Jump to content

Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia Foundation/2015/Community consultation/2015-02-28

Add topic
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Warning! Please be aware that new comments posted on this page may not be seen or tracked by Wikimedia Foundation staff. If you have new comments or thoughts and would like to share those with staff, please open a new section on the main consultation page. Thank you.

Joe Sewell[edit]

Response by Joe Sewell

Joe Sewell's thoughts on question 1[edit]

The only other "trend" I can think of would be one that's already around: maintaining quality without rejecting editors. Right now many former editors, including me, have felt so completely insulted and rejected by those who have enough time to influence "consensus" (and who apparently don't have anything better to do during the day) that we no longer fix grammar errors or typos. Kudos are few and far between, but complaints over minor infractions are numerous.

Joe Sewell's thoughts on question 2[edit]

A healthy project must encourage participation while maintaining quality standards. Get rid of the offensive boxes and tags that say, "hey, someone stupid has messed this thing up, somebody else needs to fix this!" If it needs attention, do it in a way that doesn't offend the "next billion users." Status quo will see the "next billion users" go elsewhere. More to the point, if something needs fixing up, just do it and don't complain on the article page about it.

A healthy project must encourage participation from people with day jobs. I was involved in a disagreement about the appropriateness of a point about the late Chuck Smith and his relationship to Calvary Chapels. My edits were mercilessly and rudely reverted after 24 hours, even though my day job often limits me to looking at Wikipedia during my lunch hour. My lack of response within 24 hours was considered implicit acceptance, when it was not! After a couple of stints with that, I gave up. Again, it's an insult to those who don't have time to meet the ludicrous artificial "deadlines" that seem to be in place just to keep certain people in power.

A healthy project must look good everywhere. Mobile browsers have a variety of different characteristics. Project pages must be readable, navigable, and editable no matter what browser, no matter what capabilities, no matter what the screen size may be. The current iOS and Android Wikipedia apps come close, but the latter doesn't allow easy editing, and the former keeps loading old versions of pages. Updates to Mediawiki can destroy an app's usability, as well as custom templates; several Wikia wikis, for example, are completely unreadable using their unmaintained app.[edit]

Response by Gedanken zu Frage 1[edit]

Ich werde den Browser weiterhin verwenden
Translation: I'll continue using the browser Gedanken zu Frage 2[edit]

Ich denke, es bleibt so ähnlich wie es jetzt auch ist
Translation:I think it stays more or less like it is.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

This is a really good point. Since i am assuming that you currently have a mobile wikipedia version, you should work on ease of accessibility, good resources, overall smoothness (animations/loading), and really but REALLY fast load/reload times. People on mobile devices expect to be fast and mobile, and mainly that is why its mobile. In the next few years, new chips will be integrated by Nvidia and AMD to mobile devices that can outperform the XBONE, and that is why using resources wisely is key.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

Seeing a wikimedia website about programming and books etc. just about programming would be a relief for most programmers, including myself. I think this is required, and would make traffic and would be helpful. Other than that, integration with other websites would be 2 steps forward, in my opinion.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

make sources more reliable[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 2[edit]

your website is extremely under USA and ISRAEL political manner and its so undependable due to they refer to these governments politics and you banned other evidence and keep this web under your Premption


Response by BirthOfJesus

BirthOfJesus's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Nothing. First of all, the question isn't perfectly clear to me. What is a "major trend," as opposed to just a "trend"? And why should there be a need to improve/make a trend more notable for? It seems both confusing and hard to get a grasp on what is being asked for here, so I'll run my answer down as, "Basically nothing." Instead of a "trend," make general improvements to the Wikivesity/Wikibooks sections to further illustrate the power of open-source work, learning, and access to free ways to learn and free digital books for self-teaching and many other causes. I hardly consider improvement to be a "major trend" to identify. Also, better categorize subjects, sections, and pages to construct easier navigation between various articles. Lots of categories on Wikipedia are clumsy and incomplete at best, and could use a touch-up. Instead of worrying about how you can fulfill the notion of a trend for others, just improve Wikipedia as a whole, & things will be better for everyone.

BirthOfJesus's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Look at my other answer above; it covers both questions, since neither of them count, to me at least, as one good question in the first place.


Response by

Lava's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Make a wikipedia app or if unavailable make your mobile wikipedia more mobile friendly

There is a Wikipedia app! See the android app, and the iOS app. For more details, see our own documentation at mw:Wikimedia Apps.
For the mobile version of Wikipedia in a browser, there is on-going work to improve that, and add new features, coordinated at mw:Mobile Web. Hope that helps. :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:44, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

Lava's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Globally used in every country and 100 % accurate as it has to be user friendly and truthful at the same time :)

Re: 100% accurate, you might be interested in point #6 of w:en:Wikipedia:Ten things you may not know about Wikipedia. :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:44, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

Amazighi for-ever[edit]

Response by Amazighi for-ever

Amazighi for-ever's thoughts on question 1[edit]

اضافة بعض الموثرات الى الموسوعة قد يجلب الزوار اكثر لان شكل الموسوعة يبدو قديما Translated:By Lava: Add some more info as visitors will bring more as Wikipedia seems old

Amazighi for-ever's thoughts on question 2[edit]

شكرا لكم Translated: Thank you


Response by Inspindawetrust

Inspindawetrust's thoughts on question 1[edit]

In the coming age of accessibility, it's imperative that all articles stay objective, as many different ideologies and perspectives will be reading them.

Inspindawetrust's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Thriving and healthy Wikimedia projects would if possible, have translation in real time to allow anyone in the world to enjoy and contribute to Wikimedia. I know that's very difficult to put into motion, but keep it in mind as a distant objective at least.[edit]

Response by

Considerazioni di sulla domanda n. 2[edit]

Oltre a definizioni, dare spazio a come si fanno o producono alcune cose, conoscenze e spiegazione di processi produttivi, sia industriali che artigianali. Penso potrebbero essere utili sia agli utenti attuali per prendere coscienza, sia a paesi emergenti per trovare soluzioni.

(Machine translation, please improve it) "In addition to definitions, give space to how to make or produce some things, knowledge and explanation of the production processes, industrial and handicraft. I think it might be useful to current users to be aware, both in emerging countries to find solutions."


Response by Pgallert

Pgallert's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Open and free/libre knowledge and content and the decline of classic copyright. People want their texts to be read, their videos to be watched. The money then comes with the popularity rather than through royalties.

Pgallert's thoughts on question 2[edit]

They would capitalise on their specific advantage: content and its presentation. They would spread the open content idea. Specifically the WMF would:

  1. outsource all non-core business, software development being the prime example. There is a thriving FLOSS community which will write the necessary software for WM, free of charge.
  2. protect and promote editors. For instance, granting them automatic 'journalist' status if they regularly write on current topics. Or enabling easy access to "portfolios" in the way it is done on the WMF Global Blog (https://blog.wikimedia.org/author/XXX). I'm willing to expand on this should there be interest from your side.
  3. facilitate the governance of the WM projects without attempting to govern them themselves. This includes accepting and deploying local consensus where even remotely feasible.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

There are people who want to use Wikipedia for sources. Therefore, I would say, appeal to the young generation whilst also making sure that everything is checked and revised daily, because normal people will use Wikipedia for source references even if they know that the sources can be incorrectly identified as true and are just lazy.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

Well, I think that a lot of Wikimedia projects will begin to have references to memes, celebrity goings-on, and other social trends. I don't like the fact that the newest generation, just past mine, is becoming so socially oriented and electronically-inclined that they don't appreciate anything anymore. They take 5,000 pictures just of their lunch. They don't treasure each picture and make sure that it means something to them. They just hate work, hate history, and hate most everything that requires an ounce of work. However, this is how I expect the trend to continue. Even Einstein said, "I fear the day when technology surpasses our human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots." So true, now.

"The kids are alright." -Pete Townshend  :) --Lgruwell-WMF (talk) 01:50, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply


Response by Iagocasabiell

Iagocasabiell's thoughts on question 1[edit]

I guess new perspectives will open about everything, with a revisionist trend, sometimes healthy and positive, but also trolling, propaganda and edit wars will burst. Anyway, that was also expected in the beginning, and Wikipedia turned out to be awesome and reliable.

Iagocasabiell's thoughts on question 2[edit]

I think we should prepare some kind of edition training school app or something, with like 5 lessons: adding pictures to commons with appropiate licensing, how to complete an article (showing the need of sourced material), how to join a talk in an article, geotagging, categorizing... and then make the wikipedia app follow those lessons. Also we should prepare an easy translation platform so we could grasp some endangered languages before they dissapear, before it's too late.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Bring together an acedemic group (or people who earned there stripes in there respective fields) who can verify articles. Make sure it gets harder to adjust verified articles, then thoroughly check changes made to these kind of articles before actually republishing it. For instance; a professor history of france confirms that the information about the french revolution is accurate, the article gets "sealed". This makes it harder for a child or people with bad intentions to change for instance the date of the event in fiction, but leaves space to add other information. This way, I think, you can get an encyclopedia that is more trustworthy; with no elephantine mistakes in confirmed articles and still gives the opportunity for everyone to help. It only makes rewriting "confirmed facts" much harder. It wouldn't be flawless (nothing is) but it could create a "britannica-like" (wich most people see as the truth) encyclopedia with loads of added information but then again, with a certified core. I know there is a similar system in place, but not as efficient I think.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

1. Editing pages with many conflicts. User1 thinks that page X should contain A. User2 thinks that page X should not contain A but contain B. User1 wants to share page X with A. User2 wants to share page X with B. More users more conflicts.

2. Ensure Wikipedia is accessible for everyone everywhere all time in present of pressure from governments to reduce internet freedom and performance pressure of billions of users and possibility of hackers attacks(both to shutdown servers and to broke semantics of articles).

3. I cannot donate to Wikipedia because Belarus donations are blocked. I donated to Wikipedia from Belarus via 3rd country VPN.

4. I want post articles into Wikipedia from alternative sources to speed up initial article authoring. E.g. public books/software/articles/research/reports in many case I done in markdown, so users may take parts of it and form Wikipedia article.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

1. Provide `fork` mechanics for wiki pages. Check gitlab or gitorious to test how it works.

2. Allow for p2p/federated/tor/bitmessage/otr like features for hosting/editing/authorization. Use some machine learning to ensure that changes to article are good, trigger some notification if these seems bad.

3. Allow me to donate to Wikipedia from Belarus directly, no need for VPN.

4. Allow posting to Wikipedia from alternative markdown source. See what is possible https://stackedit.io/editor[edit]

Response by Gedanken zu Frage 2[edit]

Mobile apps die kostenlos und ohne mobilen datenzugang genutz werden können.

(Translation) "Mobile apps that can be Utilized for free and without mobile data access."

Did you check Wikipedia Zero before? :). It builds partnerships with operators across the globe in order to support the idea. The focus right now is for Global South, where this is likely to be more impactful and mostly need. Thanks! --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 21:48, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

(Translation) Hast Du Wikipedia Zero schon mal angesehen? Es baut Partnerschaften mit Providern auf der ganzen Welt um diese Idee zu unterstützen. Der Fokus liegt auf dem Süden, wo es vermutlich am wirkungsvollsten ist und am meisten gebraucht wird. Danke![edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

cultural bias that taints articles with dominant ideology's thoughts on question 2[edit]

they would be self-aware of their own inherent values.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Öncelikle sa ben türk değilim ama türkiyede merhaba yada nasılsın yerine artık sa ve as var bu konu hakkında bi yazı yapın

(Machine translation, please improve it) "First, though, I'm not Turkish, but rather how the turkey hello or have a structure as short and longer be writing about this topic"[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Virtual Reality is going to explode in all aspects, Gaming, information, work, and various industries are taking advantage of VR. Wikipedia has to find ways to encode itself into a VR accessible program for example: A user using vr goggles on his computer has to have a press of one button which would seamlessly turn wikipedia into a 3D building or room where the user can find articles and learn stuff through this method, adapt with technology and wikipedia will stay on top. VR is already used to train squads of U.S soldiers. There should be a wikipedia section which lets a user LIVE an article or a thing. For example reading about some industrial process, there should be a section which enables viewing a VR scene of how the process happens so the user can understand the concepts instantly and on the most basic of conscious levels. Remember first it was reading, next it was video, now it's Virtual Reality. VR has a chance to go beyond videos as learning tools and i hope wikipedia will exploit this. The encyclopedia must think of creative ways to adapt to this emerging technology.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

Brand recognition has to be the main focus for wikipedia. In my opinion it is the single greatest learning tool ever that has been made possible by the internet. I don't know exactly how wikipedia will get known in other countries. But I know that the entire world is now hungry, starving rather for information. You must find a way to champion wikipedia to other countries and regions, never politically, but for humanitarian grounds. Maybe some apps to reach wikipedia from pressing it's icon on a mobile device instead of searching for it on google or other search engines, something easily accessible. Another thing is, wikipedia is famous because people are buzzing about it, when these new regions come online you have to find ways to get these people to start buzzing about it, encourage regular people there to spread the word of it's qualities, it's benefits, it's ease, it's credibility.

One last thing, I found this while reading articles that I was interested in on wikipedia and I think it's important. It's from a list of french expressions here on wikipedia itself.

fait accompli

lit. "accomplished fact"; something that has already happened and is thus unlikely to be reversed, a done deal.[26] In French used only in the expression placer/mettre quelqu'un devant le fait accompli meaning to present somebody with a fait accompli.

Wikipedia needs to be the first into these new regions coming online, either to set the tone for boundless knowledge so that if it ever gets censored the people will miss it and know such a thing exists.


Response by Sm8900

Sm8900's thoughts on question 1[edit]

1. social media and social online networking.

Sm8900's thoughts on question 2[edit]

2. Wikipedia needs to provide much flexibility on how like-minded users can find each others and work together on group efforts, group projects, and mutual interests. groupings should not be limited solely to official Wikiprojects. if a group of users has an interest in, say, solar energy, or renewable energies, or new developments in genetic biology or nanotechnology, they should be able to set up a group of their own to work together to do so, and to set up their own group based purely on unofficial social ties if that is what they wish to do. currently, any such users need to set up a Wikiproject, or else they cannot establish any other group which might allow them to work together.

in short, we need to allow groups of editors to set up informal [or formal] social groups where they can work together, REGRADLESS of how many other user groups may already exist on a particular topic. this is the only way to allow the kind of continual of interest-based groupings and efforts which need to be permitted to occur, if Wikipedia is to endure. thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 21:18, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

el Internet también aportaría mucho al crecimiento de su pagina

(Machine translation, please improve it) "The Internet also add much to the growth of your page"'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

toda la información es muy importante para muchas cosas resalto las buenas respuestas a las preguntas

(Machine translation, please improve it) "all information is very important for many shoulder things the right answers to questions"[edit]

Response by

the new possibility of expansion on the internet through culture and new ideas's thoughts on question 1[edit]

with the ever expanding internet we are going to see new ideas and the ideas will reflect the people of where they come from it will come culturally governments, historical values and history, and these things will be presented for all to see which will keep expanding from there. good examples of these places would be south america and Africa, the people of Africa have a wide array of cultures religion and history, and the things they create and say and do on the internet will resemble this, and this will also bring in already put ideas and learning on the internet to their countries and cummouties. so new cultures on internet will spread to these places making a subculture that will keep expanding connecting and it will start making effects in real life to the point of new reforms in government and this also may allow foreign ideas to take hold that the people hold values to and agree with. so keeping information unbiased as possible is the best thing to do which in its self is a huge tackling but this will allow less agendas of others to take hold with misinformation that will use this information that will in its self be more damaging then not allowing the idea to happen in the first place.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

new projects should reflect the people who are using them and what they feel is needed and a good amount of people don't know what they want until they have it so the best I can say is ask what people want but also try and make new things that will have an impact but stay within want people will want what they may be i cannot say that is for people to decide for themselves and with something on this scale this is no one size fits all kinds of projects so the projects should reflect on what this subculture or group identify with and have many projects that reflect these things and will attract new people with these projects and learn of other projects that they identify with and either like and be a part of the project or not identify with it and move on to something else.

this is what i believe would be helpful in this case but what I have described is mostly opinionated and not factual if any questions I enjoy a good conversation: ~cheers[edit]

Response by

Las ideas de acerca de la pregunta 2[edit]

creando una aplicación para moviles

(Machine translation, please improve it) "creating an application for mobile"
There is a Wikipedia app! See the android app, and the iOS app. For more details, see our own documentation at mw:Wikimedia Apps. --Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:39, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

i think its time for wikipedia to go public and make a lot of bucks from next billion users's thoughts on question 2[edit]

well to me information is like a river flowing in any direction, and wikipedia must have a way that people can also add there valuable information in articles that they might know more about. by this the knowledge and information will get strong.[edit]

Response by

Las ideas de acerca de la pregunta 1[edit]

Gracias a Wikipedia, casi el mundo entero ha podido adquirir, con un poco mas de facilidad, el conocimiento y estar informado también con los hechos que fueron y son noticia. En la actualidad la tecnología esta siendo aprovechada en los diversos campos de acción humana, y el modo cómo se adquiere información no es ajeno a esta nueva tendencia y revolución tecnológica. Así es como se tiene que ademas de los teléfonos móviles y las tabletas, la información que Internet brinda y en este caso particular Wikipedia, no solo estaría presente en estos aparatos sino que también podrían facilitarse en dispositivos como las gafas creadas por Google o las creadas por Sony o en todos los aparatos que hoy utilizan Internet como los televisores; ademas de lo anterior seria muy bueno que hubiese una aplicación de rápido acceso que abra una ventana directo hacia la Wikipedia que brinde información detallada y actualizada , teniendo en cuenta que hoy por hoy las aplicaciones son útiles y son lo que mas esta llamando la atención. Pasando al tema de los usuarios presentes en Latinoamerica, África y Asia; La Wikipedia debería estar presente con una mayor cantidad de información en las lenguas que se habla en cada una de estas regiones, ya que por ejemplo existen artículos que se encuentran con mayor frecuencia en ingles, por esa razón creo que los próximos usuarios serán mas jóvenes y con ansias de adquirir conocimiento en su propia lengua.

(Machine translation, please improve it) "Thanks to Wikipedia, almost the whole world has been able to acquire, with a little more ease, knowledge and be well acquainted with the facts that were and are news. Currently the technology is being utilized in various fields of human action, and the way how information is acquired is no stranger to this new trend and technological revolution. This is how you must also mobile phones and tablets, the Internet provides information and in this particular case Wikipedia not only be present in these devices but could also be facilitated in devices like glasses created by Google or created by Sony or all devices now use the Internet as televisions; in addition to the above would be great to have an application shortcut to open a direct window into the Wikipedia provide detailed and updated information, considering that today's applications are useful and are what most are calling the attention. Turning to the users present in Latin America, Africa and Asia; The Wikipedia should be present with a greater amount of information in the languages ​​spoken in each of these regions, since for example there are items that are most often in English, for that reason I think the next users will be younger and eager to acquire knowledge in their own language."

Las ideas de acerca de la pregunta 2[edit]

Los proyectos futuros y exitosos de la Wikipedia podrían concentrarse en adquirir nuevas y mejores plataformas de acceso que permitan a los usuarios incluso interactuar con la pagina para tener una relación usuario-plataforma para la recepción y remitencia de conocimiento e información mas oportuna y con mejores resultados.

(Machine translation, please improve it) "Successful future Wikipedia projects could focus on acquiring new and better access platforms enabling users to even interact with the page to have a user-platform connection for receiving and remitencia of knowledge and information more timely and with better results."[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

...write here…'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

...write here…

je comprends rien à ce que vous voulez

vous pouvez pas parler un peu francais non?[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Have and app.

We have apps on both in Google Play Apps and on iTunes.--GByrd (WMF) (talk) 01:14, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Show more images, audio, vidio and websites for more information. To have more specific sections and to have a instant question and answer.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 2[edit]

have some staff work on edits instead of random users[edit]

Response by

me gustaria que se centraran mas a estos tiempos me refiero a cambiar el diseño blanco de la pagina por uno mas moderno y con animaciones para los moviles

Hey guys you are retarded or what? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable#mediaviewer/File:Allied_army_positions_on_10_May_1945.png

See that map? I dont see polish flag. Its a indonesian flag.

Already reported at c:File talk:Allied army positions on 10 May 1945.png. Thanks. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply


Response by Sicherlich

zuerst einmal: ich sehe eine andere Sprache als Englisch. Vielleicht bemerkt ihr doch, dass ihr zu den Autoren müsst und nicht die Autoren zu euch?! Ein Hoffnungsschimmer. (ein kleiner Schimmer. Ich traue Euch (WMF) weiterhin nicht mehr über den Weg.)

"First of all: I see another language than English. Maybe you really noticed that you have to go to the authors and not the authors to you ?! A glimmer of hope. (a little shimmer. I still put no trust in your (WMF) words.)"

Sicherlichs Gedanken zu Frage 1[edit]

(Unklar; Nutzer = Leser oder Autoren?)

  • Die Zahl der aktiven Autoren sinkt weiter. Die wenigen haben aber immer weniger zu sagen, was in der WP passiert, sie werden zu reinen "Schreibsklaven". Das "Denken" übernimmt die Foundation für sie.
  • In der Foundation sinkt die Anzahl der (ehemaligen) Autoren.
  • Die Bedeutung der Wikipedia sinkt, da sich Spezial-Wikis mit mehr Freiheiten für die die Autoren herausbilden.
"(Unclear; user = readers or authors?)
  • The number of active authors is falling. The few have less and less to say about what happenes in the WP, they become mere "write slaves." The "thinking" is taken over from them by the Foundation.
  • In the Foundation, the number of (former) Authors drops.
  • The importance of Wikipedia decreases as special-wiki with more freedom for the authors emerge."

Sicherlichs Gedanken zu Frage 2[edit]

WMF redet mit den Communities: in ihrer Sprache und akzeptiert kulturelle Unterschiede. Dont't panic (like implementing Superprotect et al): Wikipedia ist absolut planlos gestartet und hat so ziemlich alles der Community überlassen. Warum soll das nicht mehr funktionieren? Wenn es wirklich nicht funktioniert dann kann auch die WMF das nicht retten.

"WMF talks with the communities: in their language and accepts cultural differences. Dont't panic (like SuperProtect Implementing et al): Wikipedia started completely haphazard and has pretty much left everything to the community. Why should it not work? If it really doesn't work the WMF can't save it as well."[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

...I would add more people famous or not[edit]

Response by

credentials's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Ability to reference information with other dictionaries or encyclopedia's's thoughts on question 2[edit]

To have truthful and accurate information including medical that even a med student could use to convince an instructor of the accuracy of information found by searching wikipedia etc. A past instructor had expressed incertainties of absolute faith or trust in wikipedia entries and I'm sure that information relevant to accomodating opinions both for and against mh drugs and treatments should be available. Maybe even idea's of suggesting that psychological diagnosis aren't thought out to a best sense?

Volunteers are working on WikiProject Medicine to improve the quality of articles on medical topics.--GByrd (WMF) (talk) 01:31, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[edit]

Response by

Design of the Wiktionary page


Response by Saqibroy

Saqibroy's thoughts on question 1[edit]

First of all special thanks to wikipedia for this which countribuations wikipedia is doing after all i think if wikipedia starts special articles in news papers which consist of combine knowledge articles on different topics like as on physics on all news papers or make its own newspaper internationally published in every country then i think wikipedia will obviously lead that limit.no doubt wikipedia is working superb in all respects but this will lead it one step more higher.


Response by Rax

Rax' Gedanken zu Frage 1[edit]

Ich denke, dass sich (ähnlich wie "damals beim Fernsehen", nur schneller und kommunikativer) zwei grundsätzliche Angebotsvarianten - und entsprechend zwei grundsätzliche Nutzergruppen - noch stärker als derzeit schon herausbilden werden:

  • jene, die das Internet zur Unterhaltung nutzen, gelegentlich auch zur leicht verständlichen Information, und zur Kommunikation darüber
  • jene, die das Internet zur seriösen Information und vertiefenden Hintergrundinformation nutzen, und zur Kommunikation darüber
in english (sort of):
I think that will emerge (like "back then on the telly", but faster and more communicative) - even more than currently - two basic sorts of offers - and correspondingly two principal groups of users:
  • those who use the internet for entertainment, sometimes for easy to understand information - and communication about
  • those who use the internet for reputable information and in-depth background information - and communication about

Rax' Gedanken zu Frage 2[edit]

Erfolgreiche und gesunde Wikimedia-Projekte würden IMHO beide Entwicklungen berücksichtigen. Im Moment sehe ich drei ganz unterschiedliche Trends beim Beispiel Wikipedia (das kenne ich nun mal am besten):

  • Der Quelltext wird zunehmend komplizierter, d.h. das Editieren wird für Newbies immer schwieriger. - Erfolgreiche und gesunde Wikimedia-Projekte würden das Editieren vereinfachen.
  • Die Texte derjenigen Artikel, die zur Allgemeinbildung gehören (erweitert: die zum etablierten Papier-Lexikonwissen des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts gehörten) werden inhaltlich zunehmend wissenschaftlicher, komplexer, d.h. das Verstehen wird schwieriger. - Erfolgreiche und gesunde Wikimedia-Projekte würden planen, wie es zu komplexen Sachverhalten auch einfach verständliche Zusammenfassungen gibt (etwa als ausgebautes Intro der Artikel).
  • (das Folgende ist nur ein Gefühl, nicht empirisch belegt) Es gibt das Bedürfmis von Lesern, ihre Meinung zu Artikelinhalten mitzuteilen, darüber mit anderen Lesern zu diskutieren; dafür haben wir noch keine redaktionelle Lösung. - Erfolgreiche und gesunde Wikimedia-Projekte würden solche Diskussionen (die keine Auswirkungen auf den Artikeltext haben müssen, weil es gar nicht das Bedürfnis der kommentierenden Leser ist, diesen zu ändern) ermöglichen und allenfalls sanft moderieren.
in english (hope so):
Successful and healthy Wikimedia projects would IMHO consider both developments. At the moment I see three different trends in the example Wikipedia (I know the best):
  • The source code is becoming increasingly complex, that is, editing is becoming increasingly difficult for newbies. - Successful and healthy Wikimedia projects would simplify the editing process.
  • The texts of the articles belonging to the general education (expanded belonging to the established paper encyclopedia knowledge of the 19th and 20th centuries) are increasingly scientific content, complex, ie, understanding is difficult. - Successful and healthy Wikimedia projects would plan how there may be easy to understand summaries to complex issues (perhaps such as extensive intros of the articles).
  • (the following is just a feeling about - no empirical evidence is given) There is a need of readers to share their opinion about articles content and to discuss it with others; we do not have any editorial solution. - Successful and healthy Wikimedia projects would allow such discussions (which doesn't need to have any effect on the articles text because the wish of the commenting reader is not necessarily to change the article) and at most moderate it gently.

So weit meine 2 Cents. Grüße --Rax (talk) 22:42, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

just my 2 cents. Regards --Rax (talk) 22:42, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

PS: my condolences to the poor, who must evaluate all this ;)[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

i's good to use for people to use Wikipedia to add facts especially that are needed to understand's thoughts on question 2[edit]

just as usual[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

CB&I and energy/infrastructure companies that are pivotal to the supply chain are more and more the focus of negative articles in the media. Technological advancements should be better promoted. Concise summary of the subject.[edit]

Response by

Gabriel Lacerda / usability

No caso,um redesign nas estruturas do sistema em si,não muito radicais e sim objetivas para facilitar ainda mais o uso dos recursos que a wikimedia proporciona internacionalmente,inovar,buscar nesse cenario,se destacar com novas tecnologias,quem está lendo,ou por exemplo,textos mais intuitivos de ajuda,e que instigam o usuario a fazer parte de uma das grandes comunidades da web de código aberto,like firefox and ubuntu :D,o foco deve ser não no design e sim na usabilidade em si.

mais realmente,o que é design,como podemos alinhar o mesmo a um trabalhao conjunto com a usabilidade,esta foi uma "resposta pergunta",espero ter ajudado,abraços :D ...

(Machine translation, please improve...)
"In case, a redesign in system structures itself, not very radical but objective to further facilitate the use of resources that provides internationally wikimedia, innovate, seek this scenario, stand out with new technology, who is reading, or example, more intuitive text help, and that prompt the User to be part of one of the great open source web communities, like firefox and ubuntu :D, the focus should be not in design but in usability itself.
more really, what is design, how can we bring the same to a lot of work together with usability, this was a "question answer," I have helped, hugs :D ... "


Name: Emily Thoughts: Wiki should have more well-known writers give their opinions and share their information instead of random people. Trends I think in the future will be on fashion and celebrities. A thriving Wiki page would be colorful and interactive, have a comment dashboard, and have lots of pictures.


Response by 2601:7:5A80:7D0:D193:FEFA:EE64:EDDF


We have apps on both Google Play Apps and on iTunes.--GByrd (WMF) (talk) 01:18, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply


32X’s thoughts on question 1[edit]

  • The screen size is smaller (but resolutions are rising again): After almost 15 years there’s still no way to have a good screen design that works on different kinds of screens and sizes. Work on that!
  • The user interface on desktops is a mess because every link has to be there on every page. (Why?) And it sometimes doesn’t even make sense: On has to confirm to say thank you, but next to every edit there’s a revert link that works imediately, even if I don’t ever need it. Have this on mobile devices and people will go crazy and avoid editing.

32X’s thoughts on question 2[edit]

  • If you release software that changes the default user interface: make sure that it works. VE didn’t (and still doesn’t) work in a lot of tasks, and MV is a large step backwards on small screens.
  • Listen to the comunities instead of working against them. -- 32X (talk) 00:03, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[edit]

Response by skjuz mi, better czek

1. ziji pobliz Prahy jsem 1958 ? 2. mam "pouze" gymnazium (i kdyz k VŠ jsem čuchnul, když to bylo zadarmo a na spoustu věcí bylo dost času)

Tak k věci: Spousta znam je i jmenem a datumem nar. vídáme se různé profese atd. si mysli, že je to Ruská (potaž. Sovětska hymna) a to je třeba ujasnit (objasnit) .....

A proč je Svatá Valka - Džihad a toto ...

Thank you ANN

Machine translation; please help improve: skjuz me better Czeko I live near Prague in 1958? 2. I have "only" high school (although the university I čuchnul when it was free and a lot of things was enough time) So the thing: A lot is known by name and date born. We see various professions etc. thinks it is Russia (consideration. Soviet national anthem), and it needs to be clarified (clarified) ..... And why is the holy war - jihad and this ...[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

ویکی پدیا بزرگترین مرجع در تمام موارد علوم وغیره خواهد بود اینده اعتبار ان زیاد خواهد شد

(Machine translation, please improve...) "Wikipedia is the largest source of all others of the future will be high reliability"[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 2[edit]

make sure wikepedia is better :)


Response by 2A02:8070:8682:80:C82E:BCB0:BD3A:2E54

Link zu anderen offiziellen Wikis.

(Machine translation, please improve...) "Link to other official wiki."

2A02:8070:8682:80:C82E:BCB0:BD3A:2E54s Gedanken zu Frage 1[edit]

Artikel zu denen es ein eigenes offizielles Wiki gibt, direkt zum diesem Wiki verlinken, da es dort Unmengen an weiteren Informationen zu lesen gibt.

Ein Beispiel Artikel "Die Simpsons" --> Link zu http://de.simpsons.wikia.com/wiki/Simpsons-Wiki

oder auch Artikel "Tolkiens Welt" --> Link zu http://de.lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Der_Herr_der_Ringe_Wiki

Wäre meiner Meinung nach eine Überlegung Wert da bei solchen spezifischen Wikis wirklich zu allem etwas zu lesen ist.

(Machine translation, please improve...)
"There are items for which a separate official wiki, jump to this wiki link, as there are there to read tons of other information.
An example article "The Simpsons" -> Link to http://de.simpsons.wikia.com/wiki/Simpsons-Wiki
or article "Tolkien's world" -> Link to http://de.lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Der_Herr_der_Ringe_Wiki
Would in my opinion considering value is there really for anything to read in such a specific wikis something."
As a content-decision, this is generally up to the individual communities. For example, at the English Wikipedia, they have templates for linking to w:en:Template:Marvelwiki, w:en:Template:Snpp capsule, and w:en:Template:TardisLibrary, and similar. (I can't see anything for The Simpsons Wiki, though it was discussed in the past. Ditto for the LotR wikia, though again there is some discussion)
These wikia sites are also accessible through the Interwiki map, e.g. [[wikia:lotr|Middle-earth wiki]] creates Middle-earth wiki.
Hope that helps. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 00:54, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[edit]

Response by

I think Wikipedia is very helpful. And that you should make your site more appealing to the younger generation; by putting more bright colours like neon yellow on your pages and your home page.

We really appreciate input on what would make the site more accessible, and we have design researchers on staff who are willing to look at exactly this. Thank you! We're glad you find it helpful.GYoung (WMF) (talk) 01:26, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
@GYoung (WMF): occasionally discussions come up about making a "Wikipedia for kids". If anyone in Design is tracking that idea, this suggestion about friendly coloring would be good to track there. I think that kid-friendly coloring would be a great idea for that project. You also might suggest to the designers that they could make a brightly colored skin for the existing Wikipedias. --Pine 03:50, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[edit]

Response by

I want to feel payed to leave it alone.

Hello. I would like to talk about wikipedia pages. Sometimes a page doesn't have a picture for it's topic, or an outdated one. In my opinion with the internet today and google images it isn't that hard to keep your pictures updated or have a picture for a page without one. That is just my opinion.

Konveyor Belt[edit]

Response by Konveyor Belt

Konveyor Belt's thoughts on question 1[edit]

I think a trend I am seeing is the exponential growth of the encyclopedia, in contrast to the decline of highly active users here.

Konveyor Belt's thoughts on question 2[edit]

I don't think that editor retention efforts are the big solution everyone has been waiting for with this, including the WMF. Many of these editors left for good reasons, them being that they cannot collaborate with others in a professional environment.

Rather, tools should be developed so that the few highly active users who are happy where they are and can get along with the others can do more with less. Right now we have a lot of critical tools relying on external programs and sites, or non open source software, and if these tools go down it could lead to catastrophe, as we saw with Dispenser and Reflinks. the WMF should make a push to unite these efforts into a single editing interface that allows for many things to be done at once in a semi automated fashion, references, vandalism, tagging, patrolling etc. without having to have multiple tools for each thing, which is cumbersome.[edit]

Response by

প্রশ্ন ২'র উপরএর ভাবনা[edit]

please make the wikipedia easier for high schools' students-text book equivilant,make the topic easier,write in Bengali,UNDERSTANDING etc.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

we need to make this a universal place, finding things should be easy as 1.2.3...

We need to keep things simple not complex[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

I think another trend that will affect the future of wikimedia is the emergence of wearable devices.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

I think that thriving Wikimedia projects would benefit from more accurate and fact-checked content, not just relying on shared, public contributions, but also present content that has gone through responsible and systematic selection of data.

No!. No!. No!.[edit]

This site is not working for me. The site needs to be banned from the internet. How you have someone editing you, you suppose to have the professional thought to make this site, have someone responsible writer and a writer that knows what they doing to not give us miss information because little kids, teens, and teachers uses this site and sometimes get mistakes and wrong information. Everyone wants right answers and don't want to mess up on there presentations, documents, or teaching a class what they learns on the internet the website http://www.wikipedia.org/. You don't want no one having bad complains for your site. You need to fix it, fix it fast. Leave the EDIT button out the website, if they publish they publish, final end.


Response by



(Machine translation, please improve...)
"Although Wikipedia is often can not be recognized as a reference not a personality at school, when the examined products, first of all go to this site, and grab the base, I think in that's very useful site that. Songs and stage from that of the history of the People, Event, mathematics, since all even science are examined in this site has been very useful."


時々性格でない場合がある。ほとんどの調べ物をする場合は一つの文献では調べないので大した問題ではないです。 動画やサイトにジャンプできるといいと思いました。

(Machine translation, please improve...)
"Sometimes there may not be personality. It's not a big deal because not examined in one of literature if you want to most of the investigated compounds.
I think that it is good to be able to jump to the video or site."


Response by 2601:9:7300:A5:4048:7150:F05E:B4F4

2601:9:7300:A5:4048:7150:F05E:B4F4's thoughts on question 1[edit]

The majority of people answering these questions are inexperienced people who are giving information that is inaccurate. I would suggest you, the Wikimedia Foundation, seek help from experts in the types of answers you are searching for, instead of asking random, anonymous, and uneducated people who happen to stumble upon your advertisement by chance.[edit]

Response by

wikicomedia, a wikipedia for comedy. and one for books and about books.


Response by Gnangarra

Gnangarra's thoughts on question 1[edit]

...What major trends would you identify in addition to mobile and the next billion users?

  • the issue with focus on growth in one area is the potential to alienate other user bases by shifting focus away from their needs or by "breaking" current processes to facilitate the requirements of focus group.

Gnangarra's thoughts on question 2[edit]

...Based on the future trends that you think are important, what would thriving and healthy Wikimedia projects look like?

  1. the first big issue is having the WMF people more readily available and engaging on an in person level in the various communities, through the appointment of ambassadors under the employ of the WMF. These people would actively attend local events, chapter meetings enabling the contributor community greater access to the WMF they would also have a better understand of the people on the ground both in their capacity to deliver as well understand some of the cultural aspects that currently foorming barriers to wider participation from "minority/under-represented" groups.
  2. move away from the talking parties which have become the norm every time an issue is identified like gender, GS and focus more on supporting doing activities that are engaging the community.
  3. as the projects mature we are better able to understand, appreciate and see the impact of longer term sustained activity. WMF needs reduce a dependence on the immediate KPI measures and start to focus on longer term statistical issues because followup and continual engagement produce better results in the long term with sustainable outcomes, we are no longer the new startup novelty site looking for recognition. It needs to invest more support in sustaining communities in which under pins its base strength. Gnangarra (talk) 01:59, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

I think that it's important to create and multiply contents in lots of languages, even local languages and scarce languages. Wikipedia must be the place to learn and to keep the memory of languages which tend to disappear. This is a way to keep some cultures alive...'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

For me a good and healthy Wikimedia project is a project where the world of education takes a growing place. What a better way to learn than creating or reviewing Wikipedia pages ! I think that we must encourage the education community to create and update contents with the help of children and students. This is the best way to associate people from an early age in Wikimedia projects...


Response by 2601:c:9181:f4db:c518:67d6:c51d:6eb2

Wikipedia needs QUITE A FEW upgrades.

Maybe you guys, if you don't already, need moderators. Moderators that can check to see what is being changed and make sure they can easily change it back. Also, you guys need something in the homepage or at the top of any articles that brings you to a list of many other articles that need help such as needing more info, more details, etc.

Thanks for your time, Jaeden Merino[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

It is obviously good news for Wikipedia that its content features so prominently in Google search. However, the new Google practice of stripping out more sizeable amounts of content from Wikipedia and presenting it in a panel on Google's own page is potentially a concern. In the long term, and depending on how it develops, this Google feature may actually reduce awareness of and interest in Wikipedia's own site, and foster a perception that the content is owned or controlled by Google itself (which is probably Google's ultimate aim). 02:27, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply


Response by 2601:c:9181:f4db:c518:67d6:c51d:6eb2

do you guys have an app for wiki yet? if not make one for Android users, iOS users, and Microsoft user nd whatever else there may be out there.

There are apps available for Wikipedia, both Android and iOS. Both versions are free of cost and free of ads: The Android app at Google Play Store and iOS app on iTunes. If you register an account or have an account already, you can log in through the app and edit as well. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 03:09, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply


Response by WikiMaLeVa

Respuesta 1:

Una de las tendencias que se van desarrollando en dispositivos móviles es que los usuarios cada vez más se inscriben a otras páginas desde las redes sociales (ya sea facebook, twitter, instagram, etc.), esto podría abrir la posibilidad de que Wikimedia o Wikipedia tengan más usuarios. Esto ayudaría también a la aplicación de cuestionarios y test´s que puedan mejorar el desempeño de la página.

Puesto que cada día la sociedad se desarrolla en ambientes más visuales, la implementación de videos y más imágenes 3D puede ser una buena idea.

(Machine translation, please improve...)
"One of the trends that are developing in mobile devices is that users increasingly sign up to other pages from social networks (either facebook, twitter, instagram, etc.), this could open the possibility of Wikimedia or Wikipedia have more users. This would also help the application of questionnaires and test's that can improve the performance of the page.
Since each day society develops more visual environments, implementation of 3D videos and more pictures can be a good idea."

Respuesta 2:

La participación de otras páginas serias para el incremento de información

(Machine translation, please improve...)
"The participation of other serious increased pages for information"[edit]

Response by

thoughts on question 2[edit]

to make its looks , you give the subtitles just like you do , maybe some fun facts and pictures that clearly describes the event taking plac[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Major trends that I identify are mobile, tablet, and things like chrome books and such. I think that the next billion users will see Wikipedia on something like a tablet and as such Wikipedia should prepare for that. But we must continue to look at emerging technology as a new way for users to use the Wiki. Mobile devices like the I-Phone were once small and grew large; we must continue to look at other items.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

Thriving projects would be ones that integrate more specific topics and clearer sources. Sometimes when I click a source I am led to a dead link, so we must be careful about this type of thing by checking our sources. The source is the most important foundation for any subject because if you falsify the source you destroy everything that you tried to write.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 2[edit]

nội dung phong phú, chính xác, đưa được nhiều hình ảnh, tư liệu dẫn chứng, trình bày đẹp, hấp dẫn người đọc

(Machine translation, please improve...) "rich content, accuracy, put a lot of pictures, documentation, presentation beautiful, compelling the reader"

ding dong ping pong[edit]

Response by

What you should do is hold a 3 day show each year called Wiki-Fest. Live music, food, entertainment. Or something along those lines.


Response by Yerad258

Las ideas de Yerad258 acerca de la pregunta 1[edit]

El uso de las palabras correctas gracias a un buen vocabulario y la Retorica a la hora de hablar o en este caso, a la de escribir

(Machine translation, please improve) Using the right words thanks to a good vocabulary and Rhetoric when speaking or in this case, to write

Las ideas de Yerad258 acerca de la pregunta 2[edit]

El buen uso de esta red deberia de ser mucho mejor y de modo que deberiamos lograr crear nuevas alternativas de entrada para lograr una mejor calidad de servicio y asi ser la mejor enciclopedia del mundo con calidad exacta

(Machine translation, please improve) Good use of this network should be much better and so we should succeed in creating new alternative input for better quality of service and thus be the best encyclopedia in the world with exact quality


Response by Juan97david97

Juan97david97's thoughts on question 1[edit]

....Pueden hacerlo por medio de juegos o aplicaciones, las cuales no solo ayudarían de forma didáctica sino que se aprendería mucho mas fácil que partiendo de lectura…

(Machine translation, please improve) .... Can do it through games or applications, which would not only help in an educational but learn a lot easier than starting reading ...

Juan97david97's thoughts on question 2[edit]

...Pueden utilizar vídeos o también juegos didácticos en los cuales un usuario opina y se le corrige de la forma mas didáctica posible, así aprendería de forma particularmente sencilla…

(Machine translation, please improve) ... You can use videos or also educational games in which a user believes and corrects the more didactic way possible and learn from particularly simple form ...[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 2[edit]




Response by SantiForero

SantiForero's thoughts on question 2[edit]

I think new wikimedia projects should contain links to other websites that have additional information and can redirect the reader to more sources for further research.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Increased traffic from new areas that are gaining access to the internet.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

Wikipedia needs a way to attract dedicated and knowledgeable editors for less popular subjects.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

The next major trend would be interactive material.People will not be satisfied with just content that they have to read. They would want the content to be interesting.Content that moves them,Content that catches their eye,black and white reading material will be replaced by videos, and audio clips. As the internet speed is slowly increasing even in developing countries like India, reading science will slowly be replaced by seeing videos.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

1.Wikimedia must get more interactive.In this fast paced world,patience is a rare commodity.Learning must become more interactive.Wikipedia pages , though useful, will slowly fade away, if they dont catch the attention of the young minds. In short, I would like to say -"MAKE THE LEARNING INTERACTIVE." 2. MAKE INTERESTING VIDEOS. COMPLETE THE LEARNING LOOP, BY HAVING A QUESTIONNAIRE AT THE END OF EVERY WIKIPAGE.GIVE EM POINTS. MAKE LEARNING A GAME. 3.INCREASE THE 'FUN QUOTIENT'-: THIS IS THE SECRET OF SURVIVAL.'s[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

بنظر من مطالبی که تو ویکی پدیا نوشته میشه یک نوع حالت یکطرفه داره و در مورد هیچ چیز منصفانه نوشته نمیشه هرکی هر چیزی رو دوست داره میاو و همه چیزهای خوب رو بهش نسبت میده و هرچیزی هم که بدش میاد تو مقالاتش همه چیزهای بد رو بهش نسبت میده

(Machine translation, please improve) I think Wikipedia is written about you getting into a single-mode and just about anything not written
Myav everyone loves anything and everything about it was good and what was bad when you hand him the papers all the bad things about the game.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

نکته بعدی اینکه قابلیت لاگین شدن بدون اچ تی تی پی اس هم به سایتتون اضافه کنید چون اتصالات اس اس ال همیشه به درستی برقرار نمیشه

(Machine translation, please improve) Next, the ability to logon without HTML aes to add Sayttvn
Because SSL connections are not always properly maintained[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Constantly updating the mobile app, and asking partners like Duolingo to help translate Wikipedia.

  • We indeed need to work on supporting communities in enriching content in languages other than English, however, machine translation doesn't support community growth, in addition to the language inaccuracy flaws. Thanks!--Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 12:34, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Easy interface, bigger text, and a understandable screen.[edit]

Response by

Las ideas de acerca de la pregunta 2[edit]

La transmisión en tiempo real para los contactos de las redes sociales sin necesidad de grabar primero un video MP4 y recien subirlo luego,es decir transmicion en directo de imagenes y filmaciones on line para todos los usuarios conectados que visiten mi pagina Por otro lado los proyectos de Wilkimedia deberian poner enfasis en mejorar su app para dispositivos moviles,con traduccion automatica de idioma segun ubicacion del usuario y nivelar la cantidad y calidad del contenido para todos los usuarios sin distincion de pertenecer a paises del primer mundo o no..homologar la calidad y cantidad de informacion disponible.y gratuita,solventandoce con anunciantes de primera linea en relacion a la cantidad de like y de visitantes del sitio.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 2[edit]

I think that a thriving Wikimedia project is respected for spreading, sharing and disseminating useful and reliable information that promotes education and allows for the open sharing of knowledge, through language and cultural barriers, without censorship.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Quick, short answers on complex subjects. This compliments detailed and technical articles to allow understanding subjects at different levels.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

Most important: visual editing (WYSIWYG). Going to a second page and looking at monospaced font is scary and off-putting to non-technical users.


Response by Iltoto93

Iltoto93's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Ok, as a summary, being the first 2 the ones you mentioned already: 1) mobile browsing

2) large income of new internet users (mainly from Africa, Latin America and Asia)

Now: 3) ultra-high internet speeds are coming in. Over 100MB broadband internet services may be common in the near future, so think about including 1080p and 4K videos in articles (if possible), but keeping the articles easy to load for lower speeds users.

4) There may be a considerable growth of problems regarding political and social controversies, because we are "going deeper" into the information era.

5) Related to 3: Maybe there will be censoring requests from dictatorship countries, asking to censor specific articles related to freedom of speech. In addition, there will be article modifications (if not happening already) unleashing waves of propaganda from terrorist organizations and dictatorships.

Very familiar with issues 3 and 4.

6) Have you got any issues regarding copyright laws? In the future, if the freenet, opensource supporters and overall piracy torrenters "lose" the war against the copyright (at least in the clearnet), government copyright, copyright organizations, and other authorities entities, there may be requests to sign up Wikipedia into some sort of "non-piracy proliferation alliance". I know it may sound stupid, but forcing search engines to censor pages and closing up piracy webpages may displace and minimice the masses from piracy, and therefore wikipedia is another (and perhaps secondary) target.

Iltoto93's thoughts on question 2[edit]

An ultra reliable platform of information (which already is) editing friendly and molded to the trends of the future. Editing biased articles and transforming them into open debate articles respecting each part of the story.

DEAR WIKI: if you look further away in our human existence timeline, there has nearly never been a moment in our history (at least earlier than the first half of the XX century) in which the loser tells the main story. Do you want to make real history? then consider placing debate (moderated) articles so that in the years to come, the reality of the now stays the same and our future selves will judge and decide through correct ways.


Response by SorynIGuess

SorynIGuess's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Well, correct the Internet is going mobile, I use my computer still constantly due to its higher versatility, but I feel that your mobile site could use a rebuild, it works excellent right now for reading, but I feel that you should add more media based options, the main change of the internet has been a dynamic change that has been going on since before my time even on this earth, less text, more media, this site is here for the sake of open knowledge and it does a damn good job but I have witnessed in my lifetime a change of mindset in how learning works, you need visual/audio aides and try to help ease the retention of the information, I would rather look something up once and understand it that look it up in multiple places and get frusturated.

SorynIGuess's thoughts on question 2[edit]

It is also true that we are getting a surge of new users on the internet, and thats a great thing! people need access to knowledge and the internet is limitless in it, everyone needs to be able to use it, its powerful and helpful, and we are looking at great things

Ellsworth Kilpatrick[edit]

Response by Ellsworth Kilpatrick

Ellsworth Kilpatrick's thoughts on question 2[edit]

On the situation of Wikipedia here in China mainlands, I think it is not optimistic. Because most of Internet users here are already accustomed to using their Internet products. On the other hand, Wikipedia didn't do well in localization so it is difficult for we the Chinese to use this great Internet project.For instance, this page does not have Simplified Chinese edition.Of course, Wikipedia should do more at propaganda,to let more people know What Is Wikipedia. This is what I wanna say.

Ellsworth Kilpatrick's thoughts on question 2[edit]


(Machine translation, please improve) I hope Wikipedia able to develop an integrated, Trinity-style, most of Wikimedia's current project integration features, like Apple's iTunes the same. You can integrate Wikiquote Wikimedia, Wikipedia hatch, tourism and other projects in a wiki to create under the qualifying line, in line with developers and ordinary users habits, there are features (for example: to help students work one-stop information query item: Query "Goethe "would be able to his information, quotations integrate one output) of the project.

Ellsworth Kilpatrick's thoughts on question 1[edit]


(Machine translation, please improve) Users of mobile clients will continue to rise rapidly, but will soon become saturated, while desktop users will maintain a relatively stable trend. Based on this situation and the Chinese mainland of my life, I think that Wikipedia should be used to develop better, easier to use, more "down to earth" mobile client, Shanfanjiujian, while the desktop client left geeks and developers.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

The amount of data usage of the entire internet will increase substantially.


Response by 2600:100E:B005:EFD:458D:4B7A:904D:25A2

2600:100E:B005:EFD:458D:4B7A:904D:25A2's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Illiteracy or Imagistic literacy. Our world is moving away from language toward image. Including these 'pseudo-literati' and bringing them onboard by having, perhaps, a wiki-based reading school of some sort can only be of benefit. I would defer this project to MIT's Media Lab where they've developed a laptop capable of bringing an illiterate child in rural Kenya(?) to basic literacy in a matter of month without any outside aid.

2600:100E:B005:EFD:458D:4B7A:904D:25A2's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Wiki Media, Facebook, Twitter, Google, et al, ought to form a consortium or alliance whereby net neutrality is stated as a predicate for their respective existences and that, should said neutrality be compromised by, say, the likes of the FCC or Comcast or AOL Time Warner, or the Boogie Man, they compromise said services. Blackouts of the most important websites on the net in protest of injustice should, frankly, be a more common practice. Corporate citizenship is vital in a world where corporations are considered citizens. Wikimedia is no exception, and given it's nature, is in a position to provide "democratic" leadership in this regard.

Wikimedia and Facebook themselves violate net neutrality. [1] Andreas JN466 16:44, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

A Lonely Vagabond[edit]

Response by A Lonely Vagabond

A Lonely Vagabond's thoughts on question 1[edit]

More people are being exposed to technology and the internet faster. Children of this and the next generation will master the art of surfing the net before they are even 10. Born under such great amounts and speeds of new information. There will be many desiring a simpler form of knowledge seeking only what they need or desire. Simply, people will become lazier to read lots of words and like to read short, compact (shallow) information.

A Lonely Vagabond's thoughts on question 2[edit]

They'd be more fun. It's great that wikipedia runs without support from other big companies/names. However collaborations with other places/businesses/people will liven up the projects more, not to mention attract more people.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Social media is becoming increasingly more powerful and impactful. There seems to be a lot of changes happening on that front, with new ones coming up as others are acquired, a widening user demographic. It would be nice to have an option that would supply you with new information - either through social media, feeds or widgets. Also time has become a major factor for consideration as it seems there's never enough hours in the day to do what we want to do. Whether it's an app or site, it's got to be easy to use (search/extract/read) on any device given people's limited time and their need for 'instant gratification'.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

The major thing that I see, in regards to, and in addition to mobile and user-base trends, are for a trend of original research. In this case, the trend should be to encourage these people to write elsewhere and make themselves known to the world, and as an addendum, gather information that is not their own, as it has always been my stance that Wikipedia be comparable to a forum of ideas and a gift of the peoples of this world, that gift being as one would hope a gift would be; a gesture of kind.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

Healthy projects should consist of not only the creation of new articles but the refinement of old; and, a promise. These are people, and they should be treated as such, allowing them freedom and liberty which they may not otherwise know. So, it is our duty as people, kind, compassionate, and knowledgeable, to give them the ultimate liberty... knowledge. To not only our knowledge, but of sharing their knowledge; of encouragement, not of shame for going against the grain. We must realize that the human species is as diverse as any other, that we are all of the same, but different in ways we determine to be ours; for it is not our similarities that should unite us, it is our differences.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

sexual and recreational health projects's thoughts on question 2[edit]

The opposite of the projects in chicago. Based internationally connected to the worldwide health and system of law.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

I think that the inaccurate stigma about inaccuracy of information on Wikipedia needs to be mitigated somehow, maybe some sort of advertising campaign with statistics to show how accurate Wikipedia truly is's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Do NOT make a mobile site, every mobile site I have ever encountered compromises the original sites' speed and functionality to make it "appear" slightly better on mobile devices even though it is harder to navigate. However, should you decide to make a mobile site (which you probably will) at least provide an option at the bottom of EVERY page to change back to the standard desktop version.

Claudio jaime[edit]

Response by Claudio jaime

O que Claudio jaimeeu pensa sobre a pergunta 2[edit]

Eu sujeria que lhes recebecem com dua mãos como voces sempre fazem e continuem a fazer, para que eles possam se sentir como se fosse em sua propria casa onde, pode sacar informações que o utilizador pretende adquirir. e continuem aumentar o desempenho deste site, para que desenvolve mas ainda.

bom obrigado por leres.

(Machine translation, please improve) I sujeria that recebecem them with dua hands as you guys always do and continue to do, so they can feel like you were in your own home where you can draw information that you want to buy. and continue to increase the performance of this website, so that develops but still.
good thanks for you read.


Response by Maxjohansen

Maxjohansen's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Within the next few decades, data will become much more available. Government organizations will become transparent (search "Sunlight Foundation"), bioinformatics will become consistent and commonplace, and the internet of things will grow astronomically. To keep up with this constant stream of ever-evolving data, proprietary heavyweight protocols will not serve. To meet the internet's future needs, we have to define open standardized methods of intercommunication. Platform-agnostic device-independent methods of communication will permit ever-increasing economic equality in access to data. Online tutorial sites are becoming increasingly relevant, and many major universities have adopted open-source curriculum; devices available in emerging markets must be compatible with these resources.

The integrity of these protocols is essential. Net neutrality must be maintained to prevent disruption and espionage of this data.

Maxjohansen's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Wikimedia projects must be easily accessible to any consumer on any platform. Describing and transporting information in a platform-agnostic way will be necessary. Without open protocols, some pages might only be accessible to Android owners while others were restricted to iPhone users. More significantly, some pages might become inaccessible via cheaper devices, that is to say, information would be economically segregated. This would stunt societal growth and slow the dissemination of knowledge. Wikimedia must design and implement device-agnostic data protocols for its sites.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

I believe that people will be accessing the Internet and this site not only through mobile devices but through other pieces of technology, like their TVs and gaming devices.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

Healthy Wikimedia projects would probably be revising the site to work and look better on different devise besides mobile.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Shorter attention spans and the desire to obtain information quickly and concisely[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Voice recognitive searches are used a lot more commonly now and implementing that into the site on all platforms would be benificial.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

A "Healthy" Wikimedia project would be one people can easily get the facts from. Many people disregard wikipedia because people say that the information isn't reliable. There is also lots of text and it can be difficult to find the correct information. Making the text easier t oread woujld be a major factor in this.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

One gigantic major trend I see is Accessibility. Meaning that the use of the internet will become even easier an more automated. Like having a problem with something? Take a screenshot and have your browser look for a solution. At loss at home with something, take a picture, search for a solution. In a way a bit of what Smartphones (Siri) does. Just incoperating interpretation of Pictures/SCreenshots and the like. For example, you are at a bus station, take a picture of it, Picture is embedded with your GPS location, the sign of a busstation recognized, searching for Bus- schedules for that station.

Same might apply to Sights. In front of some church? Take a picture, hit the "search" button and have your smart-accessory provide everything it finds (most likely the Wiki Article for that place.

I further assume that the Internet might move away from written Medium and move to audio. Either directly spoken or by using programs to turn text into speech, so people can "listen" to the web while driving, navigating, or the like.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

I assume Pictures and maybe even Videos on several Topics would be nice. Maybe a way for people to "read" an article and put it online for review to create something like a "speakypedia" (wordplay on Wikipedia)?[edit]

Response by[edit]

Response by

Try making the content more visible and impactful's thoughts on question 2[edit]

To answer the second question, i had to give it a thought. The question, like your articles are a bit ambiguous to be honest and require a certain simplicity in terms of needs. Simplicity is missing. What you do have is the content. Your articles have probably saved the lives of a millions of school-going children.

Another suggestion, try prioritising your articles and filtering them. You can notice them in many online shopping websites. Adding filters can be of huge help to those who need specific details about a topic.

The last one. Make the websites less boring. Get a good graphic designer and make the pages look visually stunning. Readers often tend to get lost within the desperation provided by the labyrinth of words in articles. A visually stunning page speaks for itself in many ways.[edit]

Response by

Increase Visitor Engagement's thoughts on question 1[edit]

You website gives a feel of traditional web 1.0 websites where the job was to set up front information like wise. You should try to bring a revised website design wherein the focus is on making information much more engaging and kind of suggestive in nature. Bring in panel on the right hand side to show the relevant topics in relation the visitors search query item. Like if a person has come up on Wikipedia while searching for top ten cars, then let the right hand panel suggest other topics like top ten expensive cars, top ten bikes etc.

My answer is you will be facing crunch situation in next few years where you will possess multitude of information but your website will lag behind in presenting those. Streamline your content in the best possible manner.

I think additional informations are already given (in a sorted way) like the box in en:Party to Go. --Minihaa (talk) 12:30, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Very soon someone else will take over you if you keep lacking the social media links and call of action buttons for sharing the content on the social platform. Even I might bring in a 'EInfopedia' which will bring in a new advanced glossary of information, topics and content offering wider customer engagement. You have survived so fr because of lack of competitors.[edit]

Response by

Mijn mening over vraag 2[edit]

Zorg dat mensen in azie, latijns-amerika en Afrika, vrijwilligers mbt taal/tolk in bv Mandarijn of Latijns ingezet worden. (die Mandarijn gestudeerd hebben, hun passie)Zet die talen mbt 3 taalgebieden in Wiki=transleren ALLE KENNIS IN BV SWAHILI.

Zorg dat WIKI overaL toepasbaar is. Dus op alle mobiele apparaten.





(Machine translation, please improve)
Make sure that people in Asia, Latin America and Africa, volunteers concerning language / interpreter eg Mandarin or Latin are deployed. (Who have studied Mandarin, their passion) Put those languages ​​about three linguistic regions in Wiki = translate ALL KNOWLEDGE BV SWAHILI.
Make sure WIKI everywhere applicable. So on all mobile devices.
SLOT FOR ME IS THAT WIKI the greatest gift I ever received.

Response by's thoughts on question 2[edit]

I thought maybe you could create a Youtube channel. Make surveys about which subjects people would like to understand better and then a University teacher could explain them in videos. Moreover you could have a great income if you hit a lot of views.

The powder toy[edit]

Response by The powder toy

The powder toy对问题一的想法[edit]

請原諒在下的英文水平不好。 Please forgive my bad English skills
  • 健康化。在未來,人們將更加注重個人的健康,可以看出像apple等均推出apple watch ,主推健康,而在下的建議則是維基可以更加注重醫學方面的建設,如果有必要可以設立一個有關於醫藥的新維基計劃。
  • 中立化。在現在,維基廣泛流行于各個發達國家,但更大的互聯網“市場”例如:中國,引用網易的新聞[2],在2014年中國的網民數達到了6.49億,(649000 K)。如此的一個互聯網用戶大國,其中知道/了解維基的人僅僅寥寥無幾,維基只在部分大學較為流行,而造成此原因很大就是不中立導致中國政府對維基進行封鎖,在未來應該著手改進中立問題。
(Machine translation, please improve)
  • Health-oriented. In the future, people will pay more attention to personal health, etc. It can be seen as apple introduced apple watch, the main push of health, and it is recommended that the lower the wiki can be more focused on the medical aspects of the building, if necessary, on the establishment of a medicine new Wiki plan.
  • Neutrality. In the now widely popular in various countries wiki, but the bigger the Internet "market" such as: China, citing Netease news [3] in 2014 the number of Internet users in China reached 649 million, (649000 K). Such a big country of Internet users, which know / understand only few people wiki, Wikipedia is more popular only in some universities, this caused a big reason is that the Chinese government is not neutral lead Wiki blockade should start to improve in the future neutrality issue .
THAT "NEUTRALITY" emphasized by COMMUNIST GOVERNMENT is never what we should treasure and seek.--Temp3600 (talk) 11:06, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

The powder toy对问题二的想法[edit]


(Machine translation, please improve) Will be free encyclopedia everyone can have free access to the world! Wikipedia is infinite future, nor is immeasurable![edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Have a more stringent application process for edits. Wikipedia is littered with untrustworthy references.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Variety of information to display other than text: People become lazy and use various techniques to get information in form of VDOs, photos, and halograms.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

Wikimedia should provide various forms of data for the users.


Response by 2A04:A40:1000:E0:3C98:D4FD:5EAA:1782

2A04:A40:1000:E0:3C98:D4FD:5EAA:1782's thoughts on question 1[edit]

mobile is just a beginning. every device will become smart in the long run.

2A04:A40:1000:E0:3C98:D4FD:5EAA:1782's thoughts on question 2[edit]

accessibility and interoperability regardless of the device[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

The next major trend is reliable information...the internet is growing rapidly and information and the associated data with that information is growing as well. I feel that in the end you end up having a lot of bad and inconsistent data due to internet trolls or just a misjudgment or mistake by a single person or a group of people. That being said I think that first and foremost Wikipedia needs to grow in reliable links to other sources...some pages have more than others, but some pages have few reputable and/or peer reviewed sources. In essense we need more authentic, peer-reviewed, and higher-education level sources for each bit of information to make the information on wikipedia more legitimate.


Response by Adityanittoor

Adityanittoor's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Segregation and presentation of data is going to be a problem as the amount of data grows. So the trend is now towards app universes that help with presenting that data effectively on "multi tasking" platforms like smartphones. I think over a period of time when the number of apps get too much, people will slowly start wanting to move towards single function devices for specific applications, the difference will be that this time around they will have organically grown out of user experience on the apps.

Adityanittoor's thoughts on question 2[edit]

I think the internet is going to get more and more confusing for people as the amount of data in the public domain has to contend with efficient methods of sorting and presenting such large tranches of data, which is a computational problem. Also, it may be because I'm a product of a different generation but I am inherently more comfortable with devices that are built for a singular purpose.

Hitchhiker's Guide I think its time to make the Wikipedia into a separate device. On the lines of the Hitchhikers Guide. At the very least it would be a novelty and recover its investment (There are quite a few fans of the book). If we allow ourselves to be optimistic, it would be like talking to the most knowledgeable man on earth.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

همه ی لنز و دستگاهای انعطاف دار را روی لباس آوردن سی پی یو قابل انعطاف لباس شارژی از راه دور فقط بدون سیم

Machine translation; please help improve: همه ی لنز و دستگاهای انعطاف دار را روی لباس آوردن سی پی یو قابل انعطاف لباس شارژی از راه دور فقط بدون سیم's thoughts on question 2[edit]

سرمایه گذاری روی افکار=باور به اینکه همه با هم بدون مرزهامون میتونیم پیشرفت کنیم افکار متحد بدون مرزی باید جندین سال جلوتر از درون مرزی باشه لازمه پیشرفت همه جور ایده ای هست نه فقط نخبها ملل جمع بشن باور داشته باشیم همه با هم میتونیم همه.فقیر و گدا.باسواد و بی سواد.باتجربه و بی تجربه.بالغ و بجه اینطوری که بشیم دنیای دیگر کهکشانات هم به ما احترام میذارند من اعتقاد به فرازمینی ها دارم و میدونم زمینی ها با هم بهترینند.

Machine translation; please help improve: Gda.basvad poor and Svad.batjrbh and Tjrbh.balgh and children So you're the world to respect our universes Myzarnd I know I believe in extraterrestrial and terrestrial are 'together' Bhtrynnd.


Response by JarnoRFB

JarnoRFB's thoughts on question 1[edit]

I hope that we will see a transformation of education in the next years. Basic knowledge will be easily accessible and taught via the internet, while educational institutions will focus on more more complicated tasks like projects, in which students can learn teamwork and deepen their knowledge, and practical training. I believe that projects like WikiBooks and Wikiversity have already made a lot of progress in that direction, but for the future we will need platforms that allow for creation of interactive content, e.g. like KhanAcademy. If we are able to come up with a tool that is as modular and easy too use as a normal wiki and still enables people to create interactive content for educational purposes it will be a powerful tool.

JarnoRFB's thoughts on question 2[edit]

vikipedi doğru bilgiye nerden ulaşıyor[edit]

soruyorum vikipedi nerden doğru bilgite ulaşıyor veya bu doğruların yüzde kaçı kendi envanterinden

Machine translation; please help improve: I ask where is reaching the right bilgit Wikipedia or from their inventory so few of these right


Response by 2001:420:5246:1300:8CB0:56A9:F7A9:4BFB

2001:420:5246:1300:8CB0:56A9:F7A9:4BFB's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Mobile version can also be integrated with social/crowd sourced data for editing - for example:- create a whatsapp group for a specific page or set of pages and allow users to join and provide inputs and comments[edit]

Response by Contributions/

Dear surveyors as a native Danish speaker, and farely good English reader, I enjoy using the information available to me and my pupils very much.

BUT both in English and Danish the pages and their contents are now so detailed, specific and riddled with links and terms, that only people with extensive knowledge can understand and use the vital information. one example could be "motor" witch does not offer a simple (it moves) explanation. And "engine" has a complicated picture you might use as a mechanic but not as a layperson.

SO create, through teachers and volunteers, wiki-child (patentpending?), links with easy to comprehend texts, simplified pictures and short headlines, a wiki for the young (and unambitious).

(a cucumber, a green vegetable, comes from Asia, used in salads, very watery. the north star, a star always over the north pole, if you look at it you can find north. wiki-child, a website with easy to read explanations)

Regards ruth Boehm , Denmark[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

...your first question is only for people who know english's thoughts on question 2[edit]

idem as question 1


Response by آبراهام با ورود مرم به سایت آن هارا به اشتراک گذاری در سایت تشویق کنیم

Machine translation; please help improve: With the arrival of the people, to encourage web site Hara Share

Arcangelo guastafierro[edit]

Response by Arcangelo guastafierro

Considerazioni di Arcangelo guastafierro sulla domanda n. 1[edit]

Sempre più vi saranno agglomerati urbani con connessioni wireless che si adatteranno a tutti i tipi di supporto e visualizzatore. In sostanza avremmo molti, forse troppi, tipi di monitor a disposizione. Non solo i dispositivi mobili, ma anche occhiali o collegamenti di tipo neurale. Sembra fantascienza ma non credo lo sia. In fondo la mano artificiale collegata al sistema neurale umano esiste già e viene già trapiantata. I collegamenti neurali già esistono e saranno il vero e proprio futuro della comunicazione. per fare un banale esempio che renda l'idea un po' come il telefono installato nella mano del protagonista del remake di Total Recall.

Machine translation: please help improve: Increasingly there will be no municipality with wireless connections that will adapt to all types of media and viewer. Basically we would have many, perhaps too many, types of monitors available. Not just mobile devices, but also glasses or neural connections. Sounds like science fiction, but I do not think it is. At the bottom of the artificial hand connected to the human neural system already exists and is already transplanted. The neural connections already exist and will be the real future of communication. to take a trivial example, which makes the idea a bit 'like the telephone installed in the hand of the protagonist of the remake of Total Recall.

Considerazioni di Arcangelo guastafierro sulla domanda n. 2[edit]

I progetti che dovranno essere seguiti maggiormente, a mio parere, saranno quelli che renderanno fruibili le conoscenze non solo a chi ha un mezzo di comunicazione, ma anche a chi non può permettersene. La cultura è la fonte primaria della ricchezza di ogni persona, e la libertà di parola e espressione in genere dovranno essere estese a tutti. Pertanto prima di tutto bisognerà sviluppare progetti di miglioramento dell'ambiente in cui si vive (progetti di autocostruzione di strutture e telecomunicazioni in zone ad alto rischio di povertà intellettuale) ed in cui si opera (creazione di cultura per svincolarsi dai grandi poteri costituiti illegalmente come multinazionali etc.). Anche questo potrebbe sembrare utopia, ma ci sono già organizzazioni che stanno lavorando su questo punto. Ci vorranno molti anni ma si è visto che è possibile. Con le potenzialità di una struttura enorme come Wikimedia si potrebbe dare un'accellerata al progresso di molte zone del pianeta, sia del terzo e quarto mondo, ma anche del primo e secondo che stanno scivolando sempre più nella morsa della poverta.

Machine translation; please help improve: The projects, to be followed more, in my opinion, will be the ones that will make accessible the knowledge not only to those who have a means of communication, but also to those who can not afford. Culture is the primary source of wealth of every person, and freedom of speech and expression in general should be extended to all. Therefore, first of all have to develop projects to improve the environment in which you live (DIY projects and telecommunications facilities in high-risk areas of intellectual poverty) and Operating (creation of culture to free itself from the great powers that illegally as corporations etc.). Although this might seem utopian, but there are already organizations that are working on this. It will take many years, but we have seen that it is possible. With the potential of a huge structure like Wikimedia you could give an accelerated progress in many areas of the planet, both the third and fourth world, but also the first and second are slipping more and more in the grip of poverty.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

While English is likely to remain the main language for a majority of Wikipedia users, other languages like Chinese, French etc. are goign to become more and more important.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

A thriving Wikimedia project would be a encyclopedia that remains continuous and consistent across all languages.


Response by Mufasacat

Mufasacat's thoughts on question 2[edit]

I believe that you are asking for the most impossible of all things. This is rather like forming a committee of 10,000 persons to quickly put there heads together and provide some meaningful information about predicting the future of technology and the future of the oncoming unsustainable entrance of another billion users into the big ... burgeoning ... exploding worldwide system. I think that one in ten thousand suggestions may be of some meaning to Wiki and who is going to cipher all of this.?

In both of your questions 1 and 2 you have used the words ... major trends and future trends. I think it would be a good moment to share a moment of ..... thoughtful and deep and silent consideration for the overall trend that can only be described as "heading into the disaster of overpopulation and enormous extinction of species." Wiki, with all it's resources and resourcefulness might well consider turning its ear and energy into helping with this very huge and unexpected monster problem. Our Planet is slipping rapidly into serious trouble. We need to start making plans for how to deal with this. There probably is no better medium for communicating at the "people" level than right here with the "Wiki Ones."

Hello, User:Mufasacat. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Wikimedia Foundation staff are coming through every comment and compiling and categorizing major themes. As far as the problem of overpopulation and extinction of species, the Wikimedia movement is limited by law in where it can put its resources, but that doesn't mean that there isn't room to help from within the Wikimedia movement, including ensuring that encyclopedic coverage of issues are complete at Wikipedia, that courses on environmentalism are complete at Wikiversity, that books properly cover the topic at Wikibooks and that important primary source documents on the issue are preserved at Wikisource. I hope you'll pitch in! This page might give you a good starting point. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 13:29, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

Guest Account 2015[edit]

Response by Guest Account 2015

Guest Account 2015's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Nobody should forget that the 1 billion new internet user who use Mobil Web maybe don't have the money to use the internet a long time.

Guest Account 2015's thoughts on question 2[edit]

1. It's important to learn from the mistakes or problemes in other Wikis. For example the German Wikipedia. With this I mean to avoid edit wars and unreasonable deletions. 2. Further it's very important to don't alienate wiki users and authors because of this reasons. --Guest Account 2015 (talk) 10:57, 25 February 2015 (UTC) I'm a German user. If you answer me please write in a simple englisch and don't mind my mistakes ;-), thanks.Reply


Response by JacaDev

Change the editing interface :x Seriously. It discourages many potential editors for sure.

Please make more of an effort to be more accurate about your information and please stop letting everyone add to it! Your staff should be more competent than this![edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Predictive Search - Based on the user profile, the content of the page can be customized[edit]

Response by对问题一的想法[edit]


Machine translation; please help improve: Data will be a substantial increase in the Internet age, the video will become the main way to replace the text to share information exchange对问题二的想法[edit]


Machine translation; please help improve: Maintain strict censorship to prevent shoddy. Views Wikimedia projects so reliable. While taking a neutral position, not because of political reasons hinder Wiki plan. Strengthen multimedia construction, so Wikipedia entries include video or video links and entries related


Response by ZloAlien

ZloAlien's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Возрастёт роль использования Википедии как СМИ (она бесплатна и содержит достаточно непредвзятый взгляд на проблемы). Соответственно Википедия станет полем битвы в информационной войне (она уже сейчас поле битвы). Помимо того, что возрастёт заинтересованность отдельных государств в контроле за данным ресурсом, также такой контроль постараются взять в свои руки отдельные группы лиц, объединенных национальной/этнической принадлежностью или иными признаками. В связи с этим требуется децентрализация управления (например, что бы решение о важности статьи принималось голосованием, а не администратором с соответствующим правом голоса), а также контроль за содержимым статей. Можно поступить как делают в текстовых чатах: вандалиста (незаметно) переключать на копию википедии за какое-то число и пусть он там правит что угодно. При этом всем остальным пользователям предоставлять актуальную версию википедии. Правда это потребует обеспечение возможности правки только для зарегистрированных пользователей.

В связи с увеличением количества статей и их объема:

  1. Значительно увеличится роль википедии как учебного пособия - предлогаю тесно сотрудничать с образовательными учреждениями (уж если студенты будут все-равно лезть в википедию что бы быстро найти интересующий их материал, так пусть этот материал будет качественный).
  2. Уменьшится связанность статей википедии написанных на различных языках - предлагаю добавить возможность автоматического перевода текста статьи на язык пользователя.

The role of using Wikipedia as a mess media instrument will increase (it's free and offers relatively unbiased outlook of the current problems).

Consequently, Wikipedia will become a battlefield in information war (it already is). Not only is the motivation of some states to control this website going therefore to increase; also, some groups of people will try to gain such control, unified by national/ethnic affinity or other characteristics. Therefore, decentralisation of administration is going to be necessary (for example, the decision on importance of an article ought to be taken not by administrators with relevant rights, but by open voting), as well as enhanced control on contents of articles. It is possible to use an option that is employed in text chats: a vandal is (quietly) switched to a past version of Wikipedia, and may he edit anything he likes. All other users are provided in the meantime with the current version of Wikipedia. The drawback is that this option requires to enable editing rights only for registered users.

As the number of articles and their average length will increase:

  1. The role of Wikipedia as a source of didactic materials will increase considerably (as there is no way to stop undergraduates from searching quickly for relevant informations, then at least may those informations be of good quality).
  2. Connectivity among articles in different languages will decrease — I propose to add the option of automatic translation of article contents into the user's language.

A translator's note: by "importance of articles" the author apparently means the scales, per which articles are judged as needing protection from vandalism (am I correct?)

I really think that automatic translation is not the main trend. So, it is enough that a user is able to copy-post relevant parts into Google and read what he gets. Preferably, he ought to be aware that the meaning of what he reads very likely differs drastically from the real meaning of the original text. Wikipedia does not need to do anything itself in this area. - 00:20, 27 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

ZloAlien's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Как базы знаний человечества. Всегда с актуальной информацией, структурированная, доступная.

Вероятно хорошо бы было доработать навигацию по статьям. Сейчас в статье есть ссылки, при помощи которых можно перейти на страницы с содержимым сходной тематики, однако если ссылок нет, то статья получается оторванной от тематики, в которой находится. Хорошо бы было, сделать процесс выбора и отображения принадлежности статьи к тем или иным категориям более наглядным. Что бы при описании статьи можно было видеть на пересечении каких областей знания она находится и какие ещё статьи в данном пересечении находятся (имеют схожую направленность).

As a knowledge base of humanity. Always with the most actual information, always structured and accessible.

Perhaps, it'd be a nice idea to improve article-to-article navigation. Currently, articles usually feature links that enable us to go to other articles that address similar subjects, but if such links are not present, an article turns out to be detached in the subject area it really addresses. It'd be a nice idea to make the job of category selection and of displaying category affinity of articles more visual, intuitive, and easy to grasp. So that it be possible to see, what crossroads of knowledge domains the article occupies and what other articles occupy the same crossroads (i.e. address similar problems).[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 2[edit]

cut the crap, try to encrease the texts to only the most important information. so we can get a better wiew of what things actually means, without reading three pages, that could have been increased to just a few lines[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

I've been an avid user of Wikipedia since more than a decade - while as a student and now a professional. The latter may want something which is more specific and can be readily used. Wikipedia for a good bit of it assumes an academic flavor making it bit esoteric for relatively simple purposes.

Within specific regions of the world witnessing accelerated growth, special focus can be put on content relevant and tailored to emerging areas of employment and hence related industry knowledge. For ex in India medicine, banking, insurance, e-governance etc. may take a precedence above the rest.[edit]

Response by

I think it would be pretty cool to have a comments section like youtube for viewers to share there opinion about the topic. Maybe if accurate enough then it can be added later into the Wikipedia subject[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Make the site more colorful to attract the eye if you cant afford that I'm sure you can make a fundraiser.

To answer the second question first, I'd like to go over two related ideas: the protection of children and curation. As far as I'm able to tell, there are no limits to things that can be searched. I don't know if any products available as third party filter Wikipedia content, but in their absence, there is far too much adult content freely available for children to see, some with entirely adult-only imagery. While I believe that if parents can raise their children the way they see fit, I also believe there should be an opt-in or opt-out option to filter adult content. Children do not have any particular need to see descriptions or pictures of sex acts or genital anatomy. Once children reach learning about reproduction in school, general graphical depictions should suffice, rather than an open-license picture. This also allows for a major opportunity for growth in the curation of articles targeted for children. With proper content controls and properly sourced materials, Wikipedia could be a really excellent source of secondary information. At some point, the students need to read for a general idea and start reading the primary material/articles. As long as companies are willing to honor Wikipedia's code of neutral and factual writing or willing to make general gifts for children's content, or possibly able to make mention of their gifts, there is a massive opportunity for soliciting funds to support the effort. The moral high ground is always defensible, and most likely very profitable. Good curation of the subjects that children generally learn in school, written to the level of specificity that is considered grade-appropriate, coupled with the interrelations of subjects that are inherent to children's learning, could be far more robust through Wikipedia than other sources. I did a very basic report on beavers in the 3rd grade. What information did I need? Basic anatomical features like teeth and tail, oiled skin, diet, range of habitat, dam-building. The inherent interactivity of Wikipedia (and all hyperlinked content) would have been far more entertaining and engaging as a learning tool than just my textbook, but it was the 80s. Sprynet and 14400 baud modems would have been the stuff of science fiction.

Thank you for your thoughtful comment. There was a proposal in the past to put in place an image filter to help users filter out legal content that they nevertheless did not want to see. It was received with mixed results. I like the idea of Wikipedia for children. Some ideas that are out there include Wikipedia for Schools and Wikipedia (Simple) with SafeSearch. I greatly appreciate your taking the time to share this with us. GeoffBrigham (WMF) (talk) 01:35, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

To answer the first question, multilingual translation of well-written educational articles will always benefit the next billion users, because literacy is so important in the developing world. Also, well-written articles in English will always benefit those looking to learn English. Properly calibrated grade levels would be of a great benefit to adult learners who need a quick and reliable metric for comprehension and sentence length/complexity. At the same time, this would be a really good test of the real-world applicability of tools like the Flesch-Kincaid grade level.

Basically, what I am proposing is:

  • 1. Write articles somewhat redundantly with a writing level and content-specific level appropriate to K-12 learners at each grade.
    • Re 1. Just a thought on the first one. First (sorry for the distant start, I'll go to the heart of the matter soon), I love the approach in which Wikipedia explains how to work with it by saying what it is and what it is not. That adds much clarity. It states that it is an encyclopaedia and that, therefore, it gathers knowledge (in the modern sense of the word, an "encyclopaedia" is a storage of knowledge). It would benefit us, if it also stated more clearly what knowledge is in the Wikipedian sense. For many people, especially perhaps outside the Western culture, knowledge is not facts, it is words. I.e. words matter for knowledge as such: elements of style, elements of in-article argument, and also what I might call artifacts of human language. Human language is not well-suited for describing facts, it prefers to reflect our work with facts (why ought you to agree with me? because you see that languages have lots of really different ways of pointing out the same facts; I have also the impression that English may be not the most representative example of this phenomenon), which is why we, in our life, usually refer to facts very ambiguously, as the main thing, that we refer to, is our work with facts and our personal actions with facts. So, the introductory pages should present readily an explanation what knowledge is, in Wikipedia's understanding. Such explanation should also naturally lead to the idea (which you mention) that language of articles needs to be as simple as possible, and "style-free". Wikipedian pages are not works of authorship, they are rather collections of independent facts of objective realities (a concept which may be very difficult to explain correctly, by the way, as it is very artificial), which facts can be safely added or removed without breaking the entire article. Why realities in plural? Because there is e.g. the physical reality in which such relationships of concepts are possible, there are historical realities in which other kinds of concept relationships are possible (according to the historical concept framework in use: e.g. someone might say the concept of causality is not factual in history, someone else could disagree), and so on. This structure (a storage of independent facts, written in different sections of the article for ease of use) ought to be absolutely clear to contributors, they ought to know how an article is different from an essay (even if, say, a given language has a habit to use the same word for both). I developed this thought from Wikipedian Abiyoyo's contribution, which I could find again if you like (it was written in Russian though and concerned a problem in the Russian section that had been discussed for long time). IN SHORT: in introductory pages, please pay some attention of the reader (often not very attentive) to what knowledge is, per Wikipedia. That would effectuate also the motion that you proposed. - 19:24, 26 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • 2. Hyperlink appropriate related subjects as the grade level calls for it, and possibly add a few. Public school children will be well served to learn formal reasoning skills.
  • 3. Get a worldwide effort going so that quality pages are written in a local language and a number of diplomatic-use languages, like French and English.
  • 4. Offer pages written at a specific grade level to act as a real-world test of our measurement tools for people learning languages, especially English as a second language.
I think that caring for language learning (whatever languages will be most-sought-for in the next decades) is not a task for Wikipedia. At all. It ought not to care of it. Do little, yet do it well. - 19:24, 26 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
  • 5. Implement parental controls to limit content available to child users of Wikipedia.
  • 6. Allow separate funding of the effort to gain additional funding sources.

Thanks for the thoughtful ideas for our consideration. Here are some high level responses:
  • 1 This is a good idea. We do have Simple English, but, as far as I know, we do not have that in other languages.
  • 2 I think I need to hear a bit more to understand this, if you have time.
  • 3 This does happen to some extent. We do have featured articles, and they are often translated into languages including French.
  • 4 Creative. Thanks.
  • 5 I understand the concern. I did provide a link to some alternatives in this area. I wonder if that addresses your concern.
  • 6 There may be added administrative costs. But I see your point.
Many thanks for your input and willingness to participate. GeoffBrigham (WMF) (talk) 01:47, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
We do have Wikipedia equivalents for children in other languages, yet not as WMF projects. It was actually discussed before as a Wikimedia sister project on Wikikids. The most successful and developed are WikiKids in Dutch, Vikidia in french (one million of unique visitors a month now). Vikidia also exists in other languages as English ( http://blog.wikimedia.fr/vikidia-in-english-opens-today-lets-build-a-children-wiki-encyclopedia-6400 ) and Spanish. And more recently such a wiki was launched in German, see some English explanations. Astirmays (talk) 06:11, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply


Response by 夏浚博



(Google translation, please improve) "Wikipedia may launch a mobile App, especially on changing the current user interface which is very not enjoyable."



(Google translation, please improve) "Change the editing interface, the current interface makes non-professional users very inconvenient to use, it is best to be as easy as Microsoft Word to edit"

@夏浚博:,相对于可视化,在下更喜欢源代码编辑器= =。--The powder toy (talk) 09:00, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply


Response by Dfcloete

Dfcloete's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Thank you for the opportunity to comment. On the one hand - as a highly academic user of Wikipedia, I feel under qualified to speculate on the use by more casual users. On the other hand - as an African with a passion for the continent, I really want to help.

Education growth in Africa has the potential for placing a huge demand on Wikipedia. Once empowered with internet-capabilities, the potential arises for millions of users to find answers here, where they've always been. The challenge remains to present it in a way that makes Wikipedia the preferred source of information (refer to part 2).

This also applies to adults. Adult education is a major field in Africa. Linking these mature students to resources should be a major priority.

Again from the academic side, referencing must remain a priority. Although it is tempting to create a "one-stop-shop", it will always be important to trace the source of information.

Dfcloete's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Wikipedia is often the first answer to any question posted online. If google continues to refer to Wikipedia as the first reference, Wikipedia will always find new users as they come online for the first time.

The usefulness can be expanded by further increasing utility as instructional. A very specific application of this could be farming. As the continent strives to feed itself (and the rest of the world), farmers can find increasing benefit from online instruction. Imagine a world where first-world scientists have a direct line of communication to the 3rd world farmer, analyzing his conditions on the ground and giving advice on methods. This way, science and reality are directly linked. Has this not always been the point of Wikipedia.

This is the simplest implementation of the idea. I can envisage endless applications involving communication, engineering and even construction methods in a fast-changing landscape.

How does Wikimedia feel about sponsored posts? I see so many articles about brands and products. Is any revenue generated from such posts? Objectivity is certainly a major concern when such ideas are put on the table, but perhaps sponsored sections within posts could be "sold". This idea requires further formulation and I'm sure someone is working on it. Just throwing a stone in the bush.

Again, thank you for the opportunity to help build a better Wikipedia

Dear @Dfcloete: thank you for your comments and your time. A few questions back to you:
  1. You speak about the importance of references, which are a norm in Northern countries. On African continent, however, where the academic documentation is not as extensive the editors have a hard time getting primary sources.I wonder if you have thoughts on this.
  2. For your direct-connect idea of "information seeker" and "information maker" (re: farmers in Africa) -- how do you see the engagement work in practice? Would this be a platform for scientists to collaborate and problem solve to produce how-to articles? Would it be a request (ask a question) system?
Thank you LilaTretikov (WMF) (talk) 01:16, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the questions @LilaTretikov:.

  1. Regarding references, I think I misstated what I meant. Let's rather refer to Wikipedia as the "answer" to questions. For example, if I ask "How far is the moon?" I get an answer along with a brief Wikipedia synopsis with the indroduction paragraph and a hyperlink. When new users learn that they can get answers to simple (hopefully eventually complex) questions this way, they will flock to the source (Wikipedia).

On the point of referencing primary sources in the African context - I'm interested to see where the reference chain starts crumbling. I don't have enough experience with this struggle though.

  1. How-to articles are the right name for what I had in mind, yes. Not necessarily easy, but ultimately what I was thinking was a drop-down system where you select a sector (e.g. farming), subsection (e.g. potato farming) and then fill in some additional parameters which impact the "answer" (e.g. rainfall and temperatures). This all then combines to yield a scientific recommendation (crop density, fertilization required, additional factors). The important thing here is that information must be quantitative. This is the hitherto untapped subset of information. I can see that it doesn't belong on a feature article necessarily since it would detract from the information presented to the bulk (qualitative) of users who are simply seeking high-level information. By requesting high input, the algorithm separates users who are looking for more detailed data from these other users.

If my thoughts seem disorganized, that's because they are. Very quick responses to an issue that deserves full-time attention.


Response by 2602:306:B8F8:6890:A937:2B06:CF78:227E

2602:306:B8F8:6890:A937:2B06:CF78:227E's thoughts on question 1[edit]

We love to show the world who and what we believe in, in thy physical domain: we wear Nike shoes and brand everything we have with stickers or adornments from our favorite brands. Organizations that figure out how to remind us of their awesomeness in the "meatspace" will be the ones that win the next billion users.

I love this. A couple questions: What does awesomeness with Wikipedia's brand mean to you? Or, the way brand folks would ask: what do you think of when you think of Wikipedia? If Wikipedia were a person, who would it be? How would you represent free knowledge in the physical space? What sort of "things" or products represent Wikipedia? Katherine (WMF) (talk) 01:15, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

2602:306:B8F8:6890:A937:2B06:CF78:227E's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Reduce the friction of adding to wikimedia: 1) connect me to those wikimedia users who are already prolific contributors; 2) figure out a way to streamline the addition of content (possibly by suggesting popular content to prolific contributors); 3) share the credit with the contributors and those who might have just given the "assist"; 4) allow my organization to build it's "own" organic wikimedia content by somehow sharing wikimedia infrastructure process etc. on my professional organization website.

Cool thoughts. More questions:
  • 1) What sort of things would you want to connect with other prolific contributors about? For example, would you want to follow their areas of subject expertise? People based in the same part of the world as you?
  • 2) We've heard some people suggest this -- for example, looking up things that are commonly searched for in search engines, and making auto-suggest stubs. Something to think about!
  • 3) This is interesting... can you share more?
  • 4) Do you mean letting people edit, for example, in a wikispace on your website, and then have it show up on Wikipedia? For example, update knowledge locally, and have it updated globally?

Thanks! Katherine (WMF) (talk) 01:24, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply


Response by Julius1990

Julius1990's thoughts on question 1[edit]

The WMF should identify that mobile is only a reader trend, but won't ever be a contributer trend. Mobile file uploads in most cases were not useful so far, writing long articles with mentioning of sources etc. on a mobile will never be comfortable nor the way to contribute to Wikipedia in the way Wikipedia needs it. I would like to ask if anyone in the foundation who has those visions ever wrote an article for Wikipedia that is not a facebook-post-like stub. I doubt if anyone who really contributed in a quality way really can see in this direction a vision for the future. The vision must be to make contributing in the conventional way a satisfying experience for those who like to indulge them in the weird and conservative hobby of writing an encyclopedia. This hobby never will be sexy, it never will get millions to actually be steady contributers who consult scientific literature and databases and so forth. Adding once in a while that vip y got a child named x is what facebook-user-like "Wikipedians" will do, but they won't collect the knowledge of the world in ways that also would help in certain regions to raise knowledge and values like democracy.

Same goes for the billion new possible users. They will be readers only users, since contributing to Wikipedia means first of all having the ressources and second to meet certain (often scientific) standards. So: As long as the WMF won't build libraries in the slums of India and other parts of the Global South, as long as it won't make for those billion people JStor and so on available, there won't be any usuful contributions. Those people in those regions that could contribute, already have the access because they can use university networks and so forth. Question would be if WMF ever targetet that Global South elite. So far and also for the future the Global South for editor-users is and will be just a fiction that gets used by the foundation to propagate certain developments that are useful for them, but not for the people who wrote and write the encyclopedia. Instead of daydreaming, the foundation should focus and care about the people who actually already write for the projects and who this way will contribute to make knowledge to the people in the Global South accesible. But Wikipedia is no reliable source for Wikipedia itself.

I strongly agree with the first half of your response, and I would be more optimistic than you concerning the second half. The goal is precisely for wikipedia and associated projects to be the access to knowledge for the many that is so lacking in some countries. Furthermore, while I agree that truly active editors with serious edit intend form an extremely small percentage of users (for reasons that are beyond the scope of action of the WMF), more users also means more quality editors.Iry-Hor (talk) 12:53, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
Iry-Hor, on that I doubt, because the possible Global South editors are just a trope used when the foundation speaks and acts against the existing volunteers. But the question would be if from there for example new editors for the german Wikipedia would be to expect, while that for English or French would maybe be a possibility for a small number of new editors. To be frank, those of the Global South that have right now no internet access will have other, more serious issues to deal with than collecting knowledge from books and scientific or other quality sources for Wikipedia or other Wikimedia projects. And their own experience of their surrounding is simply no source, at least for none of our projects. So as long as the foundation doesn't want to alter the projects that it should serve completly, there is not much to expect from that direction. But in one way it might be true that you might get easier some low rate contributers from there than to fix the destroyed relationship to teh volunteers that already contribute in a heavy way. --Julius1990 (talk) 13:47, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
Hi, Julius1990. :) In answer to your question, yes - I have contributed more than Facebook-like stubs, and I see the potential for mobile contribution. I'm not sure how that's going to be implemented, but 20 years ago I could only imagine being able to talk to my phone to ask it search the internet for me. Technology evolves, and those who have the vision can help it evolve to achieve what may currently seem insurmountable. There are some above who've suggested that developing mobile is important, but not at the cost of desktop contributors - and as a desktop contributor, I'd personally agree strongly. :)
In terms of the billion new possible users, I think we need to keep in mind that there are all kinds of ways and places to contribute to Wikimedia that don't look like what Wikipedia content contributors typically do. Wikivoyage, for instance, relies on eyewitness contributors. Wikinews also benefits from feet on the ground. The encyclopedia is a massive part of our movement (certainly I think so, as I put most of my volunteer time there), but it's not the only. Also, even in the encyclopedia, people without access to sources can do content curation, ranging from flagging problems to fixing them to translating articles into different language projects. There are challenges, to be sure. But I hope we can find a way to empower newcomers while also serving existing editors. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 14:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
Dear Maggie Dennis (WMF), I think the point here is that the foundation seems not really to care about the volunters already existing. So I can't trust in its mobile visions. Same goes for the billion possible Global South users. Instead of responding to Letter to Wikimedia Foundation: Superprotect and Media Viewer and showing nearly 1000 volunters, many of them very high profile editors that did much for the projects, what already the basic respect would deserve it gets ignored. Neither Lila, nor the Board ever adressed it. They seem to act more like Brecht's famous saying, in this case "hoping for a bunch of new editors, while dragging the existing ones (that are critical to the foundation) out of the projects".
Coming back to the mobile question. How should I trust that there would be a good prospect when I see that the foundtion couldn't even handle to run "Labs". The toolserver worked, it was maybe from a technical side messy, but it worked. Since the foundation took over, again and again nothing works. So how should I have the faith that you can actually develop a mobile invironment without interfering with the current way of editing. And Wikipedia still is the most important project for the whole Wikimedia universe. And it will remain that, and with all the mobile vision I miss the question if mobile at all will get us the edits the projects need.
And yes, there are more projects than Wikipedia. But when you mention Wikinews, Wikibooks, Wikisource ... in discussions so far I never heard them asking for new users from the Global South, falling for a Fata Morgana (maybe there is a lake, but likely not). They have mentioned other problems, problems that the foundation didn't adress. You actually abandoned those projects, so they are not the best argument to put here. --Julius1990 (talk) 19:52, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
Hi, Julius1990. Well, first, I understand that by "you" you probably mean the Wikimedia Foundation, but I don't thinks that's a helpful generalization. The Wikimedia Foundation is one organization, true, but kind of like the Wikimedia movement is one movement - there's a lot of diversity within it. Beyond that, I'm not sure they've been abandoned by the organization itself (although a lot depends on our definitions of abandonment, I'm sure.) I haven't done a lot with Wikibooks as a volunteer, but send people to it frequently who write to the Wikimedia Foundation through answers@, both for resources and as potential contributors. I was in a conversation while visiting the Wikimedia Foundation quite recently where somebody was talking enthusiastically about how Wikisource is one of our potentially strongest projects and floating ideas about how to help it thrive. But if you think that support for sister projects could be better, that's certainly worth addressing, and your ideas on where that support should go would be very welcome! In terms of trusting the development of tools, I think that the only alternative to trying new things is stagnation, and I think that's not a good thing for us to do. The Foundation needs to work well with communities going forward to make sure that tools are high quality and suitable, but I personally don't believe giving up on development is the answer. If you feel differently, I respect that, but as a person who also develops content (as per your question, albeit not as much as I'd like to), I'd be open to seeing what we as a movement can come up with. :) --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 20:06, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
Dear Maggie Dennis (WMF), i just contribute to Wikipedia and a bit to Commons. For Commons i can say that the tools heavily need a clean-up and work-over. It can't be that with the Upload Wizard i can't upload an old artwork to the correct license for example. And those are the very basics of contributing in our movement. I believe that the foundation should first get those things done like cleaning-up the Commons tools, getting Labs stable and so on, not to forget finally getting done a working (at least in most cases) VE, before hunting for something else, when the current stuff isn't solved satisfying. First I want to see that done, and when you do it good, at least I develop again trust in the technical capabilities of the foundation and it's developers. Coming back to the smaller projects: I would believe it is the job of the foundation to know exactly what they need and want and how they can get supported. But then i know such issues like the Esperanto Wikipedia asked for some little funding for i think some technical device and didn't get it. It was nothing in comparison to the budget of teh foundation, but those fellow Wikipedians had to beg on their knees. From the other projects like the English Wikinews I know just what I have read through Lilas talk page here and there I have read much critic and even bitterness (that'S why i used the term of being abandoned by the foundation) and I see not how this can be adressed by the Global South. I think every editor that fits our requirements is good for us, but to me it feels that the foundation with the view into that direction actually messes up on its original and most basic duties.
And I feel that before going for visions the foundation has to solve the current issues. Seriously, how can it be expected that we that signed the open letter and never got a response, trust the foundation for that development? And yes, you are individuals, but you act to us as a solid mass where no nuances or even disagreements are visibel. When Erik Möller forced Superprotect and the media Viewer on high prolific projects, I heard noone in the foundation disagree. Even worse a community liason Wikip(m)edian was forced to act such force on the German Wikipedia. That trust must be regained, then you as an individual and the foundation as organization can ask for and rely on my trust. That doesn't go against you personally, I appreciate when foundation staff actually engages with the volunters in the way you do right now. Even if I have no trust that this actually changes anything in a foundation that in it's structures appears to me as an outsider as crooked in it's structures like a tax saving model of amazon. --Julius1990 (talk) 20:27, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
PS: [https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ALilaTretikov_%28WMF%29&diff=11374272&oldid=11373321 Here you can see on a further example why I doubt the abilities of the foundation and its developers. As long as such things happening (again and again) the WMF better focuses on doing a good job on what it should do right now, and stop having visions. When everything on the current issues is working smooth and well, then you - read: the foundation - can look in other directions. --Julius1990 (talk) 21:54, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

Julius1990's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Build a good and userfriedndly (Wikiwand as example) reader-version of Wikipedia that easily can be switched to edit. Make good tutorials for using Wikicode. Respect the volunters and most important: Stay realistic, stop dreaming.

Hi @Julius1990: how do you see a user friendly site work? Would that be the default experience for IP users? Would it be a switch on the site? Thanks LilaTretikov (WMF) (talk) 01:51, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
To start, there should be at most 100 characters per line. --NaBUru38 (talk) 02:16, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
Dear LilaTretikov (WMF), as long as crediting the authors according to the licence on this side is violated by your public domain wish, i won't give any substantial comment here anymore. And actually before I answer to you, I would expect you to show me and 950+ fellow Wikip/medians the respect of answering to our open letter. Then we can go from there ... --Julius1990 (talk) 08:37, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
zu faul den diff zu suchen um zu danken, daher hier; Danke Julius1990 für den kommentar ...Sicherlich Post 11:24, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply


Response by Megalibrarygirl

Megalibrarygirl's thoughts on question 1[edit]

I agree that it's important to recognize that mobile usage is important. The nice thing is that I have no trouble accessing Wikipedia from a mobile device. Editing from mobile is a little bit more difficult. Can addressing editor's mobile needs be a priority?

Megalibrarygirl's thoughts on question 2[edit]

I'm an atheist and a woman. I recognize that being part of these two groups which have been traditionally marginalized is a challenge for Wikipedia's diversity. Continuing to address diversity in an objective, neutral way by ensuring that minorities and women are properly and equally represented is still very important. As more Asian and Middle Eastern participants come into Wikipedia, it's also important to make clear what "Free Speech" and "Neutral" viewpoints mean. Many people from such countries have not had free speech and understanding what it means, and untangling it from cultural perspectives is important.

It is impossible to explain what neutrality is, because Wikipedians themselves don't know what “neutral” (better terms: “unbiased”, “properly weighted”) means. Something to do with sources. Which sources? That is culture-dependant. I am not even talking of “free speech”; I bet that you yourself don't know what “free speech” is. Also, it is impossible to “untangle” these concepts from cultural perspectives, nor has anyone ever done it. A minor point: the traditionally marginalised groups of people are males and followers of religion. No jokes. And I have no idea what being a man or a woman means for the contents of an article. Why should a woman add different contents than a man, and vice versa? What's the problem? - 07:51, 18 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
I completely agree (and not just because I'm an Asian agonistic woman). Context matters for understanding who and what we are, and what we stand for. We've started having critical conversations around this in forums like Wikimania, and we're currently running the Inspire campaign, though that doesn't yet move the needle on closing some of the conceptual gaps that may prevent people from understanding, using, and expanding the knowledge we make available. Really appreciate you raising this as it IS an important part of our future strategy. GYoung (WMF) (talk) 01:33, 25 February 2015 (UTC)Reply