Jump to content

Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia Foundation/2015/Community consultation/2015-03-05

Add topic
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Latest comment: 9 years ago by GeoffBrigham (WMF) in topic Gaming4JC
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.[edit]

Response by Hey! Quick advice, one reason people prefer other sources of internet information is that Wikipedia looks horrible, absolutely disgusting, It's daunting and confusing to use, hard to find what you want and everything just doesn't look how it should, it is 2015 so you should get with the times, go for a more vivid, metro, clean look, a better font, different logos and make everything modern, choose a style and stick with it, for example, Google's Lollipop Material Design, Windows Metro UI design, Apples iOS 7/8 Flat transparency design, Do something 2015, otherwise people will just assume this is a website from before and numbers will decline, I've already asked some people and they say Wikipedia is hard to use and looks bad.

Do something.

Disclaimer: My following text on this comment page is solely released under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL. It is not released into the public domain.
Browsers and browser plugins (as well as options for logged-in Wikipedians) should be able to choose css style sheets to make the appearance fashionable; this is up to browser and browser plugin developers to develop (or for logged-in users to choose from available styles/skins). As for finding what you want, the nature of serious knowledge is complex and requires patience and thinking. Tabs for editing, talking and history checking may be daunting for users expecting instant gratification, but they are fundamental for an openly edited encyclopedia. Traditional encyclopedias don't have these: your only options are accept an article or (without affecting the encyclopedia article itself) reject it; it's difficult for most readers to check the sources and impossible for all but a tiny handful of people to check the editing history or intervene to improve the content. Boud (talk) 00:44, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Well... wikipidia mobile's thoughts on question 2[edit]

less unfilled articles[edit]

Response by

thoughts re
mobile usage and Wiki's future's thoughts on question 1[edit]

I actually really like the current (American user here) mobile site for wikipedia and wiktionary on my iPhone. I think the ability to click on footnotes and access the cited sources is integral to Wikipedia's stance as a "gateway" to content, in addition to encyclopedic entries. However tables, certain pictures, and audio/video files often are in a format I cannot access. The tables part is especially bothersome. For the "next billion users" I suppose colloquial use of language might show problems with other languages' "wikipedia" sites.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

I think any healthy Wikimedia projects would offer more sources and background information regarding certain entries. I plan to donate to the site!!


به نظر من ویکی پدیا همانند وجود اخبار و ... در صفحه زمینه پنجره های جدید مایکروسافت می بایست صفحه در این زمینه داشته باشد به صورتی که این صفحه در صورت عدم اتصال به اینترنت داری حداقل اطلاعاتی که کاربران ممکن است به انها نیاز داشته باشند دارا بوده و در صورت تاصال به شبکه جهانی وب به روز شده و اطلاعات دست اول و به روز شده را در اختیار کاربر قرار دهد . همچنین می توان صفحه ای ویژه ایجاد کرد تا کاربران اطلاعات خود را نوشته و در صورت برقراری اولین ارتباط با اینترنت این اطلاعات به وکی پدیا منتقل شود به عبارت دیگر این صفحه توانایی ذخیره اطلاعات به صورت موقتی و انتقال انها ره به صفحه مرجع داشته باشد نظر های دیگری نیز موجود است ولی به نظر من اینها بهترند در واقع می بایست کاری کنیم که کاربر کمترین هزینه و زمان را برای انتقال معلومات خود را مصرف کند همچنین ایجاد قسمتی برای امتیاز برای کسانی که می نویسند و تحقیق می کنند تا شاید بتوان حداقل تشویق و یا رقابت برای نگارش و یا مطالعه افراد ایجاد کرد .

Machine translation; please improve: If Tasal the World Wide Web has been updated and first-hand information and the user is updated. You can also create pages for users to post their information and the establishment of the first connection information to the Internet in other words the pages to be carried And who Wikipedia a storage the page of reference temporary follows transference take Commentor competition for writing or reading of creation.[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

I believe that people need reliable information in this fast-paced world. Wikipedia definitely needs to become more reliable and shouldn't be edited by users. Users should have the option to notify the site when they believe something is wrong, but not change it. Changes should be left up to verified experts on the subject, perhaps such as teachers or professors.[edit]

Response by

Es un Gran sitio web solo que le falta que complementen mas la información y que la den correcta en algunas ocasiones

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"It is a great website just lacks that complement more information and correct the den sometimes"[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

...No thoughts on question 1…'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

...It would be awesome if other countries were allowed to post in their native languages however if someone read it from another country, it would be in theirs. EX: Someone in China post about their culture on Wikipedia. Then someone in America could jump on and read their post in American without having to translate and vice versa…[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Доброго времени суток.Я думаю,что имеет смысл найти контакты с крупными провайдерами стран,для того чтобы они предоставляли доступ к вашим ресурсам на льготных условиях.Какое-то время мне это очень помогло. Успехов вам во всех ваших начинаниях!

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"Good day. I think it makes sense to find contacts with major providers of countries in order for them to provide access to your resources on concessional terms. For a while, it really helped me. I wish you success in all your endeavors!"[edit]

Response by's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Verbal interaction would be a nice feature perhaps hosted by a "Suri" type.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

As for the small screen, it's a small, small screen and to really appreciate the ergonomics of some thing like a written/printed page only large/larger screen will do. Just as I would recommend my friends and associates to see a film in a theatre or on a large screen viewing device so also I would let the user know of the limitations of the small screen and recommend a more supportive viewing environment.[edit]

Response by 04:28, 1 March 2015 (UTC) === نظر کاربر در مورد پرسش ۱ دو عامل مهم که در آینده تاثیری شگرف خواهد داشت اول بالا بردن عمر بشر هست که به لحاظ علم امروزی شاید روزی دور از ذهن نباشد مغزهایمان در محفظه آکواریومی باشد باشد و بدن که ساختاری شکننده نسبت به محیط دارد جایش را به اعظای قابل تعویض دهد..نتیجه اینکه زمان بیشتر جهت استفاده از تجربیات و علم وجود داشته و همچنین توانایی کسب علم بیشتر از چیزی که انسان را به زمان محدود میکند..مانند فرستادن فضانورد به سیاره ای که زمان رسیدن به آن 200 سال طول میکشد.. حال انیشتنی را به ذهن وارد کنید که به جای 80 سال 400 سال عمر کند... دوم کسب علم محدود به زمان است به این معنی که چه میشد اگر زمانی که شما صرف کسب علم و دانش میکردید تنها در اندک زمانی ممکن بود و بسیاری از تجربیات بدست آمده و علم بشر در اندک زمانی در ذهن جای میگرفت..این هم دور از ذهن نیست..امروزه احساسات از طریق امواج الکتریکی بر مغز قابلیت تحریک دارند و دور نیست روزی که اطلاعات قابلیت بارگذاری از راه مغز را کسب کنند... ولی این در حیطه آیندگان است پس امروز چه میشود کرد...انسان علاقه مند به نظم است و ویکیپدیا امروزه به عنوان قفسه دانی از کتابهای مستند و این باعث میشود اهمیتش در هما حد قفسه دان بماند مگر اینکه قابلیتهای علمی آن به زندگی امروزی متصل شود...مانند اینکه آیا میتوانم طرز پخت شامم را در ان ببینم؟ بله پخت نهار از نظر اشپز علمی و تجربی است و نوع پخت آن یک ابداع که هر چند شاید مهم نباشد مراحل تبخ آن نسل به نسل مانند یک فرهنگ گذر کرده و امروز نوعی از نهار گاهی سبکی از فرهنگ را نشان میدهد و به همین دلیل مکزیکی کمتر سوشی میخورد ... دوم استفاده همگانی تر... مثلا اگر در اتوبوسی یک روزنامه به رایگان باشد شاید در روز 100 بار خوانده شود و حال اینکه امروزه هر شخص با داشتن یک موبایل یک روزنامه هم زاه دارد و آیا ویکیپدیا بر روی تمام این روزنامه ها نسب شده؟ خیر ولی اگر بتواند با قراردادهایی به عنوان برنامه های پایه بر روی این دستگاهها بیاید کاربرانی بیشتر داشته باشد.. و در پایان من در کشوری زندگی میکنم که بسیاری اینترنتی ندارند ولی شاید یک سی دی آفلاین از ویکیپدیا کار را آسان تر میکرد...Reply

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"Enter the mind of Einstein's time to replace the 80-year and 400-year-old ...
Can be ... like the way
Cooking Shamm to see it?
Yes cooking lunch for the scientific and experimental cook and bake it an invention that although it may not matter evaporation process from generation to generation as a cultural
Today's passage, and sometimes a light lunch of Mexican culture shows why eating less Sushi
The second, more general use ...
No, but if contracts can be as basic applications on these devices would be more users.
And in the end I'm living in a country that many do not have internet but it was a CD offline Wikipedia makes it easier ..."

=== نظر کاربر در مورد پرسش ۲

1.ورود به انوان برنامه های پایه بر روی دستگاههای شنیداری و دیداری 2.ورود به عرصه ایده ها و فراتر از واقعیتها 3.ایجاد زمینه کاری شهروندی و حق امتیاز برای تحقیقها و ایده ها 4.ایجاد محیط مستند تصویری بهینه تر

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"1.vrvd to Anvan applications based on audio-visual devices
2.vrvd beyond the realm of ideas and facts
3.ayjad field of citizenship and the copyright for Research and Ideas
4.ayjad environment optimized video documentary"[edit]

Response by 05:07, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Internet sources, and more specifically wiki sources, are becoming and will continue to become more widely accepted as legitimate. I remember a time when people would automatically write something off if it was sourced to Wikipedia or some equivalent, but it is less and less like that every year. In addition to the two already identified, I think this will be a major trend in coming years.[edit]

Response by 06:12, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 2[edit]

It could include forms of production, crops, minerals, etc.. flags, sites to see in and close to area. Commerce type of items of interest for cultural events.[edit]

Response by 07:26, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Translation i.e. the internet will expand much beyond the traditional big language users as internet connectivity reaches the "last mile" of users who can't be bothered to learn a new language to access the world's information. Could probably expect a more decentralised and vibrant internet.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

Often, I get the feeling that Wikimedia projects are kept going by a small army of very dedicated editors.IMHO,going forward the best way for Wikimedia projects to enhance/retain their reach,credibility and objectivity is to make the casual editor more central to its functioning i.e. editing/contributing to Wikipedia shouldn't be an activity worthy of cult membership which it kinda is. M

Dynamic 2015[edit]

Response by Dynamic 2015 07:29, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Dynamic 2015's thoughts on question 1[edit]

WIKI MEDIA can be used as a single largest information source that can be segregated under broad categories and sub-categories. Eg: The information for students of varied subjects and interests, information for professionals who fall under the expanding professions etc. easily accessible archives shall be ready to access under the supercomputer server environment that could be further distributed under the cloud networks and proxy servers of the same networks.

the information so gathered can be constantly be updated and made available to the users. the information category can be restricted as per the nature & importance of the information.

Medicine, Law, Legislation, information about Judiciary, International Law, sources of contacts, information centers and offices worldwide etc. can be integrated under one roof.

Restricted access to certain categorized information should be the key to information governance--Dynamic 2015 (talk) 07:55, 1 March 2015 (UTC).Reply

getting access to inter-governmental and government's foreign units remains a major issue for many times. this gap can be bridged under this arrangement.

Trade, Commerce & Business : Colossal and valuable information can be given to the business world in general, regarding the raw material, suppliers, credibility factors about the sources, points of contacts, financial sources, rules and regulation pertaining national and international business etc.

A lot more can be done to help the small and medium scale entrepreneurs by giving them valuable information

Interactive platforms on technology under different topics can lead to technological big-bang especially in IT and various other engineering branches as well.[edit]

Response by 08:05, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

De site geeft prima informatie Maar helaas de vertaling naar het Nederland ontzettend slecht Soms zelfs niet eens te volgen Jammer Wie heeft dit vertaald ???? Het is de zinsbouw die dus verbetert moet worden

"The site provides excellent information, but unfortunately the translation to the Netherlands is incredibly bad
Sometimes even unintelligible. It's a pity, who has translated this ????
It is the sentence structure that has to be improved"
AFAIK there are a lot of bot-created articles in the nlWP, made either as translations from other language versions, or from wikidata, or from some other database. Those mere stumps improve the amount of articles, but go against the quality. I personally don't like this concept, it's not liked by the deWP community as well, but some other WP communities seem to be fine with it, it's a matter of taste. ♫ Sänger - Talk - superputsch must go 11:48, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[edit]

Response by 08:31, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Put ads on the sides of the information provided.[edit]

Response by 08:36, 1 March 2015 (UTC) For the next billion wikipedia users, it would help if the cursor will automatically default into the search box!Reply

Eksan Anggara[edit]

Response by Eksan Anggara 08:39, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Eksan Anggara's thoughts on question 1[edit]

...ok i'm write in here.. ...bagaimana jika wikipedia membuat sebuah sofware yang mana bersifat ofline tetapi harus di update per bulan, sehingga untuk pembaca lebih mudah tahu sudah seberapa jauh wikipedia telah jauh berkembang...

Machine translation; please improve: what if wikipedia create a software which is ofline but must be updated monthly, so it is easier for the reader knows already how far wikipedia has greatly developed ...

Eksan Anggara's thoughts on question 2[edit]

... mungkin,, jika wikipedia lebih ter list daftarnya mungkin akan lebih nyaman..

Machine translation; please improve: possible,, if wikipedia's more ter list would probably be more comfortable ..[edit]

Response by 08:49, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Considerazioni di sulla domanda n. 1[edit]

non aggiungerei altro, Wikipedia è uno strumento utilissimo.

Machine translation; please improve: can't add more, Wikipedia is a very useful tool.

Considerazioni di sulla domanda n. 2[edit]

Wikipedia lo ritengo uno strumento molto utile e formidabile inoltre permette lo scambio di informazioni tra persone.

Machine translation; please improve: Wikipedia I consider it a very useful and powerful also allows the exchange of information between people.

Lumbering in thought[edit]

Response by Lumbering in thought 08:55, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Lumbering in thought's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Interest in philosophy

Lumbering in thought's thoughts on question 2[edit]

something that answers questions in a Socratic method way. Also a way of measuring the validity of an argument using technology.


Response by Luzezps 09:09, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Luzezps's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Probably nothing that impacts Wikipedia too heavily. Whatever does impact Wikipedia will depend on the demographic of the additional users. The most influential interaction between the two trends will probably be a capitalizing interest in the new user base.

Luzezps's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Wikipedia should increase the comprehensiveness of the entire site. The ability to see the degrees of separation of a topic with any other given topic is useful in gaining a broad understanding of a particular piece of knowledge. But if users could select predetermined paths, created by experts (Or....:D), that would lead them through certain veins of knowledge, Wikipedia could offer an infinite range of fields, instead of topics. For instance, if the main section of comprehensive fields was grouped into fiction and non-fiction, we could view some field in non-fiction, say, Physics. Physics would be broken down into what contributors (And...:D) deemed to be the broadest categories of that field. New topics could be added but certain extinction criteria would ensure subsets of certain fields weren't presented as equally spanning as their mother set. So as the users makes his way through the list of fields from Physics, to Modern Physics and Classical Physics, down to Quantum Mechanics and Relativity, and the long list of Classical Physics topics. Eventually the user will reach the leaves of this tree of knowledge and this will be a specific topic such as: Physics-Classical Physics-Fluid Dynamics. If Fluid Dynamics is a leaf node then it will have been created as a comprehensive tree with a specific trajectory. Each link on each page will be chosen to direct the user towards purposeful information relevant to the overall goal of the "Course". :D

This approach could have major implications if executed properly. The only problem with this approach is precisely what will make it Profitable. Apart from contributor fields, that would be based on ratings and extinction algorithms, Wikipedia could employ experts to create highly accredited veins of information that could not only be verified by their credentials but could also act as a Wikipedia "Course" :D. If Wikipedia could create a fair balance between the price of a course and it's worth as a credential it would become the first global university. The trend towards specific knowledge fields and specialization would make this a supreme tool for individualized learning and stream lining global education.(XOR..:D)

As long as Wikipedia stays non-profit it will self-sustain and be able to expand into other areas of global influence.


Response by Roy.ly 09:12, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Roy.lys Gedanken zu Frage 1[edit]

Permanenz, Beständigkeit, Kontinuität,..

+ Vielleicht wäre möglich die vielen un·gagierten Beitragenden mit überraschenden kleinen Gagen zu belohnen. Eine nach Umfang + Qualität der Beiträge gestufte Lotterie könnte ich mir dazu dienlich vorstellen. » danach die angemeldeten Beitragenden anschreiben.. Den Umfang kann ein Programm auflisten, die Qualität kontrolliert Ihr sowieso - da wäre nur noch ein Klick in einer ?-Stufigen Skala zu machen,.. das weitere kann dann wieder ein Programm machen oder als öfentlicher Event gestaltet werden. ☺

Translation: Permanence, constancy, continuity
Perhaps it could be possible to reward the lots of un-rewarded editors with some surprise small fees. Some kind of lottery, graduated along amount and quality of the input, could be useful, then contact the logged-in editors. The amount could be listed by a bot, the quality is controlled anyway, it should be just a click on a ?-level ranking system. The rest can be done by a bot again or turned in an public event.

Roy.lys Gedanken zu Frage 2[edit]

Soviel (so gut, so passend) wie möglich in Richtung einer 'global-freundlichen¹ Kultur wirken, ¹ohne negative Nebenwirkungen an anderen Orten, ¹ohne Nachteile gegenüber 'Minder-bemittelten', weniger Wohlhabenden, Behinderten,... Negative Nebenwirkungen + Nachteile vermindern, ausgleichen, Zugang vereinfachen (u.a. durch erklärende Videos / Kooperation mit youtube, vimeo,..). In Initiativen investieren, die in die Richtung wirken 'global-freundliche¹ Kultur herzustellen. Intern auf die Werte² orientieren, die vermögen eine 'global-freundliche¹ Kultur herzustellen, ²Werte, die erleichtern 'global-freundliche¹ Ideen + Entscheidungen zu finden, in Richtung dieses 'Orients' zu suchen. ☺

+ Alle Zusammenhänge aufdecken, um Irrtum (Zeit für Suche/n abseits des 'Orients') zu vermindern. ☺

Translation: Act as much (as good, as fitting) as possible in the direction of a 'global-friendly¹ culture, ¹without negative side effects at other places, without disadvantages for the less well-off, less wealthy, disabled, ... diminish and compensate negative side effects and disadvantages, improve acces (i.a. with explanatory videos, cooperation with youtube/vimeo,...). Invest in initiatives the operate in the direction of 'global-friendly¹ culture. Focus internally on the values², that enable the creation of a 'global-friendly¹ culture, ²values, the make it more easy to find 'global-friendly¹ ideas and decisions, to search the direction of the [orient/orientation].
Reveal all connections to diminish mistakes (time for the search offside the [orient/orientation].

regarding images[edit]

Dear sir,i am the regular viewer of wikipidea but what i had notice is that still wikipidea is not getting the excact images of various rural area and city.I kindly request to shot out this issue and motive the viewer.Thanks


Response by 2001:1620:F00:8250:B042:D3F0:3BA6:DB44 09:59, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

2001:1620:F00:8250:B042:D3F0:3BA6:DB44s Gedanken zu Frage 1[edit]

Dass sozusagen alle neu angelegten Artikel binnen weniger Minuten einen Löschantrag erfahren. Das ist vorallem der offensichtlichste Trend!

Translation: The most obvious trend is, that every new created article gets a deletion request only minutes after creation.

2001:1620:F00:8250:B042:D3F0:3BA6:DB44s Gedanken zu Frage 2[edit]

Nicht jeden neu angelegten Artikel gleich mal mit einem Löschantrag belegen. Aber das wird wohl ein Wunschtraum bleiben.

Translation: That not every new created article gets a deletion request asap. But that will stay just wishful thinking.[edit]

Response by 10:28, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

you can add links to sites which has the most visitors in specific countries which can be found on alexa by telling them you can add infos to what they reperesent.......[edit]

Response by 10:36, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Cost of a successful website.[edit]

My idea for the need to handle question 1 and 2... and 3 which was not mentioned, net neutrality has to do specifically with funding to keep wikipedia as a quality source for information. I know that wikipedia tries to stay clear of ads like the plague... but might I suggest that people don't mind ads as much as they mind spam. And businesses don't mind paying money for ads as long as their ads are marketed. If I was for instance looking at clock history, I really wouldn't mind seeing a banner ad for a watch company. One well marketed ad. Once you feel you need to cover the sides and the top and bottom... then we feel like we have been spammed, and you are tying down the speed of my downloads. If you promised so many hits to the company paying for advertising (like facebook does... clicks are more expensive then hits, etc) then I feel you would have no problem getting ads for any page on your site. That is all I got as a business owner and as a internet user.[edit]

Response by 10:39, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

search box should be placed in the left of the page[edit]

I want to use wikipedia as a search engine. So I don't understand why the search box is placed in the right of the page. When I use Google Search, I move my mouse to the left other than right. Hope it can be solved.

Sänger S.G[edit]

Use something consistent for the archiving of this discussions and posts[edit]

You've currently got two inconsistent archiving systems, so that it's impossible to find anything anything back from two days ago.
Either you archive by /day1, /day2 /day3 and so forth, or you use usual archiving bots to stuff anything older than 48h or such in an archive. I'd prefer the first solution, as in an archive is this non-fitting template {{archive header}} at the top, while everything can and should be discussed for quite some time, regardless of where it's put to.
I'm still looking for my post from two days ago, and there's no way besides looking everywhere and search the whole page to find out where someone has put it to. ♫ Sänger - Talk - superputsch must go 10:42, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

I just translated Seedorfjohnny here on this page, and after saving suddenly was on Day 6. The order of the paragraphs on this pages is completely without any sense, or at least without any fathomable sense. ♫ Sänger - Talk - superputsch must go 12:11, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Just found out why there are so many useless topics here: The field "Subject/headline:" on the page creates it if you fill it, and if you do, the line == {{subst:REVISIONUSER}} == is in the wrong hierarchy. So the form for this is wrong. Can you change it, please?

I've emailed James Alexander about the topic field. :) For the benefit of others, since I spoke to you already, will explain archiving system:
The daily pages were created because the consultation grew quickly to a size that was causing the page to break for people with sub-optimal internet connections. We didn't want to remove them to subpages completely because we wanted them to remain visible so everybody can read current conversations easily, though, so that's why they are transcluded onto the main page. This keeps the entire thing readable in one place. After 72 hours of inactivity, comments are being archived because they will no longer be monitored on Meta by staff. (Material is being collected for further analysis elsewhere.) New comments on those pages may not receive response or be included in the spreadsheet we are using to track trends and suggestions. (This is a standard process for WMF community consultations of this scope, since obviously we're not talking about a small number of participants. We have done this since at least the Terms of Use consultation.)
And thanks again, ♫ Sänger, for everything you've been doing to help this consultation function! Incredibly helpful. :) --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 16:20, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
@Sänger S.G: First off, as Maggie said, thank you for all of your work on the consultation it's incredibly helpful. Regarding the Subject/headline issue I've made some changes (removed the 2nd level header from the preload and added the revisionuser piece to the header) to try and make that better. I'll keep an eye out to see how it goes. Jalexander--WMF 00:52, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[edit]

Response by 12:11, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Сергей Колибаба

Проблема Викисловаря - достоверность лингвистического знания. На сегодняшний день совершенно отсутствует вразумительная этимология во всех национальных языках Европы. В христианской Европе еврейский Бог есть - слова Бога нет, разве такое возможно????? Масса людей не верят в национальную историческую этимологию!

Пора переходить от "национальной" исторической лингвистики к САКРАЛЬНОМУ языку - ивриту (язык иудеохристианской идеологии).

Machine translation, please improve:
Sergey Colibaba
Problem Wiktionary - significance of linguistic knowledge. To date, no perfectly intelligible etymology in all national languages of Europe. In Christian Europe the Jewish God is - the word of God is not, Is this possible ????? Lots of people do not believe in national historical etymology!
It is time to move from a "national" historical linguistics to the sacred language - Hebrew (the language of the Judeo-Christian ideology).''


Response by Better366 12:13, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Better366's thoughts on question 1[edit]

...write here…非常正确,手机移动网络不久将出现一个巨大市场人群,且亚洲非洲美洲的用户使用维基百科之后,我相信会像我一样喜欢上她的,而且会主动为之做些志愿者工作,让维基百科和世界变得更完美。

Machine translation; please improve: Quite rightly, mobile phone networks will soon be a huge market of people, and the user Africa Americas Asia after using Wikipedia, I believe it will, like me, like her, and whom will take the initiative to do volunteer work, so Wikipedia and the world more perfect.

Better366's thoughts on question 2[edit]

...write here…网络管制或者网络通畅,将会较大程度影响Wikimedia projects.当网速提高和流畅之时,也是Wikimedia projects辉煌腾达之时!加油!我们永远支持您!

Machine translation; please improve: Network control or network open, it will affect a large extent Wikimedia projects. When the time speed increase and smooth, but also when the projects brilliant TOUCH Wikimedia! Come on! We will always support you[edit]

Response by 12:34, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply رأيك بالسؤال الأول[edit]

الكتب الاليكترونية الى غير ذلك

Machine translation; please improve: eBooks to other رأيك بالسؤال الثاني[edit]

ارى بانها جيدة الى حد ما

Machine translation; please improve: I see it as a fairly good


Response by Seroclub 12:52, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Seroclub's thoughts on question 1[edit]

'The Sero club' along with 'The Covalue system' will be the new trend for the next billion years. Anyone can go and understand the new system of human communication and governance in addition to mobile world control panel for all the 7 billion on Earth.

Seroclub's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Wikipedia is one of the most respected website in the world because we the people work together. The next Wikipedia project will be to join the whole world together through a simple yet powerful system of world communication of knowledge. This system will empower each being with equal power and wealth. 'The Sero club' invites Wikipedia to join hands for 'The Covalue system' to reach each home on Earth for a new world order. Thank you. T.Adi.Ray The Sero club


Response by MEDiX 13:00, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

(Un-)biassed moderators.

MEDiX's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Use simple words and definitions. That everybody can easely understand. In second instance Wikipedia-article should have a serious base.

MEDiX's thoughts on question 2[edit]

The moderator of a Wikipedia-page must identify himself clearly. Transparancy is the key word. He may be biassed... but please explain...


Response by 2407:C800:61F0:A:0:0:F:A70 13:36, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

2407:C800:61F0:A:0:0:F:A70's thoughts on question 2[edit]

1) I am originally from Canada, based in Asia and work in web. I am amazed at how much new users of the internet want to participate in the creation of information. I can say from experience finding a way to make sure that the information in one language matches information in another available language will be paramount. At the moment I don't think Wikipedia matches the quality of information from one language to another and (magic wand scenario I know) it would be a huge step up if the information in English (for example) matched the information in Chinese (matching character count for example along with the other safeguards you currently have).

2) Allow for the increased use of photos and easier access to them within the articles they exist in. Popping out to a different page to look at a photo is a very jarring experience, especially when there are many easy to use photo pop up windows that doesn't detract from the UI. Video too. Being able to include in an article more incorporated photo and video content to allow the author to get the point across will be hugely important in a mobile only world.

I just wanted to comment with respect to point 2 that this seems like a good idea to me. I'm always a bit annoyed when I click to view a picture larger and leave the article. Thanks for your input! --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 16:25, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[edit]

Response by 14:01, 1 March 2015 (UTC) One of the next trends is regionalisation of the internet, with local segments emerging as somewhat closed systems (like Chinese part). Some governments will try to influence the internet either explicitly (blocking access to different sites) or implicitly, by pushing their POV. And the second case is the most dangerous, as there are a lot of political groups wishing to promote their agendas. Technical, mechanistic approch to veracity doesn't work sometimes. You'll have all the necessary prooflinks in your articles, but your admins can always do a cherry-picking and remove crucial parts of context to change the perceived tone of the article. They are doing that already. And in the next decade, the amount of individuals doing that can multiply.Reply

Mohammed ahmed1997[edit]

Response by Mohammed ahmed1997 14:22, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Mohammed ahmed1997 رأيك بالسؤال الأول[edit]

...المستقبل كلما ازدهار ستزيد الالتكنولوجيا والمعلومات...

Machine translation; please improve: ... Whenever the future prosperity will increase Alaltknulogia and information ...

Mohammed ahmed1997 رأيك بالسؤال الثاني[edit]

...مواضيع ويكبديا مثمرة لكنها بحاجة الي تقسيم...

Machine translation; please improve: ... Themes and Aqaibdia fruitful but need to divide the ...[edit]

Response by 14:27, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

it should include videos of the particular subject being discussed and the procedures explained (youtube reference)[edit]

Response by 14:58, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Good Website for any information


Response by Rjh 15:04, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Rjhs Gedanken zu Frage 1[edit]

Es müssten Nutzern mit unterschiedliche Wissensständen unterschiedliche Versionen präsentiert werden. Also eine kurze schlagkräftige Zusammenfassung als Erstes und tiefergehende Details auf Anfrage oder Option. Gleichzeitig müssten vor allem Experten als Reviewer (Wissenschaftler, Hochschulen und Universitäten, Journalisten, Fachkräfte, ...) als Reviewer der Artikel und Pädagogen, Literaten, ... zur Überprüfung der Didaktik der Artikel gewonnen werden. Für Kinder müssten spielerische Elemente (entdecken, rätseln, lernen, ...) integriert werden. Rjh (talk) 15:04, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Translation: Different versions of articles should be presented to users with different levels of knowledge. Short, effective summary first and more details as an option. At the same time there should be employed more experts (scientists, universities, journalists, specialists...) as reviewer of the articles as well as for the didactics educators, literati and such. For children playful elements should be implemented (discover, riddle, learn,...).

Rjhs Gedanken zu Frage 2[edit]

Themen und der grundleegende Aufbau von Seiten (Kapitel, Überschriften, ...) müssten beim Erstellen von Seiten automatisch generiert werden. Zum Beispiel für Orte, Organismen, Chemikalien, Filme, Personen, aktuelle Ereignisse, ... Die Dokumentation (Referenzen) müssten automatisch erstellt/abgefragt werden. Rjh (talk) 15:04, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Translation: Themes and basic layout of the pages (chapters, headlines,...) should be generated automatically with the creation of an article. For example for places, organisms, films, persons, current events,.... The documentation (references) should be automatic generated/asked for.[edit]

Response by 15:09, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Making Worlds Knowledge available in all languages potentially elevates intelligence world wide. There is a seminal problem related to critical thinking & lack of Source evaluation. Many Users feel no personal responsibility to check out sources. If in the Instant case the paradigm seems logical & connected even anecdotal then it is accepted as true, hate groups & terrorist use this method to recruit.

How is critical thought & source checking promoted? even automated?

About 1/3 of the world now 2015 is connected to the WWW. And this connection has empowered humans. Arab Spring, Anonymous,anti-vaxers, ISIS and many others.

As the WWW connection to humans grows so will the power derived from this connection.

Case; ISIS is bastardizing Islam and using that on line to recruit & justify savage barbarism. Users seem unable to separate shaft from the wheat, lies falsehoods accepted as truth in many cases.

Without digressing into def. of "TRUTH" Can we automate tools to spot outright lies, pseudo logic, and frame anecdotal evidence in its proper context?

I use Wikipedia to verify my veracity, while not 100% its a great place to start.

As the world connects to the WWW the potential for Human Greatness expands but so to for Evil.

The power for masses to influence Governments, movements, humanity continues to expand with connections to the WWW.

How do we empower critical thinking, source checking?

Hope this was what you were looking for.

Bill's thoughts on question 2[edit]

To assure your survival, consider Google (ETC) ads, small price to pay for Wikipedia's fact checking, & good trade off, if U don't survive then Wikipedia is useless, I love Wikipedia. Add twitter, facebook buttons, etc.


Response by 15:10, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

1. the age of users may be important -worth doing some analysis 2. giving more information on the validity of entries[edit]

Response by 15:12, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

math themes need more examples, that would make the site greater!

ایرانی توپ[edit]

15:13, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

نظر کاربر ایرانی توپ در مورد پرسش ۱[edit]

به نظر من وب در آینده اپلیکیشن محور خواهد شد بدین معنا که کسی دیگر سایتها را در مرورگر مرور نخواهد کرد و اطلاعات لازم را از طریق اپلیکیشن رد و بدل خواهد کرد پس ویکی پدیا نیز باید اپلیکیشن اندروید، ویندوزفون و اپل آی او اس تولید کند

Machine translation missing: Google returned nothing. Please help!

نظر کاربر ایرانی توپ در مورد پرسش ۲[edit]

مشارکت در طرح هایی که به سراسر جهان اینترنت آزاد و بدون فیلتر ارائه می کنند خصوصا در مناطق فقیر کشورهای جهان سوم

Machine translation; please improve: Participating in projects around the world to provide free Internet and free filter, especially in poor areas of the Third World


Response by Jjones85 15:14, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Jjones85's thoughts on question 1[edit]

As a web developer, most of the projects I am involved in today tend to have a high priority on a completely responsive interface. The days of user-agent sniffing are not yet dead and gone, and native apps do not seem to be something disregarded simply due to development time/cost, however, having a responsive interface allows you to delay (if not eradicate) the need for development using either of the 2 aforementioned methods for handling mobile users simply by having a single interface capable of handling any screen size or profile. I will never go on record saying that responsive design is the "silver bullet" solution for providing content to end users as it does have caveats such as added interface development time and a more limited user interface on larger displays. It is definitely a solution worth looking into though.


Response by Pschakraborty 15:22, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

উইকিপিডীআ অত্যন্ত কাজের এবং informative আমি ব্যক্তিগত ভাবে ইহার দীর্ঘ আয়ু কামনা করি । Every rich person should help wiki by donating money.


Response by 2601:7:9E01:3244:A4F1:DB86:93BD:B72E 15:28, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

People every where want to tell their stories. Pitch Wikipedia as a way for them to do that and they'll get on board


Response by Krishnakumar3011 15:33, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Krishnakumar3011's thoughts on question 1[edit]

...write here…As mobile phones may be the only option for using internet in poorer countries, the quality of browsers, network etc. will be poor. As the purpose of any article here is to understand the content thoroughly rather that the style, the content pages of all articles should be readable even with the cheapest of internet infrastructure. For example, even with the worst browser quality, worst network capacity, the content of any article should be rendered in a readable manner. This may compromise on style and other glamour, but readability of content should be considered supreme.

Thanks, Krishna

Krishnakumar3011's thoughts on question 2[edit]

...write here…

1. limit users to obtain information from governments 2. politically and ideologically motivated misrepresentation 3. The control of access to information and monitoring traffic[edit]

Response by 15:51, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

It seems that you get Info on the go.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

I guess it would look like what is needed by us.[edit]

Response by 15:52, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

نظر کاربر در مورد پرسش ۲[edit]

با سلام از ارائه ی خدمات شما متشکرم دو نظر برای بهبود و توسعه ی ویکی 1- طراحی و ساخت نرم افزار همراه برای سیستم عامل های گوشی مثل Android, Winphone, iOS, ... که به دو طریق قابل استفاده باشد آنلاین و آفلاین(دیتا ) 2- توسعه ی قالب (Theme) برای وب و حارج شدن از حالت یک نواختی آن با تشکر معین کریمی تهران ، ایران

Machine translation; please improve: Winphone, iOS, ... which is used in two ways: online and offline (data) (2) of the form (Theme) for web and Harj from the humdrum of thanks given Karimi in Tehran, Iran


Response by Healthcarestudent 16:01, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

...write here…I am a student studying medical terminology. The pictures and photos are very helpful.[edit]

Response by 16:01, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply má o otázke 1 nasledujúcu predstavu[edit]

Potreba viacerých obrázkov (na vykipédii je väčšinou málo obrázkov)

Machine translation; please improve: The need for multiple images (at vykipédii is usually a few pictures) má o otázke 2 nasledujúcu predstavu[edit]

Podľa mňa by sa mala pridať ku každému článku na wwkipédii niečo ako galéria obrázkov kde by si čitateľ mohol rýchlo nájsť potrebné obrázky priamo pri článku

Machine translation; please improve: In my opinion, should be added to each article to wwkipédii something like gallery of images where a reader can quickly find the images directly on the article[edit]

Response by 16:15, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Увеличение платформ доступа, как, например, вышло с Smart TV

Machine translation; please improve: Increase access platforms, such as happened with Smart TV's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Совершенно новый дизайн сайтов и приложений, как, например, мобильная версия Википедии (не компьютерная!).

Machine translation; please improve: A completely new design websites and applications, such as mobile version of Wikipedia (not a computer!)[edit]

Response by 16:23, 1 March 2015 (UTC) Hi wikipedia. For me because of the internet and non biased sites, like wikipeida, dedicated to transmitting accurate truthful non baised information, I can say I Do live in a society in which the communciation of information over the internet is still relatively free. I hope this will not change, unelss it becomes even better. Where there is no ownership there is no motivation to cheat to keep ones position safe, or profit from information, thus no reason to lie or keep facts from the public hidden, like who really shot JFK or do we already have aliens amongst us.Reply

Its getting harder to lie to the public. Thanks to grass roots news and people documenting their experiences.

Wikipedia is the standard on the internet for checking all those useful facts that are absolutely necessary for our daily lives now. I can say without overstating it that I LOVE WIKIPEDIA. But if it ever becomes a financial institu. that will quickly be over.

So far, I still feel blessed to be born in such a time where I can find pretty much anything out that I need to know quickly and one always hopes accurately. even all sides of the prevailing struggles.

So Wikipedia must and can never be someones property. we the people check it and check how accurate and truthful the information is therein. we can contribute and if we know different on a stated fact, we can dispute it.

With Wikipedia there is still a hope that mankind can exsist safely protected by the Universal Law of Truth because now the information is back in the hands of the people, and not news companies or Tv stations.

This exchange of unbiased information will hopefully overhthrow all thats wrong with the world today and bring us into a whole new epoch of man, based on tried and tested truths and universal living laws, from protecting the DNA of a blade of grass to protecting and nurturing a whole group of people whose plight may remain unknown if not for caring souls who must share current truths with their brothers and sisters on the WWW.

Lets keep the tools of the freedom of information in the hands of the people. Soon we may be able to discuss the worlds problems and vote all together because of the internet and arrive at an agreed and working model which actually fulfills all its needs without sacrifing anything. Its clear the polticos cannot be trusted and the best of our human race, the smartest, the visionaries, the ones who look beyond personal gain for doing what is simply RIGHT have not the influence they should... The ones who see all the aspects and as many effects of the decisions we make, which will affect our futures are not where they should be. The ethical, the honest, the altruistic, the real heroes. The best should be the leaders.

We are at a time where very small things could harm us very greatly in the future if we do not have the best of our human race in the right places and decison and executing positions we will surely fail in our endeavour to "reach the stars" within the spiritual human being but also within the cosmos. Earth will not forever be here.

From my heart of hearts I will pray that this exchange of information will become as sacred as the way we choose to pray or to celebrate our exsistance.

Best regards to all the folks at wikipedia.

James Mathew[edit]

Response by 16:41, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

They will not be willing to accept WMF bureaucracy.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

Cut WMF bureaucracy by 50%.[edit]

Response by 17:03, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on questions 1 and 2[edit]

Current screen layouts do not work on mobile devices. Drop a lot of the various boxes and never-changing stuff and all the empty spaces. Move click points into dropdowns or something. Simplify screen layouts A LOT. Make Footnote display optional or at least considerably less intrusive/disturbing

Wikipedia: Simplify wording. Intro texts must not have tons of bracketed stuff. make viewing it optional, move it elsewhere, put it in clickboxes, whatever.

I tried to become a new registered user several times and on several Wikis. I gave that up after HALF AN HOUR because it was not possible. Dozens of uncognizeable chaptchas, diverse disallowed or supposedly taken user names (NONE showing up in Special:userlists, there must be something bogus there) and I had to install another browser because I could not get rid of my existing user name from a wiki that I did not even connect to. Make that both working, secure, simple and completely drop all attempts of user tracking. I understand that that may mean to escape the US government rule and reign. THEN DO IT!

Allow more syndicated logins with other sites but accept that some users are never willing to share identies even between two wikipedias & that there are good reasons to it because of the ever-ongoing mobbing that one may experience without giving any reason or setting a cause. Also do get rid of lobyyists, special interest groups, PR-agencies and the like that are responsible for both mobbing and slanted and biased or missing stuff, mostly in the Wikipedias.

Get more journalists, professional or scientific writers aboard, as writers and reviewers. Mark quality of contributions.

Conferences and mass events are something that would be very useful to have in the currently underdeveloped areas. You MUST then improve coverage and support for lesser used languages, and must make it easier to have them installed, even if it takes time until enough supporters are there.

Advertizing Wikpedia and related projects in other media should be intesifiedd. Make tv stations and radio stations and newspapers report on them, which likely goes togetheer with events. Possibly make flashmobs an so.[edit]

Response by 17:03, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

ı think you write new news. so we find guickly everything. ı usually use thiss site. ıf you changed this site.ıf you upgrade thi site. ı use it always.ı have al ots of research homework and ı search everything sometimes ı can't find it. ı sure you change it. thanksssss.[edit]

Response by 17:09, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Quality over quantity[edit]'s thoughts on question 1[edit]

Trends are short lived. Don't focus on what is hot today. Focus on what works and is most reliable.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

Not everybody on your site is in teens or early twenties. Keep navigation simple. I have nothing to do with face book. I'm not curious about other peoples lives. I'm here for information not entertainment or companionship. Thank you[edit]

Response by 17:56, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

change nothing


Response by Ktkelly 18:01, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Harry Edwards Healer[edit]

Usual completely biased write-up. I have heard that Wikipedia is basically written by young men in their twenties. I have always found it completely biased. The people who write the articles seem to worship science and dismiss anything which hasn't been scientifically proved. But many things can't be proved at the present time by science. Why can't you write articles about subjects such as alternative medicine etc. in an unbiased way? Dismissing them as "pseudoscience" is totally unfair. The greatest evidence for any type of healing is self-evidence and there are many, many thousands of cases which have been cured with many different types of alternative medicine! Also, your attitude assumes that conventional medicine is the only direction ill people should go in. Conventional surgery can be wonderful it is true. But conventional drugs are basically a big money-making pillar of the economy. They do not cure any illness but merely suppress it in the body which eventually leads to a worsening of the person's condition. Practitioners involved in alternatve medicine do it firstly to help people and only secondly to make a living - many make only a very poor living out of it. As your organization worships science so much why don't you do more research into the effects conventional drugs have on the body? Maybe if you did this you would find out that conventional drugs are probably more of a "pseudo medicine" than any of the alternative medicines, because they simply do not cure anything and are actually highly dangerous to the human body - unlike any type of alternative medicine!


Response by MarvinEmmg123 18:26, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

MarvinEmmg123's thoughts on question 1[edit]

The Entire World is moving quicker and quicker towards the mystical magical melting pot whose ringlets become more and more concentrated as it swirls from the outer limits of the planet culminating into it's center which is located throughout America, and the Internet together with projects such as Wikipedia, are causing it to happen, at an even quicker pace. Soon American troops will not be required to be stationed abroad. All humankind even if not actually living in America will be Virtual Americans just as others already are Jewish Americans,Black Americans,White Americans,Eat-talian Americans, Greeks,Arabs,Russian,French,Chinese,Indian,Iranian,etc,etc,etc & etc. ...write here…

MarvinEmmg123's thoughts on question 2[edit]

I'll give you one thought. If you want ... I'll give you more. My recommendation to REVOLUTIONIZE how humans reason in the future is to incorporate by time-frame and for each civilization, all human innovations and imaginations. For example, let's say addition was invented in the year 100 and subtraction was invented in the year 1300. Instead of our current way of teaching subtraction immediately after addition. I say, after addition, first teach about what other things happened between years 100 and 1300, before subtraction was invented. Then students may ACTUALLY re-invent subtraction. That to me would be a wonder to behold...write here…[edit]

Response by 18:43, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Bence biraz kısa ve öz olmalı çünkü uzun olunca insanlar okumak istemiyorlar bide yeni teknolojiler hakkında olmalı.

Machine translation; please improve: I think it should be a little terse because they do not want to read a bit long when people should be on new technologies.[edit]

Response by 19:02, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[edit]

Response by 19:02, 1 March 2015‎

The Future World

as we live in a fast paced world , whwere everything changes with a blink of an eye, maintaining the same quality and service is a difficult task and when we have limited number of resource's it become more difficult to give people what they deserve and whats there own.

as we see our world is going mobile ,from a 5 year old kid to 80 years old man use a mobile today, mobile is easy , handy and readily available . we hve seen evolution from desktops to laptops and from laptops to mobile now ,everyday we advance in technology and we dont know what will replace these mobile's in future , whatever it may be ,it will be more productive then phones which we use today.


Response by 2A02:908:E265:4F80:CD21:A1A6:48D5:C494 19:03, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

2A02:908:E265:4F80:CD21:A1A6:48D5:C494's thoughts on question 1[edit]

I would say Internet, i mean the entire Internet must be clearly explained and all the possibilities

2A02:908:E265:4F80:CD21:A1A6:48D5:C494's thoughts on question 2[edit]

I think a website indian and brasil like coz there are the future useres[edit]

Response by 19:07, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Get advertising, become a public company make billions. If you think thats greedy you can donate some of that money to charity. Then you will stay in business for another billion internet users[edit]

Response by 19:09, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply'ın 1. soru hakkındaki düşünceleri[edit]

bütün dünya dillerinde bilgi verilebilmesi

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"be able to provide information in all the world's languages"'ın 2. soru hakkındaki düşünceleri[edit]

toplumsal konular tarafsız işlenmeli

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"social issues objective should be handled"[edit]

Response by 19:18, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Daar moet beslis geywer word dat elke taal van elke volk en minderheidsgroepe erken sal word, en dat dit tot sy reg sal kom.

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"There should definitely be jealous that every language of every people and minority groups will be recognized, and that it justice will come."


Response by Jjbasso 19:31, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Jjbasso's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Mobile is just one of the movements. This said I would focus on the trend of what I call toaster technology that is technology that is designed to hide itself in the real world. That is as technology starts to self manage itself it will get out of the way. So integrating your data into new protocols allowing information to be available at a fingers touch without having to go and look for it I feel will be more important than the media it runs on.

Jjbasso's thoughts on question 2[edit]

I feel that as individuals such as myself hit "technology saturation" this means it either all has to get easier, or it will disappear. I feel we are seeing this in email today which is a badly broken and abused system. Tomorrow's generation will not put up with badly functioning ecosystems such as email. It will take groups such as wiki, that are open, focused, and committed to fix these serious problems. Facebook, and other services that are designed to consume your day will die a slow painful death and clear the way for simple services such as twitter.[edit]

Response by 19:39, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Net neutrality is disappearing. Wikimedia provides (hopefully) unbiased information, and this needs to remain availible. I personally use wiktionary often when dealing with not english languages. I imagine this could be even more useful for people learning english as they begin to use the internet.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

I would like to see more of an effort placed on clarity (especially for scientific articles), completing wiktionary, and guarenteeing access to wikipedia from multiple sources in the even that the site is blocked or goes down. A self updating and easy to use repository file would be wonderful.

Elídio francisco[edit]

Response by Elídio francisco 19:58, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

O que Elídio franciscoeu pensa sobre a pergunta 1[edit]

Bem deacordo com apergunta eu sujeria qui ovesse novos Métodos i só assim é qui se pode ter as Maiores tendência

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"Well deacordo with apergunta I sujeria chi new ovesse Methods i just so is qui se can have the biggest trend"

O que Elídio franciscoeu pensa sobre a pergunta 1[edit]

O projeto wikipedia teria aspeto próspero i saudável se continuar ater novos Métodos i tendências

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"The wikipedia project would aspect prosperous healthy i continue stick new methods i trends"


Response by Runtape 20:06, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Runtape's thoughts on question 2[edit]

an unbroken thing need not be fixed.[edit]

Response by 20:16, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Hi.It's better for u that share ur site with famous college.I mean u should have a link in their sites.And u can have an account in social channels I mean all of them.Thanks for ur attention![edit]

Response by 20:19, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply对问题一的想法[edit]

首先,我來自使用繁體中文(Traditional Chinese)的國家,我選的是中文版頁面,進入到這個頁面後為什麼變成中文版(簡體)?雖然並不會造成我閱讀上的困擾,但很高興被這麼對待。 我想網際網路發展至今已成熟,但如果說在既有的網頁上,將它趣味化會更能有優勢。

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"First of all, I come from a country using Traditional Chinese (Traditional Chinese), I chose the Chinese version of the page, why become Chinese (Simplified) after entering into this page? Although not a problem on my reading, but happy to be so treated.
I think Internet development has matured, but if the existing pages, it would be more entertaining advantage."对问题二的想法[edit]

其實維基百科可以更生動有趣一點,閱讀它的時候不單單只是我們看到的由上而下的閱讀方法,它或許能夠結合其他的軟件改變我們使用它的方式(例如像是在翻一本書),當然我們必須考慮到用戶本身的電腦效能,所以可以讓用戶自行選擇它想要的閱讀方式。 還有圖片可以是動畫,會動的,甚至是能跟它互動的會更加有趣。


(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"In fact, Wikipedia can be a little more interesting to read when it is not just a top-down method of reading we have seen, it may be able to be combined with other software to change the way we use it (for example, in turn like a book) of course, we must take into account the user's own computer performance, it allows the user to choose which way you want to read. There are pictures can be animated, will move even sorted out it will be more interactive and interesting.
Now I like to check the information directly to the Wikipedia, because it has a fairly complete information, and very objective, if it can be more interesting in the future, presumably very developmental."


Response by "me" 20:20, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

:)'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

Wikipedia should not let everyone be able to edit the information because plenty of people rely on this information and there is no wayto prove it is correct.[edit]

Response by 20:22, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

In the 20th century, we came to see that there was not simply one way of looking at the world, but several. This stems from the idea that it is impossible to make an observation without affecting, or relating to, the thing you observe. (This is not just an extrapolation of quantum mechanics. This idea has turned up in many fields.) I expect this idea to further crystallize in the 21st century. Human knowledge, as currently communicated, has challenged our ability to readily replicate and apply it, since it is so complicated. My guess is that category theory (from mathematics) can provide a way to understand differences in viewpoint systematically. In particular, it looks like the concept of an Olog will be useful for communicating the differing ways in which we understand differing fields.

At present, endeavors such as Wikipedia do not systematically implement this kind of meta-analysis, instead relying on the notion of a somehow "neutral" point of view. This notion of neutrality may prove problematic, since humans are not exactly neutral in their assessments of their circumstances. I maintain that humans develop knowledge because they have intentions, not because they lack intentions. Thus, I suggest heeding some of the philosophical implications of category theory, as well as its semantic tools (Ologs), to provide a more general system for organizing and interfacing the world's knowledge, which I guess would aid in its replication and evolution among diverse peoples.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

The application of a category-theoretic perspective to Wikimedia projects should ideally result in the deconstruction of controversy and a dramatic increase in the coherence and precision of the knowledge presented. It will require dismissing the notions of neutrality and objectivity as a useful way to present knowledge, instead articulating and relating the intentions of differing parties, thereby building an interface rather than a barrier. It will reflect the full diversity of human experience, so that every endeavor finds its place.

This change will require a somewhat different intellectual culture from what is currently commonplace (which might be called "naive relativism"). The current culture permits "unbridgeable chasms" between differing perspectives, so that while they are permitted to stand side-by-side, they cannot work together. A category-theoretic relativism will identify the unity between apparently contradicting views, thereby displacing controversy with enlightenment.[edit]

Response by 20:25, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 2[edit]

I have made 2 donations. It may come to the point when everyone will have to pay a yearly fee of $5.00. If everyone who uses this site did this, we wouldn't have to worry about losing the site. Nor would we have to worry about the accuracy of its content. It is a wonderful free site. I have corrected a few things myself. I did my homework first before I corrected 2 dates. Even if the site started off asking for a yearly fee of $3.00. I don't know who many people use this site or if $3.00 would be a viable amount. I could afford $5.00. I think that is a reasonable amount. Thank you.[edit]

Response by 20:35, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

have more simple english pages[edit]

Response by 20:55, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

In addition to the mobile trend and the next billion, there should be a language chosen in which the information is stored as a mastercopy. If I read in the different country wikis, the information content varies. So your considderation should include one global language.[edit]

Response by 20:57, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

I can hardly imagine my life without this site. Use information from Wikipedia almost every day.[edit]

Response by 20:58, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

add photos[edit]

Response by 21:11, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

You dumbheads! Wiki will survive if you put a few ads on it. For being such a bunch of intellectuals, you folks sure are a bunch of dummies when it comes to comprehending that thing called The Real World out there.

Like it or not, advertising pays the freight. You can put a few ads on without it winding up looking awful, like some ad-soaked sites. This is not choice between looking awful or not. Just a few will be OK. If people like your product (and of course they do....me being one great fan), they'll put up with a few ads.


Response by 2606:6000:6181:9B00:A4B8:6524:8037:816B 21:45, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

2606:6000:6181:9B00:A4B8:6524:8037:816B's thoughts on question 1[edit]

customizable user profiles, connect to social media, easy access

2606:6000:6181:9B00:A4B8:6524:8037:816B's thoughts on question 2[edit]

create an app if there isn't one already, provide bullet point facts rather than long chunks of text for mobile users have a homepage with most popular searches or new topics or something like that with an easily used search bar. Keep profiles with viewed articles, favorite articles, profile pictures that can connect to social media

The Future.[edit]

Yea I don't care about your questions and this is your only freebee from me. The problem with Wikimedia or whatever is validity. People are slowly not trusting what is posted on these wiki pages. My understanding is that anyone can create a page. Like twitter and other sites you need verified accounts. Maybe 2 separate classifications of verification. One where the member/ org knows about the page and approves its content as valid. And another were multiple sources have to prove the content -and new content before it's posted- as valid along with the org/person. The goal should be make wiki the forerunning in truth on the internet rather that largest collection of maybes for your college paper.

Wiki should be to legit information what youtube is to videos. That is thinking forward.

Thank you.

The Wikipedia Lover[edit]

Response by 23:13, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Wikipedia Lover's thoughts on question 1[edit]

To actually give them information they actually understand. Most people on Wikipedia are children looking for information to help them thrive and learn.

Wikipedia Lover's thoughts on question 2[edit]

They would be highly decorated. I care for this site and I want it to thrive highly. Do not leave the template of the website blank. Don't be afraid to add a little color to your site and your projects. My work here is done.[edit]

Response by 23:28, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

More lazy, stubborn, ignorant users so its best that you watch out.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

Probably have some color. More than black and white...

Loup Solitaire 81[edit]

Response by Loup Solitaire 81 23:45, 1 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Mes réflexions pour la question 1[edit]


Machine translation; please improve: None.

Mes réflexions pour la question 2[edit]

  • Professionnalisation des contributions (rémunération) avec articles protégés mais éditables après validation : L'utilisation de contributions rémunérées après validation de la compétence de la personne devrait booster le rythme d'amélioration de la qualité du contenu de Wikipédia et compenser une baisse des contributeurs.
  • Plus grande automatisation ("bots", partenariats "open data") des tâches ingrates et des passages qui requièrent une mise à jour régulière (journalière, hebdomadaire, mensuelle ou annuelle) comme des tableaux statistiques.
  • Prise d'ampleur de Wikidata.
  • Meilleure gestion des catégories.
  • Utilisation du "big data".
Machine translation; please improve: Professionalization of contributions (remuneration) but protected with editable items after validation: The use of contributions paid after confirmation of the competence of the person should boost the pace of improvement of quality material from Wikipedia and offset a decline in contributors.
Greater automation ("bots", "open data" partnerships) menial tasks and passages that require regular updates (daily, weekly, monthly or yearly) as statistical tables.
Taking extent of Wikidata.
Better management of categories.
Using the "big data".


Response by NickK

NickK's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Readers will be more interested by interactive content (e.g. videos, animations, voices of people, pronunciation of words) in addition to classical texts with illustrations. The other point is that due to growing number of sources readers will be interested in higher-quality content, i.e. well-written, diverse and multilingual — NickK (talk) 01:17, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

NickK's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Engineering-wise we need to have better media players (to integrate videos or sounds from Wikimedia Commons), and it would be great to have a better book reader (integrated with Wikisource) or news feed (integrated with Wikinews). Such features would make Wikimedia projects thriving as a most comprehensive source of information (and in addition, of free information).

Project-wise we should promote increasing quality of content, most notably should facilitate integration of high-quality sources (e.g. by obtaining permission for printed encyclopaedias, by digitising public domain sources or by getting easier access to scientific articles), as large amounts of information are still not available in free access (and even less available in different languages).

Community-wise we should be social to the point we should promote healthy cooperation between editors (where diverse groups of editors work together on some topics), but we should not be a social network (we should promote cooperation, not communication) — NickK (talk) 01:17, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

@NickK: Good point re: video players / book readers. For Wikisource, the wsexport tool is a good start, but I agree this kind of thing should be better integrated.
What do you think the Wikimedia Foundation could/should be doing in the next few years that would promote the kind of healthy cooperation between editors you're describing?--Erik Moeller (WMF) (talk) 01:48, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
@Erik Moeller (WMF): Thanks for the feedback.
On the first point, I think that these tools should be more visible, not as a Labs tool but as a built-in feature. Many people are reading books or watching videos from their mobile devices, and we should make this easier.
Speaking of collaboration, I don't have a complete vision but I have some ideas. It would make sense to look into tools used by scientific community for collaboration on scientific articles, like w:ShareLaTeX, for example. Some great features would be a possibility for several editors to edit an article at the same time, both in source code or VisualEditor (a good example again is ShareLaTeX where two users can edit source code simultaneously), or a possibility to add comments (which are currently available using <!-- --> lineup, but not seen in VisualEditor), as they are a powerful tool of providing guidelines to editors.
This may also need improvements to discussions, and from this point of view I think that Flow is might be going in a wrong direction, as it was based on the concept of people discussing existing content (as it used Flickr, Youtube, Tumblr or Livejournal as references) or people answering a single question (like StackOverflow or Quora), not on the concept of people discussing improvements to the existing content. It might be helpful to look for successful platforms where people are discussing joint work on the content, with features like discussions on general structure (e.g. changing the structure of the article), discussions on particular passages in the text (e.g. commenting on a particular paragraph), suggesting changes (e.g. a user suggests a better lead of the article) or flagging particular issues (e.g. a user reports that a particular section needs updating and provides source for it). Flow might be easier for providing feedback to newbies, but it is even worse for discussing content improvements (particularly because it does not work well with anything more complex than plain text, like citations or formulas), so some different platform is needed for article talk pages.
To sum up, it would be great to make a research on collaborative editing tools (especially scientific ones) and see what we can learn from them — NickK (talk) 14:03, 24 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
Do I simplify your description without destroying it by saying that you want the discussion tools not reinforce the comments' being topic-based or discussion-based (who answers whom), but their being action-based (who addresses what problem)? Then how to describe 'a problem' (better, an 'encyclopaedia-related problem') generally? Do you mean there is no way to do it, and the old non-structured section-based format ought to be used? Maybe being topic-based is instead good for personal talkpages, but not so much for article talkpages. - 20:42, 26 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
That's not the only point. In my view, good discussion tools should be also compatible with article namespace, so that we could work on some paragraphs or passages on the discussion page and then integrate them to the article. This is an important part of cooperation, while topics like w:en:Talk:Wikipedia#Wikipedia Alexa Rank out of date are not really compatible with Flow. Speaking of action-based tools, it would be great to better manage links between article and talk pages, e.g. it would be great to see comments like "talk page has a discussion about neutrality of this section" or "ther is an ongoing discussion on how to paraphrase lead section" or "a user suggested source for updating this section" from the article. A good action-based tool is pl:Wikipedia:Zgłoś błąd w artykule where users can report mistakes in articles, which is quite helpful in finding mistakes — integrating some similar tool would be also helpful — NickK (talk) 22:28, 26 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
And as to the current pre-Flow format, the main problem is lack of mutual linking between a description of the problem and the problem itself (i.e. the paragraph in the article)? I.e. you see a problem of navigation? For I don't see what is wrong with reporting errors right on the talk page of an article in the current format, and discussing them then in formats suggested by inventiveness of the discutants; yet that requires no new tools at all… Inventiveness requires some (little, but prohibiting or at least displeasing for some) technical skill and some additional thought, that is true, but is there really a way to pre-do such inventiveness, to foretell it? - 23:10, 26 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
In my view, a possibility to edit the article by several users at the same time must be the first priority. The second priority is IMHO a better way to add comments or markers while editing — either to raise an issue or to provide some guideline. This is something completely lacking in VE at the moment and only partially functional — i.e. via comments in the source code — in wikitext editors. I agree that current discussion tools can be adapted to the formats suggested by inventiveness of the discutants, but if WMF wants to develop some Flow-based tools some more customised solutions will be needed — NickK (talk) 02:00, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Better dictionary thing for Wiktionary too. Better work on apps for all desktops for all projects to use Wikimedia stuff offline, and even save edits for upload later (this is where merge handling would be handy). OpenStreetMap apps allow to add stuff to a map offline and upload later, for example. Gryllida 10:34, 26 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
Yes, Wiktionary also has a great potential for improvement, as it has a great potential but is not very user-friendly compared to other online dictionaries, especially in mobile interface — NickK (talk) 22:28, 26 February 2015 (UTC)Reply


Response by Andrybak

Andrybak's thoughts on question 2[edit]

About people using mobile devices to access internet (Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects included)[edit]

I think that development in that area should start from utility tools (for mobile devices) for people supporting and developing infrastructure that Wikimedia projects rely on: system administrators and wikimedia staff. The next goal should be apps and sites for stewards, administrators, checkusers, reviewers, rollbackers, file movers, translators and other user groups — users who are involved in metapedianism. Only then, I think, special tools for editors could be done properly. E.g. a tool for placing images on the pages — probably with WISIWYG touch interface. Another example: tools for merging or splitting articles.

This notion of starting from utility tools comes from programming culture, where programmers usually make applications for programming first (anything from text-editors and CLI terminals to compilers and linkers) and only when such tools are ready, programmers start making applications for general users.

@Andrybak: I'm not sure I follow the analogy. I do think that we need to make sure we keep up the development of curation tools as we add new contribution tools on mobile, but I don't see the rationale why all the "meta" tools should be ported first. Indeed we've had mobile editing now since July 2013. Care to elaborate?--Erik Moeller (WMF) (talk) 02:04, 26 February 2015 (UTC)Reply
@Erik Moeller (WMF): Of course, it's just my opinion, but there are several reasons why I think it would work better this way:
  • It would create an understanding, a view in the community of how those tools (all of them, not just curation tools) would (or should) look.
  • As for programmers who develop those tools, it would alleviate issues and problems with ways things are programmed, with tools, programming languages (or anything else in the development process) faster and more clearly.
  • More involved people would make more (and better) feedback about those tools faster. It doesn't mean that regular editors can't make good feedback, but I think it's feedback from more involved people would be better in general. And this feedback might be more helpful because, presumably, curation tools would be more complex.
andrybak (talk) 09:52, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply


Response by Gaming4JC 00:09, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Gaming4JC's thoughts on question 1[edit]

1) Internet Censorship. As has already been seen in many areas of the world, censorship continues to happen and is on the rise. If we want to continue to allow the next billion people to access freedom of thought and information, it will be crucial to provide methods for these users to access that information and Wikimedia as a whole.

2) I would also suggest that not only Internet censorship, but content censorship on controversial issues, continues to be a problem worldwide and on Wikimedia. As an example on Wikipedia, there is a page called Abortion debate. The page goes on to mention Wikipedia:Anti-abortion violence and links to an article all it's own, while no mention of the Pro-abortion Violence that occurs each year is permitted. This is an example where Wikipedia:WP:Consesus and Wikipedia:WP:Weight try to label the hundreds of attacks against pro-life groups as simply Wikipedia:WP:Fringe. It is truly incredible to me that this information is so strongly censored that mentioning less than two sentences about it causes debate and brigading to get it removed, while the other side of the debate has it's own article. Therefore, a Neutral Point of View is sadly not permitted.

Gaming4JC's thoughts on question 2[edit]

1) For Internet Censorship, it would be useful to work with Tor Project and similar to provide alternative ways of viewing Wikipedia and related Wikimedia projects. For example a .onion address could be used. Facebook has already began doing this as well. This allows people in countries who are unable to access the site via normal means another viable option.

2) For content censorship, it is a tougher problem. One one side we need Consensus, but on the other we need to realize that important topics should not be allowed to be removed due to that consensus in the event the said Consensus is removing history. This has been a problem time and again since consensus can be controlled, brigaded, or manipulated to remove information from Wikimedia projects. I would propose that a rule change be done to consensus that in the event enough sources exists, controversial topics may stay. The same goes for mergers and deletions. The rule of the mob is not always correct.

Thanks for taking the time to help here. On the Internet Censorship issue, we do take a pretty strong stand. You can read more in our our transparency report. And your other points on Internet Censorship resonate with me as well. I think our strategy needs to incorporate a component that addresses that issue. Again thanks for your time and advice. Much appreciated. GeoffBrigham (WMF) (talk) 02:02, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[edit]

Response by 00:51, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 2[edit]

I do not believe you are asking the correct questions concerning the future of Wiki and the internet as a whole. The overriding concern should be the independence of the internet. If forces now set in motion continue to fruition NO information disseminated will be free of political taint.[edit]

Response by 01:13, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Make sure wikipedia is a realiable source and everyone knows it.

For better future Wikimedia[edit]

In order to improve Wikimedia (ads-free) service, one of the largest social media or technology companies has to stand out. Such as Apple.

I strongly suggest the merge into Apple or Google.


Response by anonymous 02:12, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

anonymous's thoughts on question 2[edit]

Change Wikipedia's reputation of unreliability.[edit]

Response by 03:18, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

There will be a need to address more local topics as more and more people access the internet for information. So there may be a reason to tag information as being of global interest and applicability and those that have local interest and applicability[edit]

Response by 03:19, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

dont change the template of wiki. it is so clean as it is. both the desktop and the mobile sites are so nice and easy to access. DONT CHANGE THEM THEYRE PERFECT[edit]

Response by 03:38, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

wikipedia needs to make a app and needs to start pumping out adds like game of war make the adds anoying like game of war adds

We have an app available in Google Play and iTunes. There are no ads on either app.--GByrd (WMF) (talk) 01:10, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply


Response by 2602:304:CE3E:100:ADA4:10FD:4FE2:4D7C 04:47, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

make a kids wikipidia[edit]

Response by 04:50, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

stop censoring alternate physics, etc.[edit]

Response by 05:12, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]



Machine translation; please improve: CONTRIBUTIONS TO USE MORE SPANISH. LANGUAGE OF MILLIONS IN THE WORLD's thoughts on question 2[edit]



Response by 05:16, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

A new interface something modern how about thumbnails on wiki pages showing either a picture a title a book cover or other and a new task bar to accommodate online to use with a more simplicity and a help button on the bar for beginners.


For Wikipedia and Wikimedia to thrive they will need to keep all vested interests, government, etc. from controling the information and data coming out of Wiki sites. Let all people and groups add to it as you are currently doing.[edit]

Response by 06:05, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 2[edit]

  1. 开放。opening
  2. 秩序。order
  3. 规范。standard

2601:4:2700:69F:2D7A:1076:37C4:66AC Griffin Schultz[edit]

Response by 2601:4:2700:69F:2D7A:1076:37C4:66AC 06:05, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

2601:4:2700:69F:2D7A:1076:37C4:66AC's thoughts on question 1[edit]

I believe it would be a positive move for Wikipedia to have some sort of tab linkage. I mean like a Google +1 or Facebook icon. Let's say you go to a museum or orchestra website, and you want some history and other information quickly, there may be a "Wikipedia" icon next to say, a "like" button that would pull up the Wikipedia page for said topic/place/thing.

2601:4:2700:69F:2D7A:1076:37C4:66AC's thoughts on question 2[edit]

I am very pleased with the mobile Wikipedia pages. I am very happy there is fluid, well written web design without the use of an app or other application. Everything just works...and works well. I believe the mobile screen-sized pages are very efficient, and the 'tabbing' of the sections open/closed works effectively! Thank you.[edit]

Response by 06:16, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

The internet revolution was such that unexpectable at the time it happened and opened the worldwide connection. I guess the future of wikipedia is a sponsorship with universities to develop free education.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

Healthy Wikimedia will be the start of videos upload and tutoring uploads based on education. I mean the same as articles but with videos and images which could be great to listen to for all the people and also deaf people.


Response by HappyLand2 06:20, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

HappyLand2's thoughts on question 1[edit]

It should be easily printable from mobile devices, and it should have a list of all the issues according to alphabetical order on the front page.

HappyLand2's thoughts on question 2[edit]

The articles should all require a lot of images.[edit]

Response by 07:05, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Given that a large number of WP editors and contributors in English are Western white males, you risk ending up with content that reflects that demographic too much...it may come to be seen as too elitist, academic, irrelevant, Anglo-American or establishment-oriented. It already leans heavily in that direction. Part of the problem is that your "how-to" information is hidden away and not very interesting. If it's too dense it can be intimidating.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

What you need to do is attract a wider range of editors and contributors. This can be done through creating and promoting a series of online video or interactive tutorials. You could also do a series of profiles of editors/contributors from diverse backgrounds. But please don't make cheesy, glossy, saccharine videos of fake people or you will put people off.[edit]

Response by 07:46, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Your Organization (Wikipedia) is Great but For future Massive Success You Guys Have To Focus On 'MARATHI' Langauge.Because There are Lot Of Marathi Langauge Wiki Users but,some informaion is avalible in english only for specific subjets,topics if in future wiki avalible in marathi then lots of students will use wiki and Bless It.You Guys Are really great.i am also Very Thankful to Wkipedia...[edit]

Response by 07:50, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

It would and probably should be more open to the public, but have more stringent guidelines as to editing. New Wikimedia projects should maintain their democracy but make it slightly more difficult to make sudden changes to pages, such as names, nicknames and terms of reference.


Response by 07:51, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 2[edit]

People are becoming lazier, so the page will need to be more accessible, and minimal thinking should be needed to be able to explore it.[edit]

Response by 08:08, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

  • Internet on TV
  • Audio search and voice read's thoughts on question 2[edit]


Response by 2601:2:8F00:91A:E5D3:674C:1FAE:19C2 08:48, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

2601:2:8F00:91A:E5D3:674C:1FAE:19C2's thoughts on question 1[edit]

1) I identify a trend of specificity in categorizing information occurring within the next twelve years. As the internet becomes older and more bloated, sites' targeting specific demographics will become a more essential theme; after all, in a large library, large and apparent labeling is a necessity. Wikipedia is a general information site, but would benefit from experimenting in this area because its a fantastic opportunity to be identified as a successful trend setter. 2) Another trend is the inclusion of political and social agenda in encyclopedia articles. An example: In the west, it is vogue to include feminist sensitive language in a broad spectrum of subjects. This trend has lead to the insertions of numerous specifically feminist oriented points being included in topics in Wikipedia.

2601:2:8F00:91A:E5D3:674C:1FAE:19C2's thoughts on question 2[edit]

1) A suggestion (one of many possibilities to cater to this trend) would be to create alternative page options. Creating a portal for every wiki article would allow alternative pages to be categorized without changing site model. The importance of this idea is that it would allow people of any demographic to quickly access a version relevant to their information desires. A 'student version' page would look much differently than a 'religious implications page' of articles relating to realms of theological study. In history themed articles, student pages would look far different than 'relevance to politics'. After all, as Wikipedia improves its depth of detail, who's to say it cant become a reference for scholarly material for both school age children, and important policy makers? 2) I mention this to call into consideration that as Asian and African peoples gain access to the internet, their regional political and social agendas will likely be highly different than those in the west. Therefore, it would be prudent to anticipate inclusion of language sensitive to those agendas. An assisting idea, would be to also create a portal focused upon identifying the various agendas inserted into articles, and articulating reasoning behind why those were allowed into what some consider should be a blank position data cache. It will be easier for people to understand why inclusiveness exists if definitions are formalized and presented more openly.[edit]

Response by 08:49, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

German WIKI Pages are missused bei leftist like "monochrome", they don´t write objective presentations of the given theme , they don´t write objective presentations of the given theme, but political tendentious Propaganda. Example : articles about political adverse persons like HC Strache - then forget WIKI.DE it´s only part of the "LÜGENPRESSE" and won´t have future...[edit]

Response by 09:12, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Collaboration with school and college is key the element for the future of student, internet and this site. Making at most suitable and official references for the requires knowledge and information is the key aspect for growth and dependence of education system on this site.

Jianjun yangJava competent problem[edit]

Response by Jianjun yang 09:17, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Java often updates. Sometime it make Wikimedia unable to work. Its competence is a problem.[edit]

Response by 10:03, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Lucius Annaeus Seneca:

one thing needs to be clear once and for all: whenever an author composes an article like the one in question on L. Annaeus Seneca, it is pointless and annoying to give selective information. Why omit or skip the scripts on Natural Sciences by Seneca like the "Naturales Quaestiones" including all subsequent data such as 'Editions, Translations' etc.? Authors have to make up their mind whether to make a pathetic laughing stock out of Wikipedia or a serious and reliable source of information. The article on L. Annaeus Seneca therefore, in its present shape, deserves a mark of no better than "E" ( zéro points, ungenügend (6) ) !!!!!!![edit]

Response by 10:44, 2 March 2015 (UTC) iets minder moeilijke woordenReply

Machine translation; please improve: slightly less difficult words.[edit]

Response by 11:25, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

please try to add more snaps and videos because the below average people cant understand only by just reading .so it would be help full for them . and keep maintain the same look of this webpage , and add free and easy accessible . regards Hadhi

Papikolas planet[edit]

Response by Papikolas planet 12:09, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Papikolas planet'ın 1. soru hakkındaki düşünceleri[edit]

Merhaba, öncelikle doğru bir şekilde bildirimde bulunduğumdan emin değilim, ancak bu soru hakkında bir fikrim var. Teknoloji ilerledikçe insanlar tembelleşiyor ve herşeyi hazır halde önlerine sunulmasını bekliyorlar bu ilerisi için kaygı verici bir durum belki de öngörülerim beni yanıltıyordur. Daha kullanılabilir ve daha interaktif bir fikrim var. Örnek olarak özetle şöyle açıklamaya çalışayım:

kullanıcı, bulunduğu mekan hakkında bilgi almak istiyorsa ( mesela Efes antik kenti) telefonundan uygulamaya girerek kordinat belirlemesi yaparak bulunduğu coğrafya veya bölge için hızlı bir şekilde bilgiye ulaşabilir. Faydası, hızlı ve tek tuşla sonuca ulaşmak ve üstelik sistem üstündeki sorguları azaltarak daha ferah bir şekilde çalışmasıdır. Tabi bu sadece kaba taslak bir öneridir.

Machine translation; please improve: Hi, firstly I'm not sure I found the right way to notice, but I have an idea about this question. Technology progresses, people are lazy and expect everything ready for submission to the front of this worrying situation for the future, perhaps my predictions are mistaking me. There are more available and more interactive idea. As an example, I tried to explain to summarize as follows:

if the user wants to get information about the venue where (for example Ephesus) can find information quickly to determine the geographical coordinates or region by entering the application from the phone. Benefits, fast and achieve results and, moreover, is more spacious one-touch operation, reducing query at the top of the system. Of course, this is just a rough draft proposal.[edit]

Response by 12:18, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's odpovědi na první otázku[edit]

Myslím si, že by Wikipedie mohla mít pár výtisků knížek. Např.: nějakou encyklopedii nebo tak něco, Ano internet je boží ale spoustu lidí by zaujaly knihy--> můžou si je s sebou vzít kamkoliv a nespolíhají se na Wiffi. Dál bych dělala větší reklamu, třeba i do nějakých škol. Domluvit se s určitou školou na různých vzdělávacích projektech... Aby děti uměly vyhledávat informace a zároveň se vzdělávaly atd....

Machine translation; please improve: I think that Wikipedia could have a few copies of books. Ex .: an encyclopedia or something, yes internet is divine but a lot of people would have taken books -> you can take them with you anywhere and nespolíhají on Wiff. I'd do more publicity, even in some schools. Agree with some school programs at various educational projects ... For children how to search for information and educate at the same time, etc ....[edit]

Response by 12:39, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Social media pages with popular searches or interesting facts's thoughts on question 2[edit]

apps on all platforms and competitions for people that make a lot of pages


Response by Jonny-Europa 13:31, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Jonny-Europa's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Children look up to you. Set a positive example. Shine light where there is darkness

Jonny-Europa's thoughts on question 2[edit]

I'm not a decoder nor an encryption type of guy. It is up to you. I've turned to you in times of darkness. I trust your staff to make to rational and trustworthy decision. Form relations with geniunely kind allies. Look for inspiration. Strive to become better each and every day. Encourage educated souls to add to your library of information. Righteous love always prevails.[edit]

Response by 13:35, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

نظر کاربر در مورد پرسش ۱کاربراینترنتی زیاد است اما کارآیی ندارند[edit]

من علاقه زیادی به تحقیقات علمی دارم ولی دقیقأ روش نوشتن آن را نمی دانم الان یک تحقیق در مورد بررسی میزان مشارکت دانش آموزان دبیرستانی در حل مشکلات همسلان و ارایه راهکار عملی دارم ، نمی دانم چطور باید شروع کنم از آقای دکتر مهر محمدی تقاضای کمک دارم سپاسگزارم

(Machine translation, please help improve...)
"I'm very interested in scientific research, but it is not exactly the way writing I know about a research study of knowledge sharing High school students in solving practical problems and solution Hmslan I do not know how to start. I am asking for help from the doctor, October Mohammadi"[edit]

Response by 13:46, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

Many more Chinese speaking users's thoughts on question 2[edit]

More Chinese projects


Response by Netscr1be 14:19, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Netscr1be's thoughts on question 1[edit]

  • blockchain technology
    • represents opportunity to track changes by public key
    • allows for setting attributes like authority (think expertise)

Netscr1be's thoughts on question 2[edit]

  • collaboration with other open knowledge sites (e.g. PLoS (?))[edit]

i believe that adding a comment section for discussion will add to the wiki experience. being able to share your opinions and hearing the opinions of others about a certain topic will add depth to the interpretation of information presented on this sight.

Inconsistency must be verified[edit]

Data Here is a good source of information but there is an inconsistency in the data available here. two pages may totally contradict in some cases. pls take some measures to avoid such confusing measures[edit]

Response by 15:10, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

I project that some form of reputation-based metric will come into use as an indication of credibility. It won't completely prevent astroturfing, the use of sockpuppets, etc; any time total anonymity is possible, credibility should be assumed to be minimal. Otherwise, according to an article in Physics World, a surprisingly small number of "bad apples" can have an inordinant impact on the quality of published material.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

Tools to allow credibility analysis should already be pertinent, given the primary drawback of Wiki-type data constructs re academia: "Never cite Wiki articles due to unreliability". I would also rank visualization tools as needful improvements; hyperbolic representations with user-selectable analytes (besides simple similarity), for example -- the ability to do key-word analysis to find unexpected "pertinence" to other subjects is going to make someone some money. Plan for how to handle an increase in the amount of "apps as agents" doing information searches...


Response by 2A02:8109:4C0:247C:FD0B:97AE:29B1:1AB4 15:10, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

2A02:8109:4C0:247C:FD0B:97AE:29B1:1AB4s Gedanken zu Frage 1[edit]

Ich wünsche mir eine verbesserte Version der Biblithek von Alexandria für alle auf der Welt frei zugänglich - das Wissen der Menschheit für alle -- für eine besseres Morgen. Darum sollte Wiki in allen demokratischen Staaten ein staatlich geförderter Verein sein (und damit alle Geldsorgen für immer zu eliminieren) und so zu der verbesserung der Bildung weltweit beitragen. Alle Bildungszweige könnten von einer derart umfangreichen Sammlung von Welt-Wissen nur profitieren, wenn sie denn richtig in den Unterichtsaltag integriert wird. Damit könnte Wiki auch Vorreiter in der Kinder-Erziehung fürs Internet sein und zeigen das bei richtiger nutzung große Chancen und viel aktiv benutzbares Wissen auf alle im Internet warten. Daneben wäre ein rein Wissenschafts Portal von Wiki wichtig und wünschenswert. Dies könnte von den staalichen Stellen für Wissenschaft und Forschung z.B. als Europaprojekt mit Weltbeteiligung - ähnlich wie auch beim Cern in der Schweiz - organisiert werden und würde ein Wiki für alle beteiligten Fachkreise mit wissenschaftlichem Anspruch zur Verfügung stellen. Für Fach und für allgemein Wiki fehlen auch noch Chat-Bloggs in denen bestimmte Artikel disutiert und kritisiert werden können. Auch wäre eine Polarisations-Funktion wichtig damit kontrovers diskutierte Fachbereiche auch in ihrer vollen Kontroverse gebührend dargestellt werden können.

mfG Tuomas Hamm fleißiger Wiki Nutzer

Translation: I would like an improved version of library of Alexandria, free accessible for all the world - the knowledge of mankind for all - for a better tomorrow. Therefore wiki should be a government-sponsored club in all democratic countries (and thus eliminate all money worries forever) and help to the improvement of education worldwide. All branches of education could only benefit from such an extensive collection of world-knowledge, if it is all properly integrated into the everyday teaching. This wiki could also be a pioneer in children's education for the internet and show the great opportunities and great usable knowledge waiting for proper use of all on the Internet. In addition, a purely scientific portal of Wiki would be important and desirable. This could be organised by public sector bodies for science and research, for example as a European project with world participation, similar to CERN in Switzerland, and would make a wiki for all involved expert groups with a scientific vesting. For special and general wikis chat blogs are missing where distinct articles can be discussed and criticised. A polarisation function is important so controversial subject areas can also be displayed in its full due controversy.


Response by Idmonde 15:13, 2 March 2015 (UTC) الاتجاهات التي احددها بجانب. الهواتف الجوالة والمليار مستخدم هو اتخاذ اتجاه التعليم عن بعد في كل المجالات عبر سلسلة دروس. وانشاء تطبيقات تعليمية تابعة للويكيمديا وسياستها. تنزيل. التطبيقات التابعة للمؤسسة بالمجان .وكل مشروع له تطبيق يخصه . ويجب علي المؤسسة ان تنشأ مقرارات مثل الدراسية.الابتدائي و الاعدادي والثانوي وحتي الجامعي علي حسب كل بلد وخصائصه. وسيدته . وجعل تلك المقرارات. ككتب الكترونية حيث يسهل تحميلها في الهواتف والحواسب ومن هذا نحصل علي فرد ذكي معلم يستطيع ان ينشئ وان يفكر بطريقة سليمة .فإذا كان المليار. تطور وتعلم من المؤسسة فلتستعد للتريليون .فستكون اكبر مرجع للمعلومات. وحبذاReply

Machine translation; please improve: Trends that I select next. Mobile phones and one billion user is to take the direction of distance education in all fields through a series of lessons. And the establishment of a policy of Ueqimdia and educational applications. Download. Of the Foundation applications free of charge. Each project has applied his own jurisdiction. The institution must arise Decisions like Aldraseh.alaptdaúa and preparatory and secondary to the university where each country and its properties. And his mistress. And make those Decisions. E-book form as easily loaded into the phones and computers is that we get the individual intelligent teacher can establish and think it was a proper way .vama billion. The development and learning of the Foundation for Vltistad trillion .vcetkon biggest source of information. Preferably[edit]

Response by 15:14, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

Mes réflexions pour la question 2[edit]

Wikipédia pourrai avoir un site plus moderne car le fond d'écran est très ennuyeux.

Machine translation: please improve: Wikipedia could have a more modern site because the wallpaper is very annoying.[edit]

Response by 15:32, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

More video game articles.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

More user friendly interfaces,


Response by 15:49, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

connecting person by real facts and the interesting way to represent the information, by latest knowledge of any event, and representing all related topic at once while searching and then user select what he/she want.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

more pictorial views are very much helpful and some videos or may be direct link that connect with the information. latest knowledge plus some upcoming events that must be happen.[edit]

Response by 16:02, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply's thoughts on question 1[edit]

I think its importand to give wikipedia new look. Wikipedia as a bih company needs to follow trends in web design.'s thoughts on question 2[edit]

New projects for wikipedia I would recomand is that i would recomand is to change looks of wikipedia. Create new apps for Android, and Apple operating systems.

We indeed have Android and iOs apps :) --Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 19:12, 2 March 2015 (UTC)Reply