Talk:CIS-A2K/Work plan July 2015 - June 2016/Kannada Wikisource

As per your request, I (A small time contributor) would like enumerate a few suggestions, as follows :

1. When an experienced contributor, takes any topic of his choice, no one can say, 'it is not useful', or 'who reads it after all, such remarks', 2. A created article however bad it might seem to be, should be tried to add to the mainstream wikipedia. Yes, it can be improved, made more informative, or more illustrated etc; The moderators are supposed to correct and modify, and make it more resourceful, without hurting the sentiments of the Contributors. Just putting a tag, saying the article is not upto mark. Spelling mistakes to be checked, or not up to the wikipedia style of writing etc. 3. If an article is made, means the author has something in mind. Some organisations, have been doing useful services to the community at large, without having propaganda, or media interference. A hundred year organization, has not been covered in the leading news paper,for its activites like, Silver jubilee, Golden jubilee, jubilee programs. When the authorities decide to have their internet website now the programs are streamlined. But the original page on the internet will remain, with out disappearing. 4. Wikipedia (Kn) should not have norms, strictly as per English Wikipedia lines. East is east and West is west. The concept of West has to be modified, remodified, and set to the local conditions. This has to be understood clearly by the moderators, CEOs and others. They should have clear foresight, and plan. 5. Lastly, we think Wikipedia will provide all that we want. Now I am of the opinion, this is not very true, because, you can not expect the right kind of data projection as it is envisaged by the Wikipedia foundation, while the regional players are acting.

-(Radhatanaya (talk) 13:19, 27 March 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Dear Radhatanaya, it seems you wanted to comment on Kannada Wikipedia plan. This page is for discussions on Kannada Wikisource plan.--Pavanaja (talk) 13:30, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

While it is good to get more and more Kannada content released under CC License, it is equally important to ensure that the content is digitized and made available at the earliest. For this, please see if training session/s can be arranged for interested individuals. After the training, they can also be assigned specific time bound tasks so that tracking the progress is easy. Srimysore (talk) 09:12, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Need a proper plan to digitize the donated books[edit]

A plan has to be created to push the content after digitization. Also, Wiki source content should be pushed in a systematic way. If the plan is to use Institutional participation, please ensure that a standard is maintained. Adding content from Wiki source to existing wikipedia needs to be done with atmost care.

Also may I know the efforts that would be put in by the program manager here? Digitization cost has been added as 5000.00 INR - Please clarify this. There is good amount of money kept aside for Workshops (We might not require that if the idea is to use institutional partnership). This proposal cost look almost the same as the kannada Wikipedia plan. Why not achieve the results out of one plan? Getting new book donations might require constant followups and visits whenever necessary. Beyond that, how Kannada Wikisource activities would be different. It has to go hand in hand with the Wikipedia workshops etc. Do we really have bandwidth to spend time and energy on two different type of projects here? Omshivaprakash (talk) 20:23, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There was a small mistake in the figures. I have corrected it now. The money will be used for scanning the books.--Pavanaja (talk) 04:29, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft needs an another round of review for typos. and the above answer doesn't answer everything. Omshivaprakash (talk) 06:29, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Journey so far section talks about the Kannada Wikipedia editors count. Also, dream targets etc are just few numbers. Existing Wikisource editor numbers are not mentioned. Stats shows that we have a very small set of users on wiki source Wikisource Stats. An another objection is on the endorsement that is added by an editor who has not even logged into Wikisource. Please do verify the community member endorsing the proposal plans Omshivaprakash (talk) 14:11, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]