Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2017/Sources/Cycle 3/Spanish Wikipedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
What group or community is this source coming from?
|name of group||Spanish-speaking community|
|virtual location (page-link) or physical location (city/state/country)||es:Wikipedia:Estrategia 2017|
|Location type (e.g. local wiki, Facebook, in-person discussion, telephone conference)||local wiki|
|# of participants in this discussion (a rough count)||8|
Fill in the table below, using these 2 keys.
- 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||We must make a considerable effort to better serve newcomers, and to attract a bigger number of new wikipedians. (AnselmiJuan)||neutral||newcomers|
|2||1||B||This happens because there is some political and social approaches treated with excessive superficiality, or in a very conservative way. This has benefited projects as Metapedia. (En este viaje)||supportive||political interest|
|3||2||C||The issue of getting traditional sources to source certain articles is massive and serious -- we should begin to value sources that are often not considered reliable. (19Tarrestnom65)||supportive||sources|
|4||2||C||The greatest enemy to get "all the knowledge" on Wikipedia, is no longer the lack of traditional sources, but the community itself that exercises the power to decide on issues such as what is notable and what is a reliable source. This could destroy Wikimedia before 2030. (19Tarrestnom65, B25es)||concern||community, notability|
|5||2||C||As a pragmatic policy, I believe that we should attribute reliability to sources that reflect reality (when it can be contrasted). Even blogs. Another pragmatic idea would be to gather oral histories as sources. (B25es)||supportive||oral sources|
|6||1||A||Wikipedia will not last forever, another platform will leave it obsolete. As long as it lives, we must fulfill our mission: to serve as much knowledge as possible, in a free way. Also we must care for the community that keeps this alive, and end the bureaucracy. (Strakhov)||neutral||mission, environment|
|7||2||C||In order to avoid English and Western bias, the number of Wikipedians must be increased in all language communities, to make room for different approaches in different languages. (AnselmiJuan)||supportive||outreach, language|
|8||2||C||It should also be inculcated that volunteers also help themselves to become culturally enriched and to improve their language skills by collaborating with Wikipedia. Uploading photos from remote communities should be encouraged. (AnselmiJuan)||neutral||skills, remote communities|
|9||2||C||The knowledge provided by the encyclopedic article must come from reliable and published sources. However, it's not all about Wikipedia, since there are other sister projects where primary knowledge gathering efforts are better positioned. Projects need to be better integrated with each other -- where Wikidata plays an essential role. (Strakhov)||neutral||encyclopedia, sister projects|
|10||3||E||Wikipedia is also part of the disinformation trend. Our own odyssey of capturing all knowledge online ended up showing certain biases to the "truth", understanding that the authorities' responsibility who have the last word in the articles "formalization". Therefore, to increase the understanding in this encyclopedia implies to be permeable to other spectra of understanding. (En este viaje)||concern||bias, truth|
|11||3||E||In addition to the external disinformation trends, within Wikipedia there are shortcomings that reduce reliability and prestige, like the reversion and deletion procedures usually applied. I suggest to take statistics and take some other type of actions in order to better address this issue. (AnselmiJuan)||supportive||policies, deletionism|
|12||3||E||90% of the people who consult Wikipedia do so in order to copy articles for their school assignments or read the biography of some celebrity. I don't believe that misinformation affects us much. (Morgalexandra)||concern||misinformation|
|13||3||E||Wikipedia is interesting as a first step from which to approach knowledge. We have also the chance to be a way of accessing the sources, because every day there is more open-access content available. Initiatives as WikiCite and projects as Wikidata can be of enormous use. (Strakhov)||neutral||sources, sister projects|
|14||4||F||This question, which is philosophical because it encompasses the definition of the Universal Encyclopedia, should first identify the make-changing factors, such as new knowledge and historical revisionism, and then integrate them properly. (En este viaje)||neutral||historical revisionism|
|15||3||E||The most important thing to contribute to the key ideas of this challenge is that the teacher can integrate Wikipedia into his own learning and exercise process. This serves him to reaffirm his knowledge and concepts, as well as to substantively improve his strategies and approaches, helping him to be critical in multiple ways, and to assess sources. (AnselmiJuan)||supportive||education|
|16||4||F||As Wikimedia doesn't control the technology evolution or its diffusion, our only response to both is flexibility. (B25es)||supportive||flexibility|
|17||3||E||Although 90% of the people who consult Wikipedia don't do it for deep learning, there is another 10% who use Wikimedia projects to learn science and history, human rights, sexuality and freedom. Wikimedia projects are doors to the world, and we must keep them open. (NaBUru38)||supportive||deep learning|
|18||2||C||The existence of little interesting articles does not seem a problem to me. But they should not be erased because don't interest me -- there will surely be other people who find it useful, because they may be very local issues. (NaBUru38)||neutral||deletionism|
|19||4||F||Wikipedia and Wikimedia can't disappear. If we want to survive in the very near future, it is timely and accurate what is being done with this strategy, which is to take into account the pros and cons of what is coming for the future -- That's what Google is doing, for example. (JMRAFFi)||supportive||strategy|
|20||4||F||Wikimedia may not only play the role of being a reliable platform for dissemination and communication, but also, and to some extent, aspire to become a guiding and/or change agent. (AnselmiJuan)||supportive||activism|
|21||5||G||When we speak of gathering all knowledge we also include other cultures' knowledge. And on the other hand, everything we assume as "our culture" must be accessible in all languages. Double but necessary effort. (B25es)||supportive||diversity|
|22||5||H||We must maintain independence, use reliable sources and overall quality. That way, even if anonymously, we will be improving the quality of content available on internet even if people think that it comes from Google, Yahoo!, or other sources. (B25es)||neutral||quality, reliability|
|23||5||G||The contribution of the entire population to Wikipedia is an important goal, because if not, quite possibly have a biased approach. In order to achieve this, it will be necessary to promote knowledge and use of Wikipedia at all educational levels, as an extracurricular/voluntary non-exclusive activity. The affiliates must establish some kind of partnership with public or private educational institutions. (AnselmiJuan)||supportive||education|
|24||5||H||The approach and impact of Wikipedia in society is a double-edged sword: it has as much capacity to inform as to misinform. The uninformed or untrained reader will fall into the biases trap, relying on the "collective prestige" that supports "the free encyclopedia that everyone can edit" without having a critical analysis of the content. (En este viaje)||concern||bias, readers|
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.