Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2017/Cycle 2/Healthy, Inclusive Communities

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Other languages:
العربية • ‎български • ‎বাংলা • ‎Deutsch • ‎English • ‎español • ‎français • ‎עברית • ‎हिन्दी • ‎magyar • ‎italiano • ‎日本語 • ‎Nederlands • ‎polski • ‎português • ‎русский • ‎Türkçe • ‎українська • ‎Tiếng Việt • ‎中文
The following discussion is closed.

Cycle 2 of the discussion is now closed for final sensemaking and drafting. Please join us soon for the next cycle of this process.

By 2030, the Wikimedia volunteer culture will be fun, rewarding, and inclusive for both existing contributors and newcomers. We will welcome new volunteers to our movement and mentor them to ensure that they have a great experience and continue to participate in the projects. People from every background will feel part of a network of groups and organizations with deep relationships. As a result, our movement will grow both in size and in nature, as our projects flourish under our collective care.

Sub-themes[edit]

This theme was formed from the content generated by individual contributors and organized groups during cycle 1 discussions. Here are the sub-themes that support this theme. See the Cycle 1 Report, plus the supplementary spreadsheet and synthesis methodology of the 1800+ thematic statements.

  • Community health
  • Community engagement & support
  • Diversity & inclusion
  • Gender diversity
  • Internal communication
  • User engagement
  • New users
  • Experienced users
  • Readers

Insights from movement strategy conversations and research[edit]

Insights from the Wikimedia community (from this discussion)[edit]

Insights from partners and experts  [edit]

Insights from user (readers and contributors) research[edit]

Other Research[edit]

Findings from Wikimedia user analytics[edit]

  1. 220,000 people contribute monthly: https://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikimediaAllProjects.htm
  2. Representation is skewed: https://web.archive.org/web/20161024063241/https:/stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportPageEditsPerCountryOverview.htm
  3. English Wikipedia editor retention decline: File:Monthly active editors.enwiki 2016-06.svg
  4. English Wikipedia monthly user retention: File:Enwiki.monthly user retention.survival proportion.svg

Information on Wikimedia affiliates and organized groups[edit]

  1. Wikimedia affiliates and organized groups: m:Wikimedia movement affiliates
  2. 100+ affiliates around the world: File:Wikimedia Capters and WMF Maps.svg

Past community engagement and donor research[edit]

  1. Gender gap remains: m:Community Engagement Insights
  2. Reader motivations: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1702.05379.pdf
  3. Editor motivations: File:Editor_Survey_2012_-_Wikipedia_editing_experience.pdf
  4. Money raised by the Foundation: File:FY1516DonationsByContinent.png
  5. Donor motivation survey: File:Wikimedia 2014 English Fundraiser Survey.pdf

Research from other sources[edit]

  1. "From Blueprint to Scale: The Case for Philanthropy in Impact Investing", http://acumen.org/content/uploads/2013/03/From-Blueprint-to-Scale-Case-for-Philanthropy-in-Impact-Investing_Full-report.pdf
  2. "The Future of Free Speech, Trolls, Anonymity, and Fake News Online", Pew Research Center: http://www.pewinternet.org/2017/03/29/the-future-of-free-speech-trolls-anonymity-and-fake-news-online/
  3. "Online Harassment", Pew Research Center: http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/10/22/online-harassment/
  4. "The Agency, The New York Times, "From a nondescript office building in St. Petersburg, Russia, an army of well-paid “trolls” has tried to wreak havoc all around the Internet": https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/magazine/the-agency.html
  5. "Lithuanian Elves Combat Russian Influence Online", AP: https://apnews.com/27ce7f001bde4ccb9415ce4a0de74af1/lithuanian-elves-combat-russian-influence-online
  6. Underrepresented topics remain that way: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-12-22/how-woke-is-wikipedia-s-editorial-pool
  7. 84% of Wikipedia articles focus on Europe and North America: http://www.markgraham.space/blog/geographies-of-the-worlds-knowledge

Questions[edit]

View discussion of these questions on the talk page

These are the main questions we want you to consider and debate during this discussion. Please support your arguments with research when possible. We recognize you may not have time to answer all the questions; to help you choose where to focus, we have listed three types of questions below. The primary questions are the ones most important to answer during this discussion cycle.

Primary questions
  1. What impact would we have on the world if we follow this theme?  
    • Note that if you already submitted key ideas that answer this question for this theme in the previous discussion, consider just adding a link to that source page versus rewriting the whole statement. (see spreadsheet). If you have something new to add to a comment you made previously, however, please do.
  2. How important is this theme relative to the other 4 themes? Why?
Secondary question
  1. Focus requires tradeoffs. If we increase our effort in this area in the next 15 years, is there anything we’re doing today that we would need to stop doing?
Expansion questions
  1. What else is important to add to this theme to make it stronger?
  1. Who else will be working in this area and how might we partner with them?

Other comments:

Remember, if you have thoughts about the strategy process or larger issues, please share those here, where they are being monitored daily!

If you have specific ideas for improving the software, please consider submitting them in Phabricator or the product's specific talkpage.