, compiled on wikiversity, based on wikipedia articles, with new editions reviewed and certified each year by a teams of educators appointed by the various ministries of education. This may take a little longer to happen in Texas.
Another thing I can foresee is "Voice references". WMF has already done work on this and must think of more ways to incorporate information for which there is not a traditional academic reference - first hand accounts of events by the people who were there, quick before they die - a 'Wiki loves grannies' project. This may have to be filtered through another project - Commons perhaps or maybe WikiNews - but it is, I believe, important work which the WMF may well be better placed to do than anyone else.
Filceolaire's thoughts on question 2
Thriving and healthy wikimedia projects will have their content reused in a thousand different formats with different skins available even to not logged in users, with portals promoted to act as the front page of specialised sections, with sites offering verified versions as school textbooks. Think of Open street maps. One set of data available through lots of different routes with corrections and additions steered back to the central repository and made available to all the other versions. We have the start of this with the Google graph reusing our info; in future there will be a load of other sites doing this just as many already use photos from Commons - Wikipedia as a public utility.
What is important is the quality of the information in the articles. Google has recently stated that they will start offering medical advice on search pages which has been checked for quality. This will be the holy grail in future, in my opinion - quality - and as other sites get corrupted by their need to kowtow to advertisers I believe that there is a real niche that wikipedia is poised to fill, supported by the other WMF sites. Many people complain about the quality of wikipedia but look at what they write. Mostly they are complaining that we are failing to live up to the high standards we set ourselves. Few are claiming that others do the job better.
Please murder all deletionists.
203.213.82.212
Response by 203.213.82.212
203.213.82.212's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
203.213.82.212's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Guy Macon
Response by Guy Macon
Guy Macon's thoughts on question 1
As background , I would call your attention to Page Weight Matters, by Chris Zacharias:
- "Three years ago, while I was a web developer at YouTube, one of the senior engineers began a rant about the page weight of the video watch page being far too large. The page had ballooned to as high as 1.2MB and dozens of requests. This engineer openly vented that “if they can write an entire Quake clone in under 100KB, we have no excuse for this!” Given that I agreed with him and I was excited to find a new project, I decided to champion the cause of getting the YouTube watch page to weigh in under 100KB. On the shuttle home from San Bruno that night, I coded up a prototype. I decided to limit the functionality to just a basic masthead, the video player, five related videos, a sharing button, a flagging tool, and ten comments loaded in via AJAX. I code-named the project “Feather”.
- "Even with such a limited set of features, the page was weighing in at 250KB. I dug into the code and realized that our optimization tools (i.e. Closure compilation) were unable to exclude code that was never actually used in the page itself (which would be an unfair expectation of any tool under the circumstances). The only way to reduce the code further was to optimize by hand the CSS, Javascript, and image sprites myself. After three painstaking days, I had arrived at a much leaner solution. It still was not under 100KB though. Having just finished writing the HTML5 video player, I decided to plug it in instead of the far heavier Flash player. Bam! 98KB and only 14 requests. I threaded the code with some basic monitoring and launched an opt-in to a fraction of our traffic.
- "After a week of data collection, the numbers came back… and they were baffling. The average aggregate page latency under Feather had actually INCREASED. I had decreased the total page weight and number of requests to a tenth of what they were previously and somehow the numbers were showing that it was taking LONGER for videos to load on Feather. This could not be possible. Digging through the numbers more and after browser testing repeatedly, nothing made sense. I was just about to give up on the project, with my world view completely shattered, when my colleague discovered the answer: geography.
- "When we plotted the data geographically and compared it to our total numbers broken out by region, there was a disproportionate increase in traffic from places like Southeast Asia, South America, Africa, and even remote regions of Siberia. Further investigation revealed that, in these places, the average page load time under Feather was over TWO MINUTES! This meant that a regular video page, at over a megabyte, was taking more than TWENTY MINUTES to load! This was the penalty incurred before the video stream even had a chance to show the first frame. Correspondingly, entire populations of people simply could not use YouTube because it took too long to see anything. Under Feather, despite it taking over two minutes to get to the first frame of video, watching a video actually became a real possibility. Over the week, word of Feather had spread in these areas and our numbers were completely skewed as a result. Large numbers of people who were previously unable to use YouTube before were suddenly able to.
- "Through Feather, I learned a valuable lesson about the state of the Internet throughout the rest of the world. Many of us are fortunate to live in high bandwidth regions, but there are still large portions of the world that do not. By keeping your client side code small and lightweight, you can literally open your product up to new markets."
Source: [ http://blog.chriszacharias.com/page-weight-matters ]
(Emphasis added, capitalization in original.)
(Reproduced under fair use: "The first factor is regarding whether the use in question helps fulfill the intention of copyright law to stimulate creativity for the enrichment of the general public, or whether it aims to only 'supersede the objects' of the original for reasons of personal profit.")
In addition to the above, keeping our pages small and lightweight will have a significant impact on the energy we and our readers use and thus the amount of carbon we add to the atmosphere. --Guy Macon (talk) 07:03, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Guy Macon's thoughts on question 2
Given the above, we need a project with the specific goal of serving pages with the fewest bytes and requests possible. --Guy Macon (talk) 07:03, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
1.000.000.000 of people-in the 2025 - platform extensive for argoment science logical mathematic
151.61.250.37
Response by 151.61.250.37
151.61.250.37's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
151.61.250.37's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
I like
217.87.119.89
Response by 217.87.119.89
217.87.119.89's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.87.119.89's thoughts on question 2
...Ich mag die Seite weil wegen isso.
Strategy 2015
Anonym's thoughts on question 1
Да, мобильные устройства очень быстро развиваются и распространяются! Неплохо было бы если вы разработаете приложения для таких платформ как: iOS, Android, Symbian, Windows phone... Это будет большим плюсом для вашей стратегии 2015.
Anonym's thoughts on question 2
Wikimedia развивался бы очень быстро если вы разработаете приложения для устройств и улучшите дизайн сайтов wikimedia & wikipedia...
5.138.64.137
Response by 5.138.64.137
5.138.64.137's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
5.138.64.137's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
175.137.158.140
Response by 175.137.158.140
175.137.158.140's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
If Wikipedia was an mobile app, it will be like a walking encyclopedia. It will be much easier for users to find out the answers that has been bugging them for hours.
But that is not the issue here, the issue is that Wikipedia has always been deemed an unreliable source for school, college and university. Reasons may be because of the easy accessibility of the website and information available on Wikipedia.
Imagine if wikipedia was made into a popular and convenient mobile app. Everyone will be using the app for answers not only for personal self-enhancement usage but also for destructive usage such as cheating during a test or assignment. It also makes people lazy to search for answers the good old fashion way.
But long story short, people are getting lazy nowadays and there's no changing. Either way the Wikipedia mobile app will be a big hit without any innovation and with minimum effort, younger generations will be reliant on Wikipedia on EVERYTHING and so begins the destruction of the human race.
- We do have apps, for both Andriod and iOs. Thanks! --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 11:29, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
=== 175.137.158.140's thoughts on question 2 ===c
...write here…
Google glasses? How about WIKI GLASSES??? Genius....
NO MORE COMMENTS!!!
Sinjoro Ajnulo
Sinjoro Ajnulo's thoughts on question 1
I think in the coming decade:
- world will be more polarized and more mathematical than ever.
- the number of active Wikipedia editors will increase.
- the rate of increase of quality of content will remain same.
- Wikipedia will survive.
Sinjoro Ajnulo's thoughts on question 2
I think Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that is:
- free as in trying (although we all know yoda’s opinion on this.)
- initiated by the right people.
- edited by both people who should and shouldn’t edit.
- merely a gift of the editors to the world.
I think Wikimedia movement may be interested in strategies for a better:
- fundraising (I’ll skip)
- better management/operating (I’ll skip)
- better content (I could bite)
1. Grandma's badge
An apolitical way to gain and share knowledge constitutes a frame of reference on its own, which is required to define any “movement” (or motion) since there are no absolute frames of reference, which was Einstein's way of being apolitical I suspect. I suggest editors let their "apolitical" reference be approximately the most knowledge-deprived portion of Wikipedia's audience, and on that purpose, a "grandma's badge" could be awarded to the ones who have a stronger command on the living force, in the physical sense of course, in Latin if you want. I know quite a lot of people are badge freaks around here, but grandma's badge would be THE badge: "You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother". You did triple major (preferably one soft plus two hard) in a platinum grade school, and have a verified IQ of 140? That’s quite alright, and it should not be too difficult for you to sympathize with the idea that editing Wikipedia is not a challenge to understand, it is a challenge to explain (although these two can be viewed as a bi-instability for editors).
I might also suggest that all baby editors learn to walk sufficiently well (or develop “x-ray vision”) before they learn directions (or play north & south, preferably on C64).
Wikipedia is not moving? It should.
We don't care in which direction? We should.
We can't understand the direction? Nobody can.
We can't do anything? Anything but what we are doing.
Do heaven and earth move? Sure.
(Did Jupiter really sleep with his sister? \\/o/man, please!)
2. Wikipedia school of defensive arts: From inception to extraction no longer than a hundred years!
I have a sister, who is studying law in one of those eevee schools. She showed me a talk page the other day, and said "if you are looking for something, there is a good chance it is in the talk pages", although I suspect she said that because she knew me well. Frankly spoken, I have no idea why she was reading that article, or the editor chitchat about the subject matter. It is (probably) true that we share more than 45% (and less than 56%) of our genes, but it reminded me that I've never seen my father, and neither did she. After I read the section, I immediately thought about an improvement to Wikipedia: I remember somebody said something about forming a team for community engagement in one of below comments. I could suggest forming another specialized team to extract case-studies from talk pages to constitute a set of examples for interested editors, to illustrate the kind of editors that could help Wikipedia more effectively than others; don't worry, information in public domain can be modified freely; free as in freedom. Another reason not to worry is, as Lincoln said, "We cannot escape history".
I think Wikipedia doesn't need all kinds of editors. Let me make absolutely clear, if I can (this would be the time I wasn’t being neutral), that "neutrality" hasn't been found yet among fundamental forces of nature, and if it had been, that would not only be "big" but it could also perturb the concept of "mission", although I'd be perfectly comfortable with Wikipedia being mission-less. In fact, having a sense of fundamental neutrality at the moment of this writing would be even better; it would be like teaching a graduate level thermodynamics course, and talking about reversible processes as if you have seen one.
3. Public-in-contact rating
I saw somebody suggested public rating of articles. I also seem to remember the words twitter and youtube for some reason. I don't think public rating would work for "freedom" in Wikipedia scale, although a smart guy, who is living in somebody else’s shoes, could keep working on his mutating algorithm (or whatever). I think public wouldn’t give a "free" indicator. Perhaps a good-enough and easy to implement solution could be to involve editors' (non-editor) folks to rate articles; they are ‘public’ after all. Think of it like those human-computer interaction people hanging around with a prototype, letting people touch it and feel it you know, or like code-breaking challenges published publicly in gchq website, if you will. Of course, no editors should turn this into a community service; keep it to a dozen reviewer per editor, which would effectively enlarge the reviewer space by an order-of-magnitude. Knowing how to serve would be a critical requirement of community service, I imagine, although I’m fairly certain I don’t know how to do it properly.
4. Emphasis on cross-reivew: review of articles on hard-sciences by softies and vice-versa
I don’t know about articles on hard-sciences, but articles on social sciences quite often make me ask the question “is there a point in writing fifty billion pages if less than half will make sense?” I guess a philosopher could always have a statistician handy, although I always vote yes for people from maths, physics, EECS, and astro/aero disciplines.
[[Special:MyLanguage/#REDIRECT[[]]]]
203.25.82.62
Response by 203.25.82.62
203.25.82.62's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
203.25.82.62's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
- REDIRECT[[
]]#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[#REDIRECT[[5]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
50.174.102.18
Response by 50.174.102.18
50.174.102.18's thoughts on question 1
- A dramatic shift in education with a smaller percent of people able to attend/afford college, more frequent need for career (re)education, and education in much smaller increments, esp. in technical domains.
- More people reading articles not in their mother tongue.
50.174.102.18's thoughts on question 2
Redesign the structure of Wikipedia articles -- esp. technical articles -- for more effective pedagogy and to speak to a general audience. Readers with a wide range of backgrounds should be able to understand Wikipedia articles.
Many current Wikipedia articles in technical domains such as mathematics, engineering, and science begin with a definition that's difficult or impossible to understand by people who are not already steeped in the topic. The first paragraph often depends on citations to several other Wikipedia and Wiktionary pages, making the reader have to trace through a web of interdependent articles. Too few articles begin at the beginning.
After the beginning, such articles assume the reader understands graduate level mathematics. They assume the reader already knows and remembers the mathematical notation used in the article, even though mathematicians do not agree on notation.
Some Wikipedia discussion pages debate whether the purpose of the article is to "inform" vs. "teach." That's silly. You cannot inform people about a new (to them) topic without teaching! You don't have to test them on it (although I won't entirely discard that idea) or connect them to other students, but you do have to explain it.
Article design for pedagogy:
- Write for a general audience, including people without a college education and people from other disciplines than the article.
- Don't lose the reader in a web of articles to get started. Begin at the beginning or link to an introduction/background article for that domain.
- Orient the reader with some background and the simplest possible explanation possible first, then fill in more detail, then give a precise definition. Do not begin with a precise definition that's only readable by experts.
- Don't require more mathematics or other background than necessary.
- Introduce the notation used.
- ...
Wikipedia design for pedagogy:
- Add material and structure that's broader than a single article but richer than a portal to many articles. This should organize micro-domains into approachable batches with background, recommended reading order for several articles, and connective material. Minimize external and forward references in these recommended articles.
- Add how-to articles?
- ...
offline condensed wiki dictionary
91.99.224.116
Response by 91.99.224.116
91.99.224.116's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
91.99.224.116's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
i think you'd better build an offline condensed wiki dictionary .
84.144.66.72
Response by 84.144.66.72
84.144.66.72s Gedanken zu Frage 1
...bitte hier angeben...
84.144.66.72s Gedanken zu Frage 2
...bitte hier angeben... penis
24.21.218.73
Response by 24.21.218.73
24.21.218.73's thoughts on question 1
One trend might be toward increasing use of smart bots not only to correct grammar and sort categories but also to write text, cite references, and automatically archive every external link. There may come a time when the encyclopedia encounters a Humpty Dumpty moment where we are not in control of content. Another trend might be toward commercialization of the encyclopedia where content is controlled by marketers. In some parts of the world our content might be managed by the ministry of information. For now, the encyclopedia is well connected online, but we could be just another image of Myspace before Facebook was invented.
24.21.218.73's thoughts on question 2
A thriving and healthy Wikimedia is able to avoid the eventualities mentioned in my answer to question one, but it takes a village.
Effect on the internet as a result of increased numbers of users, and particularly with the use of mobile devices:
2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66
Response by 2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66
2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66's thoughts on question 1
...write here…You have asked an interesting question. My initial thought reverts back to what is common today. My answer is opinionated. It seems that an increasing number of people wage in on subjects to which they are not necessarily adequately acquainted. This insures that their response will be less than useful. It is also disconcerting to read responses from people who are grammatically incoherent.
I would guess that you are going to see more of the same, thus making intelligence greatly masked, if not entirely missing.
Richard G. Alps, Colorado, USA
2601:1:9800:107D:EDDD:7EF3:A804:3F66's thoughts on question 2
...write here…I dare not think. Mass confusion??
UI and search engine
Response by 103.242.150.17
103.242.150.17's thoughts on question 1
UI and search engine - people like nice looking pages to make it interesting
103.242.150.17's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
59.136.210.211
Response by 59.136.210.211
質問1への私の考え
...例えば、間違った情報を共有してしまうと正しい情報が認識されにくくなると思う。私は政治家が隠しているUFO技術を公開して欲しいと強く願う。UFO技術を戦争に使用することは許されないと思うからだ。それから正しい翻訳ソフトが発達して欲しいけど、それは難しいと思う。...
質問2への私の考え
...ウィキペディアは今後、様々な変化をしたとしても商業目的でページを閲覧されるのは好ましくないと思う。知識を共有するという点でウィキペディアは全ての人に平等の権利をもたらす事ができる重要な場所になると思う。...
91.90.65.192
Response by 91.90.65.192
91.90.65.192's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
91.90.65.192's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
1: More people willing to learn 2: Honestly you guys are doing great, just keep on doing what you're doing. One thing though, idk how to fix it, is making it so that not everybody can edit everything. Kind of a cooldown system where if your edits get thumbs ups for factual correctness you would get a shorter cooldown, and if got downvotes, for for example miss-information, you would get a longer cooldown.
more pawn
78.33.14.82
Response by 78.33.14.82
78.33.14.82's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
78.33.14.82's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
202.65.183.3
Response by 202.65.183.3
202.65.183.3's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
202.65.183.3's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Uring mangagawa hukbong mapagpalaya
Mrwellnaulak
Response by Mrwellnaulak
Mrwellnaulak's thoughts on question 1
...For the Zo people/Zomi family to harmonise in a nation. The Zo people were three groups; Kuki,Chin,Mizo. The kukies is Zomi and absorb some of the clan. The chin is also said itself zomi and absorb some clan. The mizo also absorb some clan by a key. In this therefore why i see the zo people cannot harmonise in a nation in any one of these. Besides,among these three groups(Kuki,Mizo,Chin) equal number of members cannot enter in the groups. But the new constraction is greatly opposed. My action is all the distinction are suppress with human right.
Mrwellnaulak's thoughts on question 2
...Protection of to distinc important events,culture,etc
88.247.104.79
Response by 88.247.104.79
88.247.104.79's thoughts on question 1
...tulis di sini...
88.247.104.79's thoughts on question 2
...tulis di sini...
KISITLAMAYI KALDIRIN. İSTEYEN İSTEDİĞİ KADAR BİLGİ VEREBİLSİN. BU REKLAM DAHİ OLSA. EĞER BİR YERDE KISIT VARSA ORADA BÜYÜMEDE DE KISTLAMA VARDIR DEMEKTİR BENCE
ngb uuj
117.0.33.133
Response by 117.0.33.133
117.0.33.133's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
117.0.33.133's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
79.241.158.174
Response by 79.241.158.174
79.241.158.174's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
79.241.158.174's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
ihr seit behindert
Jdz mediA Spitfire Chin gang going in Hold tight Tbone on cam nottingham shottingham begin
46.18.178.21
Response by 46.18.178.21
46.18.178.21's thoughts on question 1
...write here… People need to know about this. It has changed my life for the better and it can others too if you give it a chance
46.18.178.21's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
81.218.251.251
Response by 81.218.251.251
81.218.251.251's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
81.218.251.251's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
i very likee
159.255.77.74
Response by 159.255.77.74
159.255.77.74's thoughts on question 1
Продолжение массового перехода на мобильные устройства
159.255.77.74's thoughts on question 2
Развитие мобильной версии сайта и приложений для разных мобильных платформ,возможно больше проектов где возможно задействовать участников без регистрации
62.178.250.9
Response by 62.178.250.9
62.178.250.9's thoughts on question 1
- Further "proletarization" - more mass, less class. (I'm not sure if this is the right word.) International public use of Internet started mostly between students and university staff, tech faculties first. Then big companies (and their employees) joined and Internet changed. Then small companies and their employees joined and Internet changed. Then most of them got Internet at home, so spouse and kids and their friends joined - and Internet changed again. Then my mother and her friends joined, and Internet didn't change much ... well it did for the kids now getting daily e-mails from their parents ;)
I'd say Internet will change, the mass will grow, but the quality won't grow that much. Now all age groups participate - and it will take less time for the older to join within that next billion.
- More global village effects. Which means more opportunity to experience other cultures, but also more war on the Internet, more spam, more scam.
62.178.250.9's thoughts on question 2
- Try to build a natural project / social structure to answer the challenges. Stick to high standards of open society. Avoid bureaucratic approaches, avoid and prevent bureaucratic mindset. Fight racism. Always show quality. Stay true to the goals. Provide for the people to enable their development and exchange.
- Some of the answers above give very good ideas about what to do. E.g. online education for editors where they can learn about the best practices, about caveats and pitfalls.
62.255.14.178
Response by 62.255.14.178
62.255.14.178님의 질문 1에 대한 생각
...여기 써 주세요…
62.255.14.178님의 질문 2에 대한 생각
...여기 써 주세요… yah sick mate this is seckk!!!!
2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62
Response by 2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62
2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62s Gedanken zu Frage 1
Bedeutend wäre wenn die nächste Milliarde persönliche Gegebenheiten gleichermaßen einfließen lassen könnte als nur das rein Wissenschaftliche Denken, Das bloße ansammeln von Wissen ohne den Spiegel der Person erzeugt zwar reines Uran sollte aber die Pluto "Seelische" Umsetzung implementieren.Ob das Echtzeit Internet mit Lichtgeschwindigkeit ab 2020 Seelische Gerechtigkeit erzeugt ist lediglich zu hoffen meier Meinung nach lediglich eine Veränderung im Unveränderlichen. Seelische Gesundheit bleibt auch nach 2020 eine Persönliche Realität und lässt sich nicht ausschließlich in Plutonisches Plasma transformieren.
2003:5B:E52:29D9:7C6B:E2E2:B0DB:5B62s Gedanken zu Frage 2
Erfolgreich ist wenn der Leser dieser Zeilen bedenkt das nicht nur eine Html Seite einen Kopf und Körper hat und es ein privat leben in Lichtgeschwindigkeit schon jetzt gibt. Selbstlernende Computersysteme erzeugen nicht immer die Luft die der evulutionären Reise der Seele behagt.
Rberchie
Response by Rberchie
Rberchie's thoughts on question 1
...write here…I think Wikipedia should be more audio visual for instance we can have a software fro reading articles again some articles may need self explanatory videos.
Rberchie's thoughts on question 2
...write here…Thriving Wikimedia project should have audio visuals and disability friendly apps.--Rberchie (talk) 10:20, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
78.174.63.56
Response by 78.174.63.56
78.174.63.56's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
78.174.63.56's thoughts on question 2
... get rid of your ass faggot mods and man up Wales. Democracy and internet does not go too well you know, take the harness and tame wikipedia…
123.236.196.70
Response by 123.236.196.70
123.236.196.70's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
I dont see any major trend other than those mentioned.
123.236.196.70's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
(1) Writing / editing articles should be easy. I find it quite technical and think it requires website programming knowledge.
(2) More stress and importance should be given to authenticity of articles published.
87.255.31.241
Response by 87.255.31.241
87.255.31.241's thoughts on question 1
публичные компьютеры
87.255.31.241's thoughts on question 2
вики-сферы - рабочие зоны.
203.205.28.13
Response by 203.205.28.13
203.205.28.13's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
203.205.28.13's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
I am a junior student( grade 7) and I often use wikipedia to find information, but sometimes I have to find on another webpages.With me, instead of asking your visitors do add information, why don't you study or hire some historians and scientists to add your correct and reliable information? Once I am looking for information about bat and the information is not enough. Keeping checking Wikipedia, asking your customers their thoughts(like this), what do they want...OR you show everybody how much important you are on Internet. But snyway at the moment, you are doing a very good job and I have to say that Wikipedia is the key word of my searching list! ^_^
93.72.10.62
Response by 93.72.10.62
Думки 93.72.10.62 щодо питання 1
...пишіть тут…
Думки 93.72.10.62 щодо питання 2
...пишіть Думаю ніяк, бо наступного мільярда користувачів може і не бути, бо вони для мого Бога нічого доброго не зробили.
RA je nejmenovaná dívka z 9.A. Jen řve a bere láhve.Byla také v republice.ČAU.
74.15.94.116
Response by 74.15.94.116
74.15.94.116's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
74.15.94.116's thoughts on question 2
...write here… L'existence de Dieu ne peut être ni prouvée ni réfutée. La Bible dit clairement que nous croyons doit accepter que Dieu existe: «Or sans la foi il est impossible de lui plaire; car celui qui se approche de Dieu doit croire qu'il existe et récompense ceux qui le cherchent» (Hébreux 11: 6). Si Dieu voulait, il pourrait immédiatement prouver au monde entier, et ainsi prouver qu'il existe. Mais se il le faisait, il n'y aurait pas besoin de la foi. "Jésus lui dit:« Vous croyez parce que vous me avez vu. Heureux ceux qui ne ont pas vu et qui ont cru »(Jean 20:29). Cela ne signifie pas qu'il n'y a aucune preuve de l'existence de Dieu. La Bible déclare que« les cieux racontent la gloire de Dieu et le firmament Fait foi de ses mains; Aujourd'hui proclame à jour, de nuit proclame au soir. Vous entendrez pas de mots, pas de parole, sans entendre leur voix; leur voix à travers toute la terre, leurs mots à la fin du monde "(Psaume 19: 1-5). Nous regardons les étoiles, et de comprendre l'univers grandeur infinie, nous observons les merveilles de la nature, et en regardant la la beauté d'un coucher de soleil - toutes ces choses pointent vers un Dieu Créateur Et si ces choses ne sont pas assez, Montrer du doigt nos propres cœurs aussi que Dieu existe dans Ecclésiaste 3:11 dit, "Il a également mis l'éternité dans le cœur humain».. (traduction anglaise). Au plus profond de nous, il ya une reconnaissance qu'il ya quelque chose au-delà de cette vie et quelqu'un au-delà de ce monde. Nous ne peut nier cette connaissance intellectuellement, mais la présence de Dieu en nous et autour de nous reste encore évidente. En dépit de cette Bible avertit que certaines personnes seront toujours nier l'existence de Dieu: «L'insensé dit lui-même:« Dieu ne est pas "! (Psaume 14: 1). Depuis la majorité des gens dans l'histoire, dans toutes les cultures, les civilisations et les continents ont cru en une forme de Dieu existe, alors il doit y avoir quelque chose (ou quelqu'un) qui est la cause de cette croyance. En plus des arguments bibliques pour l'existence de Dieu, il ya aussi des arguments logiques. Il est tout d'abord l'argument ontologique. Le plus célèbre preuve ontologique de Dieu, utilise l'idée de Dieu pour prouver l'existence de Dieu. Il commence par une définition de Dieu comme «la plus grande créature que vous pouvez imaginer." Ensuite, il fait valoir que ce est plus d'exister que de ne pas exister, et que la plus grande créature imaginables doit donc exister. Si Dieu ne existait pas, alors Dieu ne serait pas le plus grand être envisageable, et ce serait en contradiction avec la définition même de Dieu. Un deuxième argument est le téléologique. L'argument téléologique souligne que puisque l'univers affiche une telle conception étonnante, comme il le fait, il doit y avoir un concepteur divine derrière elle. Si, par exemple. le soleil était juste un peu plus près ou plus loin de la terre, de sorte qu'il ne serait pas donner vie à tellement comme il le fait. Si les éléments dans notre atmosphère étaient quelques points de pourcentage inférieur, comme le ferait presque toute la vie sur la planète meurent. Le risque d'une seule molécule de protéine proliférer au hasard, est égal à 1 à 10: 243 (ce est-dizaines, suivie de 243 zéros). Une cellule unique est composé de millions de molécules de protéines. Un troisième argument logique pour Dieu existe, appelé l'argument cosmologique. Chaque effet doit avoir une cause. L'univers et tout ce qu'il est un effet. Il doit y avoir quelque chose qui a fait que tout a été créé. Il peut finalement être quelque chose qui n'a pas eu un impact, mais qui a fait que tout le reste a été créé. Cette "sans effet", ou la cause est Dieu. Un quatrième argument est appelé l'argument moral. Chaque culture dans l'histoire a eu une certaine forme de loi. Tout le monde a un sens de ce qui est bien et le mal. Meurtre, le mensonge, le vol et acte immoral est presque universellement inacceptable. D'où vient ce sens du bien et du mal viennent de si pas d'un Dieu saint? En dépit de tout cela, la Bible nous dit que les gens vont rejeter la connaissance claire et indéniable de Dieu et de croire un mensonge place. Dans Romains 1:25 dit, "Ils ont échangé la vérité de Dieu en mensonge et ont adoré et servi la créature au lieu du Créateur -. Qui est béni éternellement Amen" La Bible déclare aussi que les gens ne ont aucune excuse pour ne pas croire en Dieu : "Pour ses attributs invisibles, sa puissance éternelle et sa divinité, a été vu depuis la création du monde et est connu par ses actes Ils sont sans excuse." (Romains 1:20). Les gens rejettent Dieu existe, en l'appelant «non-scientifique» ou parce que «il n'y a aucune preuve» pour elle. La vérité est qu'une fois qu'ils admettent que Dieu existe, de sorte qu'ils doivent aussi se rendent compte qu'ils sont responsables devant Dieu et son pardon besoin (Romains 3:23; 6:23). Si Dieu existe, alors nous sommes responsables devant lui avec nos actions. Si Dieu ne existe pas, alors nous pouvons faire exactement ce que nous voulons, sans Dieu pour nous juger. Ce est la raison pour laquelle tant de gens se accrochent à la théorie de l'évolution - il leur donne une alternative à croire en un Dieu créateur. Dieu existe, et tous les gens savent à la fin qu'il existe. Le fait que tant de gens avec des échantillons de peau et de cheveux de la réfuter son existence est en soi un bon argument qu'il existe. Comment savons-nous que Dieu existe? Comme chrétiens, nous savons que Dieu existe parce que nous parlons avec lui tous les jours. Nous entendons parler de nous audible, mais nous sentons sa présence, nous connaissons son leadership, nous savons son amour, et nous aspirons à sa grâce. Les choses ont eu lieu dans nos vies qui ne peuvent se expliquer par le fait que Dieu existe. Dieu a fait le grand miracle qu'il nous a sauvés et changé nos vies, nous ne pouvons pas faire autrement que de reconnaître et de féliciter son existence. Aucun de ces arguments peut convaincre ceux qui refusent de reconnaître ce qui est déjà tellement évident. L'existence de Dieu doit finalement être acceptée par la foi (Hébreux 11: 6). La foi en Dieu ne est pas le même que l'intensification aveuglément dans une pièce sombre; Ce est une étape sûre dans une pièce bien éclairée, où la majorité des gens sont déjà présents.
81.110.136.226
Response by 81.110.136.226
81.110.136.226's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
81.110.136.226's thoughts on question 2
...write here… gtyfftyfftfkutyfufyo876yrorfuyfuyhfuyfyfyfyufjkhguyfnhvyfhju7ruytfdutnbfjklbfjkbgjkgfdhbljksbunturbutnburtntgnnjdnjfuckurehbgfeurbgrbgrbebbrugbhvnbfuebigyfbuvhnbuhghgoegwbjgnfjnhkthgewungkgmbrtgehsjlfrekjemwiuoehgebgwuygruygfwuygqigfnqogyuqomrgqorg nmuoryqgmiucygxunt,ymt,ymt,ymbvybybeytbmviybiyebvmoyiebvmxyueoqwuivbym
fufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufufuffufuffufufufufufuffuffufu
伊東基成
Response by 伊東基成
質問1への私の考え
今まではデジタルデバイドで取り残されることの多かった高齢者だったが、ネットに詳しい老人が増えてくる。引退後の十分な自由時間を使って自宅で出来るボランティア活動や、ネットビジネスで現役以上の生産性を上げる老人が目立ってくるのではないでしょうか。
質問2への私の考え
...こちらに記入してください... 今はすぐに良いアイデアが浮かびませんでした。日本語のページに限っていえば警告も含めて客観性が保たれていると思います。これはこのまま継続していって欲しいです。それを踏まえた上で得意分野の事前登録などを行ってみてはどうでしょうか。
85.255.46.227
Response by 85.255.46.227
85.255.46.227's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
85.255.46.227's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
I think its a pretty good site! It help me alot! thanks bro! Heil.
Semdewinter
Response by Semdewinter
Semdewinter's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
Semdewinter's thoughts on question 2
...write here… semdewinter: I believe that education should be a fundamental right. Today however it is expensive and inefficient. free tutorials already exist but can be beter implemented in wiki, both internal and extarnal (with a link to sites).
217.247.249.57
Response by 217.247.249.57
217.247.249.57's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.247.249.57's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Big Advice! Please do this! It's dire!!
124.149.30.219
Response by 124.149.30.219
124.149.30.219's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
124.149.30.219's thoughts on question 2
...write here… Hey! Quick advice, one reason people prefer other sources of internet information is that Wikipedia looks horrible, absolutely disgusting, It's daunting and confusing to use, hard to find what you want and everything just doesn't look how it should, it is 2015 so you should get with the times, go for a more vivid, metro, clean look, a better font, different logos and make everything modern, choose a style and stick with it, for example, Google's Lollipop Material Design, Windows Metro UI design, Apples iOS 7/8 Flat transparency design, Do something 2015, otherwise people will just assume this is a website from before and numbers will decline, I've already asked some people and they say Wikipedia is hard to use and looks bad.
Do something.
103.224.147.146
Response by 103.224.147.146
103.224.147.146's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
103.224.147.146's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
launch a wiki app which can support mobile phones.
115.246.84.8
Response by 115.246.84.8
115.246.84.8's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
115.246.84.8's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Regarding Wikipedia.
148.83.134.47
Response by 148.83.134.47
148.83.134.47's thoughts on question 1
Internet censorship. Setting up a Tor hidden service for Wikipedia would be nice.
148.83.134.47's thoughts on question 2
A project where objectivity is valued above anything else. Transparency is also key. Also run all the wikipedia servers on free software.
đéĘĢģĞĞğğĠǓǓůůũÚ
217.225.72.163
Response by 217.225.72.163
217.225.72.163's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
217.225.72.163's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
112.133.199.194
Response by 112.133.199.194
112.133.199.194's thoughts on question 1
...write here…
112.133.199.194's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
193.246.111.18
Response by 193.246.111.18
193.246.111.18's thoughts on question 1
Stay awesome.
193.246.111.18's thoughts on question 2
Stay hungry.
213.172.118.190
Response by 213.172.118.190 === 213.172.118.190s Gedanken zu Frage 1 === deine mutter ...bitte hier angeben...
=== 213.172.118.190s Gedanken zu Frage 2 === dein vater ...bitte hier angeben...
zghbkrapv;csnkg[p0g;ozsdfk bnazsdlijfzdfh
213.87.139.210
Response by 213.87.139.210
213.87.139.210's thoughts on question 1
...write here…'fdpjvboi;zdfgvbodsafmgvpojvbadfpgbjFSD|P}vjodS)fgvbujdf['zjvBzdgn'biosjb[ahjv[oisz cjnspo] bn]drtbm;kj vnszdlc
213.87.139.210's thoughts on question 2
...write here…
Collect
Response by Collect
Collect's thoughts on question 1
The trend appears to be going from "written word with thousands of references" into "short declarative statements, capable of being transmitted orally, with visual material as needed" For those users of mobile devices who want "quick information" the articles which are "too long" or which have abstruse wording are going to be avoided, and those which have a larger gallery of images than is currently the rule become of more interest (noting the emphasis on visuals in all the social media now) In addition, we will have to provide an audio version of many articles - which will be a major technological challenge.
Collect's thoughts on question 2
Any thriving (?) project will simply have to reflect quick changes - no one here can make a sensible prediction even five years out. They will, in my view, continue some current trends - a tendency to be more clearly written, and (because of the vagaries of international political situations) likely be more carefully written in accord with being "pure information" rather than the current "reflect the proper answers" standard. Lastly, they will have to provide a great deal more visual information, which will then have to be far more carefully vetted.