Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2017/Sources/Cycle 3/Bengali Community
Jump to navigation Jump to search
What group or community is this source coming from?
|name of group||Bengali Community|
|virtual location (page-link) or physical location (city/state/country)||w:bn:উইকিপিডিয়া:WM2030, Bangladesh|
|Location type (e.g. local wiki, Facebook, in-person discussion, telephone conference)||local wiki, in-person discussion, local meetups|
|# of participants in this discussion (a rough count)||18|
- Key Insight
- The Western encyclopedia model is not serving the evolving needs of people who want to learn.
- Knowledge sharing has become highly social across the globe.
- Much of the world's knowledge is yet to be documented on our sites and it requires new ways to integrate and verify sources.
- The discovery and sharing of trusted information have historically continued to evolve.
- Trends in misinformation are increasing and may challenge the ability for Wikimedians to find trustworthy sources of knowledge.
- Mobile will continue to grow. Products will evolve and use new technologies such as artificial intelligence, augmented reality, and virtual reality. These will change how we create, present, and distribute knowledge.
- As the world population undergoes major shifts, the Wikimedia movement has an opportunity to help improve the knowledge available in more places and to more people.
- Readers in seven of our most active countries have little understanding of how Wikipedia works, is structured, is funded, and how content is created.
- Overall (either)
|Line||Week #||Key insight||Summary Statement||Overall||Keyword|
|1||1||A||Since we are writing an encyclopedia, our current model should not be changed. Because the work of encyclopedia is to provide detailed information on a given topic, otherwise it won't be an encyclopedia. We'll be just another website with lots of nonsense.||concern||encyclopedia, model|
|2||1||A||Those who need encyclopedic information will collect the detailed information whether other groups want it or not. If there is a need to think about the other party, then a new project should be created.||concern||new project, encyclopedia, model|
|3||1||A||For those who seek short and easy information on a specific topic, they can use Simple Wikipedia or use other websites such as Quora. We're an encyclopedia, not a Q/A based website.||concern||new project, encyclopedia|
|4||1||A||This is entirely two different things. People are already using Wikipedia for encyclopedic knowledge now the questing should be if we want to create Q/A based website based on the experts' suggestions that is another thing can be discussed.||concern||encyclopedia|
|5||1||A||Articles of the encyclopedia should be deep and thorough on a given topic that is why it is called encyclopedia. There are always a group of people who want thing differently that does not mean we should change our current model.||concern||encyclopedia|
|6||1||B||In low awareness region, the problem is not people using only social media to share information or to gather knowledge. The problem is in these regions they are not much aware of the Wikimedia projects in the first place. So what we really need there is outreach.||concern||Outreach|
|7||1||B||Since we are in the age of information, of course, people will use social media to share information. There are numerous websites out there and certain social media is popular among them.||neutral||age of information|
|8||1||B||We should not concern what media young people use to share their information, we should focus on where they (those who are sharing) are getting that information in first place.||concern||information|
|9||1||B||We've survived all these years and have gained credibility for our current model and contents. Sharing knowledge in social media and sharing knowledge from the encyclopedia are two different things to me. However, we can promote our projects through social media so that people sharing them on social media or in-person getting them from our projects in the first place.||concern||credibility, promotion|
|10||1||B||This is not new. Whether people use messenger or other media to share information is up to them. Articles in Wikipedia should be known for quality. What we really need is outreach and way to maintain quality.||concern||quality, outreach|
|11||1||B||In the low awareness region, there is a trend that we only need to rely on Wikipedia for assignment purpose for our study. So in everyday life, they do not use Wikipedia and we need to change that by promoting it. Social media can play a vital role in this regard.||neutral||promotion|
|12||1||B||We should promote Wikimedia brand through social media by creating various video, audio and visual posts for the general public.||neutral||promotion|
|13||2||C||For the sake of the debate, if the oral knowledge is added then the problem will arise, who you trust, surely we can not practically set any threshold who we should trust and who we should not.||concern||trustworthiness|
|14||2||C||We have reached this stage today from a small website because people believe our information because we provide reliable information with sources. So changing it will affect our Wikipedia's credibility.||concern||credibility|
|15||2||C||This is simply not practical. However, in this case, one thing we can do within our current model, If some local agencies can arrange for writing oral knowledge in some way, we can use them as sources of information.||concern||credibility, local agencies|
|16||2||C||If we encourage oral citation and started to use the oral information to create article Wikipedia will lose its reliability.||concern||reliability|
|17||3||E||We can consider govt. registered newspaper sources as credible in the respective local Wikipedia.||supportive||registered newspaper|
|18||3||E||A designated guideline/common practice to check the fact should be made.||supportive||guideline|
|19||3||E||Some participants suggested hosting training especially for regular users on how to check the fact or identify credible sources.||supportive||training|
|20||3||E||One participant thinks that it entirely depends on the user who is using the specific source though we can train users.||neutral||training|
Detailed notes (Optional)
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.