Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2017/Sources/Austrian Ideenwerkstatt

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


What group or community is this source coming from?

4th workshop for projects and ideas of the Austrian community (Ideenwerkstatt 2017, Etherpad)
virtual location (page-link) or physical location (city/state/country) Office of Wikimedia AT in Vienna, Austria
Location type (e.g. local wiki, Facebook, in-person discussion, telephone conference) in-person discussion
# of participants in this discussion 8


Wikimedia AT was inviting community members to a workshop for a feedback on future projects and initiatives on Saturday, the 25th of March 2017.

The first question was "how important are the following ideas with regard to the year 2030".

5 points = very important 0 points = not important at all

  • 5 points: Supporting friendly behaviour when dealing with one another in the community.
  • 3 points: To find news ways of working together on generating knowledge
  • 3 points: Involving more diverse voices and sources of knwoledge into our work
  • 3 points: Keeping content up to date
Line Statement (summary sentence) keywords
1 Supporting friendly behaviour when dealing with one another in the community. friendly space, community

Summary for the discussion:

Line Statement (summary sentence) Keywords
2 Finding a solution for not everyone being affected by a 2-person-conflict conflicts
3 Concepts for interacting: many Wikipedians need a readbale concept of a code of conduct, for example about how to treat a new editor. Interacting, Code of Conduct, New Editors
4 To welcome means to integrate new authors - we should concentrate on keeping the ones that will come anyway instead of trying to get new authers. The adopt-a-user program is a good start. keeping authors, adopt-a-user
5 An outreach program similar to the adopt-auser program. For dispute settlement. Simplify Rules. It should only be possible to discuss if rules were complied or not, not wether rules are accepted or make sense or not. Fewer rules. Dispute settlement. Simplify rules.
6 Simplify responsibility for Wikipedia in society. When looking from outside it appears strange, what trifles Wikipedians fight about, but these set the tone. Responsibility
7 Strengthen personal contact, more live personal meetings. People with behaviour problems hardly show up in personal meetings. When you cannot find a solution while online, just meet in person. in-person-meetings
8 Diverse, heterogenous groups, that represent society. The distribution of tasks should reflect that - not everyone can do everything. diverse editors
9 The difference between fake news and diverse perspectives, that might be true as well - we need a culture for that. fake news, diverse perspectives, culture
10 A simpler introductory system with earlier rewards for new users. There is very little positive or negative feedback at the beginnging. Can be partially done automatically. The english language game "WikiAdventure" is a good start. introductiory system, feedback, WikiAdventure
11 Newby count instead of edit count. Community members that manage to recruit many new members should be commemorated more. newby count, new members, commemoration
12 Systematic sanctions for toxic behaviour. People who regularly display toxic behaviour should no tbe supported by Wikimedia Organisations in the long run. Opposite standpoint: sanctions don't work. Sanctions, toxic behaviour
13 It's difficult for new users to keep up because of language codes and codes and abbreviations Codes, abbreviations, new users
14 To take responsibility for your own behavior - with your own name. Responsibility
15 You can't do good projects with underslept Wikimedians. You can see in the profiles of some people that they're editing 24/7, without long breaks. A technical solution would be an automatic logout after 7 hours. underslept, automatic logout
16 Not to be left on your won with an idea - when you have an idea it should be carried out together. We need not only online mentoring but also offline mentoring for offline project work. Togetherness, helping each other, mentoring

Line Statement (summary sentence) keywords
17 Quality and up-to-dateness of content content quality

Summary for the discussion:

Line Statement (summary sentence) Keywords
18 periodic proof reading of all articles ("this article was proof read last in 2014") proof reading
19 Checklists: e.g. what should be included in articles on communities, what in articles about geographic locations etc. checklists
20 Readability: another point to measure quality of Wikipedia articles Readability
21 Make updating an issue: Talk about the danger of outdated information on all the responsible portals updating content
22 Initiate an updating-writing contest, perhaps integrate it with the existing template messages/Cleanup contest updating content
23 Written sources for footnotes compulsory? Wrong data in sources / sources not up to date; proof through own pictures. Some written sources are worth less than others. quality of sources
24 Automatisation: automatisation of simple tasks or of the addition of simple data that is needed in all Wikipedias. E.g. through Wikidata. Soccer articles as an example. Automatisation
25 Represent complex sets of topics in a feasible way: e.g. Article about de:Dreißigjähriger Krieg. It is difficult to get an overview over the whole topic. complex content
26 Have a visual representation of historic progression: New visualisations for topics with frequent ongoing changes. Example: Histopedia. Visualisation
27 Non-Euro-centered contents, gap for non-European content. One problem is the lack of sources. content diversity
28 Living with not being up to date. Give notice to readers, that content is not up to date updating content
29 What is qualitiy? This is an ongoing discussion, definitions will change, no final results content quality
30 Engage experts, find ways to do that new users
31 To expand stub articles content improvement