Jump to content

Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2017/Sources/Cycle 2/English Wikipedia

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki


What group or community is this source coming from?

name of group English Wikipedia
virtual location (page-link) or physical location (city/state/country) w:en:Wikipedia talk:Wikimedia Strategy 2017
Location type (e.g. local wiki, Facebook, in-person discussion, telephone conference) local wiki
# of participants in this discussion (a rough count) 36


Summary for the discussion
Theme key
  1. Healthy, inclusive communities
  2. The augmented age
  3. A truly global movement
  4. The most trusted source of knowledge
  5. Engaging in the knowledge ecosystem
Questions key
  1. What impact would we have on the world if we follow this theme?
  2. How important is this theme relative to the other 4 themes? Why?
  3. 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?
  4. What else is important to add to this theme to make it stronger?
  5. Who else will be working in this area and how might we partner with them?
Line Theme (refer to key) Question (refer to key) Summary Statement Keyword
1 A 1 We could lead the way in collaborative, online digital humanities. collaboration
2 A 2 This theme is the most important, because the community is the critical success factor. priority
3 A 2 With training and leadership, build self-sustaining teams to solve problems. leadership
4 A 2 As long as some "old guard", real or imagined, refuses to cooperate or engages in behavior characteristic of ownership, improvements will be stifled and lost, and editors will be turned away.  clique
5 A 2 Acknowledge openly that people who are skilled at finding and synthesizing information are not always skilled in social interactions, and vice versa. skills
6 A 3 Monitor and encourage troublemakers to cease and desist, set the entrenched wiki-culture aside, let other ideas to grow into prominence, make the community less rigid and static. rigidity
7 A 3 Diversity will be more about diverse opinions, small cultures and backgrounds, not about gender gap. diversity
8 A 3 Diversity is important, but articles written by people with different backgrounds aren't cohesive and easy to comprehend. style
9 A 4 The word 'connected' should be added to the title of this theme, because a lot of communities remain very separate. connections
10 A 4 The behavior of editors towards other editors may be more important than any edits they make to articles. cooperation
11 A 4 Build tools to track changes and learn how various policies change the healthiness of our community. polices
12 A 5 We could attract more retired scientists. retired scientists
13 B 1 With automation, we could drive out inadequately sourced content, provide better sourced content, and be more reliable. automation
14 B 1 Allow people from all dimensions to access, add, and change the information, don't let "someone" input information into a computer/program and pretend that such information is objective. neutrality
15 B 1 In 2030, our projects may be able to revise and update themselves in real-time, with or without the help of human editors. automation
16 B 1 Given that we're on a course of accelerating change, in 2030, our model of producing content, our editors and programmers could be obsolete. change
17 B 1 If we don't keep up with the state-of-the-art, then some other organization will likely leapfrog Wikipedia. vanguard
18 B 1 It'd be a bad idea to suggest that in possibly upcoming AI era, human contributors won't be needed, because for now, we're lacking manpower. manpower
19 B 1 We should be reliable and free to all rather than state of the art. reliability
20 B 2 Following this theme could allow us to be more effective in the other areas. effectiveness
21 B 2 Now, the technology is the main driving factor, thus it will drive development in the other 4 areas. development
22 B 3 Manual editing is obsolete in comparison with programming, and programming is obsolete in comparison to AI. editing
23 B 3 Don't allow AI edit Wikimedia projects, because it can outsmart us. outsmart
24 B 4 Automation will allow us to make massive quality improvements and drive our talent to where it can add the most value. automation
25 B 4 Provide a place to talk about the issue and eliminate meaningless chatter from those who have no understanding. communication
26 B 4 Better hardware more space for WikiBrain. hardware
27 B 5 Tech giants, academic research leaders, and graduate students could help us. scientists
28 B 5 Partnership is essential, because help from people proficient in AI would save a lot of our time. partnership
29 C 1 Accelerate the development and coverage of areas on Wikipedia greatly deprived of such coverage development
30 C 1 We'll be the light that shines in the Cosmos. light
31 C 2 This should be the last priority, because there's too many people who don't know what Wikipedia is. awareness
32 C 2 We should become a free web search engine and a free web host. search engine
33 C 2 This should be the top priority, because exposing Wikipedia to more people around the globe is the single best way to attract greater coverage. coverage
34 C 4 Make policies like OR more friendly to regions where oral tradition is much stronger than any publication coverage. policies
35 C 4 Encourage editors in the Indian Subcontinent to create articles in their native languages. Global South
36 C 4 Don't omit relevant geographic links so that our content could be more integrated. overlinking
37 D 1 It would move the world towards the dream of a universal library of information. access
38 D 1 Wikipedia will become an acceptable, respectable form of tertiary literature, and its editing will be prestigous. respect
39 D 1 Trying to chase after the top position will demoralize us, when simply providing the best information that we can will get us acceptably close. respect
40 D 1 Wikipedia could be sorted into topics, because many times pages can get overlapped. tools
41 D 1 We need to improve the quality and reputation of Wikipedia so that Wikipedia will become accepted as a cited source. reputation
42 D 1 By 2030, the whole world should understand the value of Wikipedia's role in the alleviation of thorny topics. understanding
43 D 1 Our societies are increasingly divided and they need a source of unbiased knowledge. bias
44 D 2 Something must be changed for our audience to admit that they use Wikipedia as a useful jumping-off point for research. jumping-off point
45 D 2 This theme may impinge upon the themes of "Healthy, Inclusive Communities" as the demand for prestige shuts out less educated or capable editors. editors
46 D 2 Wikipedia must be reliable, that's why people read it. reliability
47 D 2 This the highest priority, however, many of the five themes are interlinked. priority
48 D 2 This is the most important theme, and ff our information is useless, then we are useless. priority
49 D 2 This is by far the most important theme, because it proves our legitimization and effectiveness. priority
50 D 3 Invest less in mobile search. mobile
51 D 3 Less openness towards editors, more protectionism, vet editors more scrupulously. openess
52 D 3 Lack of contribution is more of a problem than low-quality contribution, which causes the patchy and inconsistent coverage that can be bad for our reputation. quality
53 D 3 Create a workflow for new users so that they feel welcome and get acclimated to Wikipedia. newbies
54 D 3 Openess and reliability are incompatible, so we need to stop anonymous edits and review first edits before we let a newbie to edit articles. reliability
55 D 3 Some types of bad articles are worse than no article, that's why we should be more liberal in semi-protecting and let only extended autoconfirmed to create articles. reliability
56 D 4 Collaborate more and expand partnerships with GLAM. GLAM
57 D 4 Focus on educating the common man to be a better editor. education
58 D 4 Welcome and encourage new editors more regularly, give them attention of more people. newbies
59 D 4 There's no easy path to the learning path, getting to the documentation is more of a random discovery. documentation
60 D 4 Encourage using open-access high-quality peer-reviewed sources, and discourage unsourced or "self-sourced" information as much as possible. sources
61 D 4 Encourage short quotations in footnotes, which will give readers much greater confidence on controversial topics, and will make verification easier. verifiability
62 D 5 Collaborate more with GLAM institutions. GLAM
63 D 5 Collaborate more with academic institutions. academia
64 A 2 The concept of "consensus" is at odds with inclusion of new views, because established cliques of editors can make their own overriding "consensus" on any particular decision consensus
65 A 2 Incivility is difficult to define in a way that allows us to draw a clear line; it is better to stay well clear of gray areas incivility
66 A 3 "Oppportunity is what we should go for, not equality." Demographic diversity for diversity's sake is pointless. opportunity
67 A 3 De-prioritize pseudonymity in favor of real names associated with accounts (even if those names are only visible to trusted Checkusers, etc), to prioritize accountability. anonymity
68 A 3 If we want to change the situation, we have to try something differently. Any particular thing might not help, but nothing will change if we try nothing. change
69 A 4 Research whether allowing unregistered users to edit helps or harms the community, then consider disallowing unregistered access if the answer is "harm" research
70 B 1 "It is important to be aware that algorithms are not inherently less biased than human editors." AI
71 B 1 Given the speed of computational and AI innovation, a 15-year plan is impossible; we need to focus 1-2 years into the future on this issue instead. time
72 B 2 Not engaging with AI progress would be nearly impossible given the state of the world's focus on it. AI
73 B 4 Make sure to give adequate support and PR attention to AI projects like ORES attention
74 B 4 Improve site design so it fits better within the modern era site-design
75 C 1 China wants global collaboration with more countries China
76 D 3 "Stricter controls are now urgently needed, not only to maintain quality and standards, but to reinforce and retain the very reputation for quality and accuracy that Wikipedia imagines for itself." standards
77 D 3 Article creation should be made as hard as possible, to ensure that only those able to produce good articles can produce articles. standards
78 D 4 Provide optional identity verification, so it is clearer who is responsible for an account's work identity
79 D 5 "How can we persuade universities to recognize editing Wikipedia as a high status public service contribution?" contributions
80 E 5 We should direct resources to developing nations that probably want to collaborate with us developing-countries
81 E 5 Focus on micro non-profits such as Partners in Health and the American Refugee Committee non-profit
82 E 5 Wikipedia needs to create partners out of its user base partners
83 C 4 We should look into revisiting the oral citations project User:Sky Harbor oral citations project
84 A 1 If we follow this, we will be able to cover many projects effectively and on time. cover
85 A 1 The community can only stay healthy, if we stop separating information based on language, and build one wiki. multilingual
86 E 1 The impact might be negative if we are not careful to keep the democratic principles of Wikimedia projects. User:Leowikardo danger
87 A 2 All cases of incivility the user encountered were attempts to avoid existing policies and consensus. If one can write an article, one can write a comment explaining the reason for one's edit. incivility
88 B 1 Far better to talk about "smart tools" to assist users to be at their most productive/accurate etc., instead of talking about AIs that could allegedly "write Wikipedia". smart
89 B 2 We need more smart tools today and, unless we can grow our community of active contributors, we will doubly need smart tools in the future. We need to have better tools and more upskilling of willing contributors. Without a massive increase in tools, Wikipedia articles will descend into a morass of out-of-date information citing deadlinks. must
90 B 5 Definitely no major tech companies. More transparent (and smaller) companies or non-profits who would not seek to harm the project would be better. small entities
91 C 2 This theme is the most important themes of all because it is the best way to cover more articles from around the world. cover
92 E 2 It encourages the new gen to help the world, and as our youngsters are very much into gadgets, why not use it for a better cause? Also, it is an all rounder promoter more than just focusing on one thing User:Supdocious young generation, good cause
93 D 1 Our challenge is how to maintain this status, rather than achieving it. Readers should have a way to tell us about missing content. achieved
94 D 3 A way to gain credibility used in academia is to publish unanonymously. We could eliminate anonymous editing, and restrict article creation (along with discussions like AfD). namely
95 D 3 Restrict some sort of editing to those who passed a relevant training (e.g. how to cite). Wikipedia skills could have pre-requisite structures and people can choose which directions they will follow. Restrict editing of higher quality articles to higher certified users while allowing lower certified users to work on lower quality articles. micro-trainings
96 D 4 Educate re-users on how to re-use (cite) Wikipedia. reuse
97 E 4 Thinking academics will take time out of their working life to write on Wikimedia is naive. First, academic institutions should take Wikipedia contributions into account in their internal processes. Retired academics are more achievable. However, Wikipedia does not operate in a way academics understand. academics
98 D 5 There is a shortage of volunteers for GLAM projects because of - among others - motivation issues. We need to have a way to apply for funds to pay people to do the boring stuff. motivation
99 E 4 Wikipedia has developed a bizarre operating culture which tolerates mediocrity, supports bullying and militates against people with expertise. User:BronHiggs harassment, expertise
100 D 5 The News Integrity Initiative and related efforts, like the Trust Project and the International Fact Checking Network. User:Cnewmark partners
101 D 1 Wikipedia needs trustworthy information to survive and thrive, and to further become "where facts go to live" for the benefit of our entire species. User:Cnewmark trust
102 D 4 Work with partners who are already facing the challenges of trustworthy sources and information. User:Cnewmark partners
103 A 1 If Wikimedia follows the "healthy inclusive communities" theme it can create the utopia that the internet was originally intended to be;(…)  more and more people will be drawn into the safe haven of its community, growing stronger and stronger, and together we will be able to tackle whatever the future holds. Together we can help fix the internet. User:Powertothepeople Fix the Internet
104 A 2 The most important. Any tool is only as good as those who wield it; if the community is not healthy, Wikimedia will be poisoned from within. User:Powertothepeople priority
105 B 2 The technology theme is a third priority - as a support role to the Community and Knowledge themes - to help us achieve these primary goals. User:Powertothepeople low priority
106 E 1 This theme is not a "goal" in of itself so much as a support action to achieve those other goals User:Powertothepeople goal
107 E 2 I have prioritised this theme as fourth (after Community, Knowledge, Technology) because I see it as a "support" theme rather than a primary goal in it's own right. User:Powertothepeople support theme
108 E 3 There's the risk of attempting too much change at once, and spreading Wikipedia resources too thin. Better to do one thing well than lots of things poorly.User:Powertothepeople risk,changes
109 E 3 Potential conflicts of interest when working with governments and other organisations. User:Powertothepeople conflicts of interest
110 E 5 The 'ecosystem' is vast so there are countless potential partners! Khan Academy, MIT OpenCourseWare, FutureLearn, university of the 3rd age, publicly funded government bodies (in countries where governments aren't corrupt), hackathons, etc. User:Powertothepeople partners
111 E 5 Minority rights organisations: Wikipedia can actively address diversity issues by reaching out to organisations that stand for underrepresented groups User:Powertothepeople partners, minority rights
112 E 5 Government organisations may have funds for a team of wikipedia professional editors to create high quality pages rather than always relying on volunteers. User:Powertothepeople partners, governments
113 E 5 Research institutions - many are already aware of an issue related to dissemination of the research knowledge to professionals and the greater public, and wikipedia could help with this. User:Powertothepeople partners. research institutions
114 C A This theme should be last in priority. If we can't get these basics right amongst the current editors who at least primarily all use the same language and have some similarity of culture, how is Wikipedia going to handle the additional complexity of hundreds of languages, cultures, ideologies, etc? User:Powertothepeople low priority
115 C 5 Oral history organisations and projects which may partner to capture and translate information from around the globe and put the information on wikipedia. User:Powertothepeople Oral knowledge
116 E 1 Under this Ecosystems banner we need to think about how we persuade more organisations to be more "open knowledge" friendly, whether that be CC licensing, being archivable, mproviding Wipedia citations, or whatever. Kerry Raymond  changing practices, open knowledge
117 A 4 We really need to put some kind of protective fence around new good-faith users, and restrict those who can react to them to people who are willing to commit to "not biting" newcomers and try and help them rather than just revert them. Kerry Raymond  welcoming users, newbie biting
118 A 1 This is '''the most important''' of all [themes]. Wikipedia, like all Wikimedia projects, was conceived as a free, open, decentralized encyclopedia that was, and still is, fully dependent on the community to run it.  CreationFox community, high priority

If you need more lines, you can copy them from Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2017/Sources/Lines.

Detailed notes (Optional)[edit]

If you have detailed notes in addition to the summary, you may add them here. For example, the notes may come from an in-person discussion or workshop. If your discussion happened on a wiki or other online space, you do not need to copy the detailed notes here.