|CATEGORY||#||THEMATIC STATEMENT||NOTES||DRAFTERS||RED: |
This is important
I have energy for...
|BLUE: "Weak Signal"||A) What would this mean to the World?||B) What would this mean to Wikimedia?||C) What would you change?||Undefined comments|
|Other medias||1||By 2030, Wikimedia should empower everyone to contribute and interact with a rich diversity of quality, curated multimedia, such as video, audio, 3D, tastes, touches, smells, and beyond, to share freely in the full range of knowledge and experience.||Harald Krichel, |
|15||7||17||* This will make accessing knowledge on Wikipedia easier for people who struggle with text based information. Such as semi-literate or people with text-based learning challenges like dyslexia. |
* It would open learning and free knowledge to currently excluded audiences.
* This will make it easier for people to gain a deeper and more in depth understanding of concepts and places and experiences covered on Wikipedia
* Wikimedia is an alternative, free publishing platform
|* It would provide the push or political capital to push for proper provisions and efforts to cater for visual, dynamic, multimedia forms for use and deployment on Wiki.|
* Other media that are used to spread knowledge
* It would require us to challenge assumptions about UX and curatorial priorities
* Uniquely diverse content where interactive VR is a normal interface.
|* Shorten redundant wording|
* I should to I will
* Learning time would be faster
* Remove detail about media which might change or lose relevancy
* Smell - love it that you included this
* There must be viable entry points to WM information other than text-based web search
* What Seddon said
* USER: Seddon - I would remove touches and smells
* Remove: such as video, audio, 3D, tastes, touches, smells and beyond
* This would make our lives more exciting and rich
* Write in seven words
|Other medias||2||Wikimedia will support a variety of learning experiences by providing a richer multimedia experience that is easy to create collaboratively.||* Rationale: Various people learn in different ways, and we should support them. Not all knowledge can be easily captured in text. Humans are visual creatures and this will make Wikipedia more people friendly. |
* Impact: It will revitalise our content by making it more appealing to more people.
* Examples: 360 video/photographs. 3D objects/interaction. Interactive data visualisation.
* Expanded example: Using a 1 minute 360 degree video to illustrate what it is like being in a jungle on the wikipedia article page for Jungle biosphere. This helps move the article from providing a more academic understanding of what being in a jungle is like to a deeper experience of what it might be like to be there.
|Douglas Scott, |
|2||3||0||* Richer --> rich.|
* Wikimedia will provide a rich multimedia experience
|Sustainability (and Growth?)||3||In order to be able to fulfill our mission in perpetuity, we the Wikimedia movement, shall continue and boldly expand our activities and impact, using our resources effectively and following our values, while continuously adapting to the world around us.||Mike Peel, |
|1||1||0||* It would mean Wikipedia had more cultural relevance and reach||* It would require a lot more|
* We would become an actual movement
* Recognised… With a recognised mission… sustainable movement
|* In perpetuity? Too overbeating|
* Reformulate using SMART guideline
* Sounds like weird Weird'al's mission statement (google it). I think this is assumed and accepted - needs to contain the values
* I would like us to own the need to raise money. We're not always comfortable with this.
* Wikimedia should develop and steward resources to ensure we can expand our impact in perpetuity
|* How to share power in a dynamic way?|
|Sustainability (and Growth?)||4||By 2030, Wikimedia should be a globally-recognized, sustainable movement that has excellence in self-governance and collaboration with actors and stakeholders to advocate, create, and distribute free knowledge.||Kaarel Vaidla, |
|15||7||2||* WM could serve as an example for other self-governing communities, no matter how big or small||* Focus not only on knowledge, but also on skills||* The last two sentences need work. The first two can go onto my other statement - excellence!|
|Sustainability (and Growth?)||5||The Wikimedia movement should strive for every human being to become a Wikimedian.||Christophe Henner, |
|5||4||6||* It requires that all world population become literate, access to internet, have motivation to become Wikimedian. |
* Awareness for free knowledge would rise
* Long-term knowledge, different than paper encyclopedias, with sustainable improvement.
* The difference this would make is beyond limits.
|* Maybe not everybody is cut, fit to be a Wikimedian?||* I would let go of it altogether. WM is not a sect! Not everyone has to share our goals and values. I actually find this thematic statement to be rather scary. |
* This might be the end of Wikimedia.
* We should not strive for this, we are not facebook and this is not sustainable
|* Doesn't feel realistic or even real|
* This sounds a bit totalitarian
|Community Health||6||By 2030, Wikimedia must be a constructive, collaborative and inclusive community where everyone feels welcome and can have fun.||Philip Kopetzky, |
|30||15||4||* More people would be able to participate in free knowledge|
* This is rocket science (hard as hell). Let's be the first online community to land on the moon.
|* We would be stronger|
* This will help us make our community sustainable
* More contributors
|* Instead of 'having fun' - make a difference? While I find this community to be fun this is not why many of us are here. Sounds a little frivolous. Thank you!|
* Suggest changing 'fun' to 'enjoyable'. Building our projects doesn't need to be fun necessarily.
* Make it clear that harrassment and similar issues are still top priority.
* I would like to see an acknowledgment that editing alone is not the only thing. There are many other ways to contribute.
* feels: + appreciated
|* This is the same as inclusion and diversity|
Beyond 'welcome' toward 'equality'.
|Community Health||7||By 2030, we must recognize volunteers are the most valuable asset and deserve a healthy environment; we will both treat our community health issues and foster proactive care.||Vassia Atanassova, |
Wozzy the Owlsome Owl
|14||18||0||* Happier wiki environment means it's more welcoming, which means more contributors, more free knowledge||* Communities are happier, more sustainable, contributors are more devoted.|
* This would allow for more time in our projects to be used more productively and help retain and attract more volunteers.
|* While I don't disagree with this, I don't feel comfortable singling out volunteers over everyone else. |
* I hope we'll grow to be a movement of not only volunteers, but also very much of constructive paid contributors.
|* Real experts must not feel that amateurs are kicking them away|
|Community Health||8||The Wikimedia community should invest resources to actively adopt processes that make our environment welcoming, nurturing, and fun for new and existing contributors, readers, and supporters.||* This includes being considerate to other members from different backgrounds… |
-- cultural and geographical background
-- individual v organisation/partnerships
-- volunteer v professional
-- frequency of contributions
-- different roles/projects
* We should invest resources into active efforts and processes. The impact would be to attract and retain more members. Members includes contributors, readers, supporters.
|John Sadowski, |
|13||8||1||* Necessary for our survival|
* Keep the movement alive, give the ability to grow (now we lose volunteers, has to be stopped)
* Follow laws for working environment, because WP is a working place/no mobbing.
|* Fun surely can't apply to supporters? |
* I specially like the third version of the statement.
|TALK: Community Health|
* This helps ensure new, less experienced editors are guided on board, and they feel welcome and motivated - Rehman
|Education||9||The Wikimedia movement takes an active role in universal education and supports the contribution of learners to the Wikimedia projects globally.||Lucy Crompton-Reid, |
Mei Yee Lui
|17||16||2||* Align to UNESCO PILLARS for Education in the 21st Century:|
1. Learn to learn (new things)
2. Learn to do (skills)
3. Learn to live together
4. Learn to be
Learning to contribute is learning all the above
* WM belongs in schools. People can learn from WM projects, teachers should learn that
* Way more contributors!
|* Relevant to the next generation|
* What is universal education! At which level? Is not learner reader, not contributor?
|Education||10||By 2030, all educators worldwide are empowered to teach about understanding and contributing to free knowledge through Wikimedia projects.||Vahid Masrour, |
Ks aka 98,
|10||12||2||* Our world needs more people knowing about free knowledge|
* The next generation of younger people will understand the values of collaboration, sharing, and free knowledge
* It changes the way people are educated to a more actively participating one (and more effective one).
|* Wikimedia community will be longer and stronger by incorporating educational institutions and individuals|
* Lots more editors!!
|* I would explicitly include non-institutional education (eg self-teaching)||* What does it mean, 'empowered' in this context? Are they prohibited from doing this now?|
|Education||11||By 2030, free knowledge is an integral part of formal and informal education around the world, for diverse new generations to participate in free knowledge, regardless of local resources. Sharing is standard in society and knowledge commons thrives.||Sara Mortsell, |
|24||12||3||* This would potentially revolutionise education and make student debt obsolete.|
* A complete new generation will see Wikipedia etc as every day life, in reading and editing
* Free knowledge would be available to everyone, across all languages and geographies
|* Strong focus on trustworthy of Wikipedia|
* Embracing sharing/free knowledge concepts beyond our projects
* A focus on contributing to, not just understanding, free knowledge
|* Be more humble? 'We expect' or 'anticipate'.|
* Instead of " "Sharing in our human heritage is the standard in society in which the knowledge commons thrives
|* Plus 1|
* TALK: EDUCATION
=== Comment ===
Needs trimming. Remove last sentence. ~~~
* So many new people involved
|Partnerships||12||By 2030, Wikimedia should lead an ecosystem of key players in the knowledge commons movement to improve quantity, quality, and reach of free content, to extend the credibility of the knowledge commons and to increase its resilience without compromising our independence or values.|| Leading means steward leadership. Serving others, initiating and ensuring that every partner in the network is thriving. |
 The term 'knowledge commons' was preferred over 'open knowledge' as the latter is a state whereas the former includes the aspect of sharing.
 Resilience refers to knowledge commons being strong and, even in the face of adversity and change, still growing.
|Sara Snyder, |
|25||30||0||* The world will have increased access to so many more free content and knowledge resources - far beyond the Wikimedia projects. |
* Use our influence to enhance other professions,
* the world will not only have access to the sum of all human knowledge but the parts as well.
* change people's thinking and behaving toward free knowledge's.
* This will increase reliability of information
|* this will help the need for multi-lingual references. |
* it would further the vision and values of the Wikimedia movement, including other objectives related to content gaps, verifiability, etc. Wikimedia projects are open and the content on wither side must be open too. * the movement must accept more experts to be involved.
* partnerships are essential for long-term sustainability, durability, excellence of our content. Two-way mutually beneficial dynamic would help ensure our long-term strategy.
* Wikimedia movement would be able to amplify its voices and work more effectively toward its mission.
|* replace "should lead" with "should be part of" |
* We must work with, support, accommodate NOT lead. We shouldn't dominate our partners but understand their needs and let them shine.
* "replace "should" with "we would like it to be"
* simplify this and just work on key points - knowledge commons, quantity, quality, credibility, and reach.
* Other orgs can also enhance value.
* call out examples of partners (non-profits, research orgs, universities, GLAMs). Replace "lead an ecosystem" with "partner with"
* Explicitly align this with open access and open data and also specify possible partnerships. Does it include universities, what about propriety publications that make content open but don't share the values the other way.
* If you need footnotes, it's not a good statement.
|Diversity and inclusion||13||Everyone feels welcome and safe.||user:Fae, |
|23||12||4||* This would be transformative - eliminating toxicity would make us all more productive and lead as an example for online communities everywhere. * Make people keen to contribute to Wikimedia whatever their culture, language, sexual orientation, religion||* Wikimedia will be a leader in empowering full equality and freedom of sharing and getting information. * even the trolls?||* "Feels" can have an appearance that isn't real (sic - not just feel safe but BE safe). * nothing - the statement is perfect. * People feel they belong there * it is too vague - it still needs work to do.||* This is the same as community health - welcoming everybody?? * LGBT people. * Gender gap - support women's group with general and specific actions. * especially women * Gender gap to conquer the decision making spaces - no more all male panels. * what about unexplainable misfeelings? * if I can't write in my language on my computer or phone, then I cannot write.|
|Diversity and inclusion||14||By 2030, Wikimedia movement should become a proactive agent of change towards the subversion of systems of knowledge inequality, while embracing values of diversity and inclusivity.||* By proactive agent of change we mean change in values and behaviors within Wikimedia and in the world.||Katy Love, |
|13||8||3||* every culture would feel equally values for its contributions to the world||* takes us closer to our vision of "every" human and all knowledge. * insider / outsider divisions and concepts and privilege would be solved.||* make this a positive not a negative. * needs to include a safe space. * it may attempt to do too much in one statement.||* gender gap, in 2030 Wikimedia movement would be a whole movement(women and men movement). * Be cable to participate in conferences and decision making spaces in my own languages. *90% of Wikimedia event attendees are not native English speakers and need support.|
|Diversity and inclusion||15||By 2030, the movement will reflect the diversity of human experience.||Helen, Tanel, Kartika, |
|6||4||1||* the world will be benefited by larger variation of content, communities, and readers. It will minimize content gap.||* Wikimedia needs to put lots of effort on increasing diversity in the movement. Should reach out to minor communities.||* not only the movement should reflect this, the content should also, +1, * change nothing||* +100. * Gender gap, increase advocacy, women more visible in media|
|Knowledge gaps & biases||16||Creating an adaptive infrastructure (technological, etc.) which will support the production and preservation of diverse forms of knowledge.||Jacqueline Mabey, |
|2||2||* well, if we can make this happen, we can take control of the knowledge sources! * that's great change for our society as our current internet/digital infrastructure does not fit all human population.||* more money will be needed to help all the new groups and chapters|
|Knowledge gaps & biases||17||Knowledge is global: we must move beyond western written knowledge, towards multiple and diverse forms of knowledge (including oral and visual), from multiple and diverse peoples and perspectives, to truly achieve the sum of all human knowledge.||Alice Backer, |
|49||23||2||* yes! |
* it will make a more equal world.
* this will go a long way towards providing a more complete and evenly proportional structure of human knowledge.
* will innovate on the field of digitally unrepresented heritages knowledge. * knowledge will be easy more than now.
|* Wikimedia won't be ruled by one side. |
* it would refocus our budgeting and actions to support plurality.
* necessary for embodying our values and ensuring service to humanity.
|* equality. |
* from diverse cultural perspectives.
* Western culture should still be supported and not forgotten.
* totally support and agree. However, please add information security. Because the more years that pass, the more information becomes commercial business. There will be fabrications - always check both sides of the story.
|* written sources vs. oral sources. It is not a matter of medium but a matter of trust. We must find a way to make oral sources verifiable. * consider other non-western notions of knowledge and reliable sources. * it it's not in my language it doesn't exist.|
|Knowledge gaps & biases||18||By 2030, every person who is looking for information on any subject is able to find it on a Wikimedia project in their own language.||Danny Horn, |
Amir E. Aharoni
|13||10||4||* equality regarding the access to education will rise. |
* more people would benefit from free knowledge.
|* We would find out what users are looking for.||* this is noble but way to ambitious and probably literally impossible. * seems too ambitious. * shouldn't be a goal - let the demand lead the supply. * too ambitious and unrealistic - we have languages with exactly one speaker. Unsmiley face.||* any subject? Nuclear codes? * knowledge should be accessible beyond Wikimedia projects.|
|Knowledge gaps & biases||19||By 2030, Wikimedia will have reformed the manner in which it identifies, collects, and reflects the knowledge and perspectives that encapsulate the full range of human experience by embodying an open culture that celebrates, values, and actively incorporates diversity.||Isla Haddow-Flood, |
|11||5||0||* It will make Wikipedia, etc. - from everyone by everyone|
|Beyond Wikipedia||20||Enable everyone to collect, curate, and share knowledge beyond encyclopedia knowledge from all fields, cultures, and traditions.||Marc A. Pelletier (user:Coren), |
Derk-Jan Hartman (user:TheDJ),
Tomasz Ganicz (user:Polimerek),
|34||13||13||* there is more than one knowledge system. |
* the world is now more friendly with other world visions and kinds of knowledge. Not only occidental encyclopedia knowledge matters.
* the knowledge of mass destruction weapons even, for everyone? I am not sure.
* this would promote equality among humans. * ?? and provide access to global knowledge of significant participation. Increase participation and representation. Enable sounds technical. we would strive to welcome them.
|* an encyclopedia is a very western concept. Most of our world of knowledge can't be caught in an encyclopedia. We need to make space for that. If we do, we will be able to fulfill our mission and share the sum of all knowledge. * more focus on sister projects.||* too narrow - not just the platform.||* drive to enable? All weakens the substance. |
* everyone <=> as many people as possible. And <=> more [less unachievable].
* "including encyclopedia" is there to make obvious that it is but a small part of "all"
* maybe overreach? Right direction. Beyond "enable" make steps that are more realistic and difficult to argue. Says nothing to "how" (tactical vs. strategy).
* enable people to collect, curate, and share all kinds and forms of knowledge by providing them with processes, tools, and skills.
* who is the "enabler" - WMF/community? "Including" is too supervious (CK) and sounds defensive. * "collect, curate, and share" is very good. more obvious.
* everyone and all is overkill.  is not necessary. "important enough" should be in.
* I love this but it needs to answer "why" - how will doing this help humanity. Answer that question and we have a winner!.
* Add access - reading or learning
|Beyond Wikipedia||21||Empower anyone to learn, teach, and research by providing a platform to share and access media, data, tools, and social interactions for growing the sum of all human knowledge.||Daniel Kinzler, |
|1||4||6||* more empowering to learners and people around the world. Opportunity to have much more personalized educational resources and information. More knowledge, more research = less inequality.||* much less Wikipedia-centric. More freedom for users and editors. More media and shapes of information. More layers in our projects [remix, annotate, and discuss]. More integration and connection in our projects.||* too narrow - not just the platform. |
* replace "non-traditional with "all kinds of" * too narrow and prescriptive in scope
|Beyond Wikipedia||22||By 2030, Wikimedia should be a home for free knowledge – flexible in format and building bridges across languages – opening contributions from non-traditional knowledge sources.||Goals… |
- to be an end user/learner focussed
- to recognise valid, non-traditional information, inputs like oral tradition and scientific experimentation
- we will open new ways to contribute and serve more diverse knowledge needs
|Finn Nielson, |
Rarishankar Ayya kkannu
|6||5||0||* Wikimedia contributors and consumers don't have to be tech savvy. Toxic nerd culture may be diluted or reformed. Greater inclusivity for underparticipating and marginalised perspectives.||* Bring in new sort of community contributors|
* Preserve knowledge that may be lost otherwise over time
|Availability across languages||23||By 2030, Wikimedia should help language communities interested in Wikimedia achieve an equal Wikimedia presence. This includes social inclusion, technology, respect for diversity.||* interest in wikimedia|
* oral history is a part of wikipedia in 2030
* cultural valves are tied to the language(s)
* during this century 6000 of the 7000 languages in the world
* Wikimedia could encourage languages whenever an extent of community wis get
* dialects are a piece of knowledge and so are the focus of the Wikimedia Foundation's vision
* the languages that are not in Wikimedia are a piece of what we know that we don't know
|Jane Darnell, |
|10||8||2||* Teaching and readin out to everyone in the language that they are most passionate about|
* Access to information without the need to learn a second language
* Increase social reliability of non-active language projects. It will enable the activation of the projects an educational use
* This will achieve more global participation
* Preservation of dead/historical language is a huge deal
* super important to create something approaching the sum of all knowledgeable
|* Ease of access and embrace to edit and create for editors and everyone that wishes to join the movement|
* This will benefit diversity projects
* Wikimedia should put more efforts to preserve indigeneous languages and small communities
* An attempt to lower the translation effort is required
|* It is difficult to have Wikimedia projects in dead languages without a community|
* I can know the culture and values of other projects and other languages
|*Make it available to participate international Wikimedia movement, alos in another language than English|
* I can know the culture and values of other projects and other languages
* It's not feasible to have all projects in dead languages, it's already hand with small languages.
* Include projects to teach all languages to all humans, not only having projects in all languages
* this should not only be abouy "equality" but about extra support: big communities can very well managed most of the processes on their one, small community, can not.
|Availability across languages||24||By 2030, Wikimedia projects should be available in all the (live and dead) languages of the world.||Available… means having a minimum of articles about essential/words. Start with live languages and extend later to dead languages (old Greek/Latin). Wikimedia should work on the field to search/encourage emerging of new language communities - raise awareness. Work on dictionaries/databases with translations of different words.||Anass Sedrati, |
Bohdan Melnychuk (User:Base),
|34||16||9||* All living and dead languages? That would be awesome and more than all linguistics known!|
* Areas of the world without good to access to information will be able to learn for free and access resources in a language they understand well.
* This would be very beneficial to underprivileged language groups
|* Wikimedia will become a strong player in/for language, tech and resources||* We're discussing about support languages in our projects but what is happening inside our own movement? It is an English speaking based movement? Change.. More participation of other languages inside the movement (eg conference).|
* Spoken and signed? Traditionally written and not.
* Why are dead languages important? Why would they be part of a strategy? I don't agree with emphasising them (I would remove that part).
* It's not WM's job to revive dead languages. Let the museums do that. WM projects are to be used by people looking for information.
* Emphasising dead languages only when it makes sense (wikisource, in dead language, wiktionary/ common about dead language).
* Let dead languages rest in peace!
* I'm skeptical of including 'dead'. 'Dead' means noone is a native speaker of the language. Documenting it - yes. Available in it?
|* Language availability is not a separate topic. Language is everywhere. |
* For this to be achieved, the Foundation can not be made predominantly of Western-Anglophones
* Only available? At what content richness or quality?
|Support emerging communities||25||By 2030, Wikimedia should empower emerging communities through exchange in a mutually-inclusive framework that embraces human experience in all its forms.||Mārtiņš Bruņenieks, |
Rebecca O'Neill (user:Smirlybee)
|4||2||5||* It actually makes people equal, not just in theory but in practice||* Refocus investment in infrastructure|
|Support emerging communities||26||In 2030, Wikimedia should be a place where emerging communities are guaranteed support from peer communities so that members of all communities can share in the sum of all knowledge in their own language.||* Guaranteed: mutual commitments to provide appropriate levels of support|
* Supporting: including but not limited to: technical, documentation, logistics, institutional partnerships, legal entities and facilitation of communication and cooperation between emerging to emerging and emerging to established communities
* Peer communities: other WM communities and organizations and the wider open knowledge movement
|3||5||0||* The vision is guaranteed to be spread all over the world||* Should be also able to share their POV in dominant languages. (There might exist fewer sources in minor languages.)|
* I would add some more concrete statement on the scope of what we are trying to achieve with this statement and describe what that looks like
|Support emerging communities||27||By 2030, Wikimedia should empower emerging communities by reducing barriers to access and share free knowledge.||* Empowerment: collaborative efforts of the stakeholders of the movement and the emerging communities|
* Barriers: access to information, lack of infrastructure, limited acceptance of types of references, lack of rule of law, access to technology
* Emerging communities all over the world with a focus on Asia, Africa, Central + South America (not necessarily Wiki communities)
|Prachatos Mitra (user: PmLineditor), |
Abigail Ripstra (user: snapdragon66),
Oscar Costero (user: Oscar),
|15||14||2||* The world would have a more diverse knowledge base available in WM projects||* We need to have a level playing field for all communities|
* The movement will be wider and more diverse in its voices and experieneces
|* By reducing barriers and increasing people's capacities to access and share free knowledge|
* And encourage and support locally-driven non-profit efforts
|Support emerging communities||28||By 2030, Wikimedia should institutionalize the research of emerging communities to efficiently find / discover, understand, resources, and nurture them towards maturity and use their performance as a key index to assessing the Foundation’s own performance.||* Emerging communities are the basic units of the movement because at any point in our history there was "emergence"|
* Research us is key to effectively dealing with us
* We are the closest to grassroots or maybe, we are the grassroots and we can serve as a sounding board or a base for other kinds of research for the future
|Georges Fodouop, |
|15||13||3||* Creates consistency, reproducability, and signals methodical commitment|
* Ensure quality and close existing gaps
|* Increasing show and tell that no one should be left behind within the movement|
* This would have a negative impact. Processes should change to enable knowledge sharing.
* Is this too tactical?
* Research is a means to do it, not a goal
* What if those communities do not want to be told what to do by bureaucrats? What kind of 'institution' would this be?
* Is institutionailze meant as doing research at the WMF or?
|* What does institutionalize mean? I think research should be independent and diverse sources|
* I strongly support this but: by 2030 there should be no emerging communities; too tactical; why related to WMF?; why research only and not action?
|Automation||29||Wikimedia, in order to make all knowledge available in personalized ways and empower contributors to create and curate it, needs increasing automation with a human touch.||Personalization in the sense of lesson curation on Duolingo, for example|
Intellectual work should stay in the hands of the editors
Learning will be personalized
Amount of work on our projects is increasing and changing in nature
Machines should work for the users, not the other way around
Boring work should be automated
|Stéphane Coillet-Matillon, |
|26||19||15||* More time for content capture, less time in "boring" stuff|
* Open sustainable technologies become accessible to the ones who need them most. This shapes planet's future to be more predictable and reliable
* More free and accessible up-to-date information
* More structured knowledge in the world
* This will enable all other thematic statements
|* Better collection of tool requirements that are usable by laypeople would increase the talent pool able to use tools, and heighten dev team productivity|
* Be careful as editors are essential. X2
* We need to start doing more about sharing knowledge of tools community to community
* It might endanger reliability. If you are bold, there's a bigger risk of failing
* Cleaner repository?!?!
* More efficient and happy contributors
|* Add machine learning / heuristic analysis to find patterns and interconnections in the mass of knowledge we would have collected|
* "Give power to people" but what kind of brain structure? That is the main topic
* Take bold "calculated steps"
* Contributions would be faster but humans would not belong there
* There is an assumption here that automation is necessary. Important. I would ask that we explain why this is a goal in itself.
|Automation||30||By 2030, Wikimedia should operate at the forefront of advanced semi-automated open knowledge technologies.||* Can indicate problems with neutrality and coverage|
* New knowledge consumption paradigms
* Inspire the world to do this openly
* Most advanced automated systems are closed (google, facebook, research labs)
* Technologies are controlled by few specialists
|11||2||7||* Inspire the world to think about an open view of tech practice|
* One of the most important aspects would be translation machines (open source) for having all knowledge in all languages
|* With this WP shall attract those, whose desires and wishes are most noble and ingenuous and honorable. It will also save lots of time for these people|
* More work for technical people than content editors
* Wikimedia would become a highly valued workplace in tech industry competing with commercial organizations
* More productivity, efficiency, and fairness
|* Reviewed by humans required?|
* I would also include machines and robots as our editors and readers more machine-friendly wikiprojects
* Losing touch with human
* Semi-auto would be improving knowledge technologies
* WM should develop technical staff + volunteers with capabilities that exceed tech industry average
|Innovation||31||By 2030, Wikimedia should proactively innovate on all aspects of our movement, including community, content, technology, partnerships, and governance. Take bold steps to be a positive, relevant, impactful force in the world.||User: Raymond; user: Spinster, |
User: Esh77 (Shani Evenstein)
|3||6||3||* Could dilute our brand if done without strong leadership. Could draw our strong visionary leaders.|
* Staying up-to-date as to stay a relevant actor in wider change
|* Losing touch with human|
|Innovation||32||From now on until 2030 and beyond, Wikimedia as a movement – communities, WMF, Wikimedia affiliate organizations and other stakeholders – should dare to evolve, be open and supportive of disruptive ideas, willing to experiment, take risks and accept failure, and embrace innovation in order to adapt to the rapidly-changing realities of every human being.||Meriem Machghoul, |
Tim Moritz Hector,
|41||12||0||* In general, I like the ideas, but it should be about the people we want to serve, not us|
* WM will give the world a better internet. Countering bias / commercialization / centralization / etc
* Who knows? Innovation will change the world in unimaginable ways
|* Let's get back to being bold!!|
* Become a leader, not a follower
* That would make us much bolder, on track with recent developments and establish a culture of constant improvement
* We would not remain a 20th century website
* We may lose a few "challenging" current contributors. Win?
* WM projects are still relevant
|* More emphasis on innovation|
* Strongly disruptive ideas can do harm (better rephrase)
|Adapt to Technological Context||33||By 2030, Wikimedia will be quickly adapting to new digital technologies and innovations, to excel in gathering, customized distribution, and structuring of human knowledge to remain relevant.||User: arianit, |
|8||5||0||* This world decreases reliance on monolingual sources and encourages knowledge sharing|
* Knowledge would be accessible through new technical means, thus providing more opportunity for more individuals to take part in learning
|* Reduce human error and increase project collaboration|
* If WM doesn't adapt, it could become obsolete. On the other hand, new tech would force WM to evolve and receive the influx of new editors, supporting roles, and other contributors
* We must innovate to remain relevant and not wither away
* We will sustain relevance and power to lead change
necessary for our survival
* WM becomes more mobile and remains relevant
the community has to accept changes
|* No changes to the statement|
* New technologies, but society advances slow * to understand and accept these technologies. WM technologies will need to be more friendly than they are now
* Must be linked with issue 12 (innovation)
|* WM needs to innovate with the product, UX and the content|
* Such adaptation seems essential but I don't resonate with this statement and have no alternatives
|Adapt to Technological Context||34||By 2030, Wikimedia will provide user experiences that do not limit, but encourage users to share, organize, and access knowledge.||James Hare, |
|6||1||1||* Look like a modern website, we can't think of 2030, if we look like a 1997 website|
* More awareness about the impact of technologies on the landscape of the world
|* This would make users to come back and edit more|
* Change the editing process using different ways / tech
* A more contemporary and fun appearance of knowledge
|* Maybe Wikimedia would enhance new technology and would become a hub for new technologies shaping the world|
* User privacy is going to be a big deal (it's an opportunity for us to lead)
|* Support this! Adapting to make contributing less arcane, more accessible|
|Values||35||By 2030, we live freedom of speech, openness, cooperation, independence, diversity and tolerance and stand for non-profit, fact-based, community-based and supportive knowledge activism open to everyone.||Basak, |
Ahmed El Arosi
|13||6||4||* WM starts to sound like a political movement that is a dangerous road to travel by|
* A safe, borderless virtual space
* Tolerance towards structural (constructive) knowledge
* Invade it
|* Reinforce the current values|
* Great values for our movement
|* WM for everyone|
* It sounds more focused on political activism than on bringing knowledge to the world
* "Nonprofit" = "credible & transparent"
|Reliability & Quality||36||By 2030, Wikimedia should guarantee verifiable, accurate and balanced content across languages to result in reliable knowledge accessible to every individual.||N/A||Geert Van Pamel, |
|15||8||2||* Equal spreading is of knowledge||* To merge one language so everyone can understand|
* Guarantee creates artificial binaries between what we have and what we don't
* This statement should be expanded a lot to include the whole open knowledge movement. We should also inspire others to coorporate with others to make reliable open knowledge available to everyone
* Wikimedia as a movement or Wikimedia organizations?
* What do you mean by 'reliable'?
|Reliability & Quality||37||By 2030, Wikimedia as a movement demonstrates that quality makes knowledge trustable by: providing high-quality information from all kinds of reliable sources to knowledge users around the world, and by having defined means of measuring and monitoring quality and reliability.||Provide tools for the community to ensure quality; support multiple projects and communities to produce content at good quality||Sunil Abraham, |
|8||4||2||* Impartial, not biased, and trusted platform for information|
* reliable sources is one important thing, but sometimes it's hard to define 'a reliable source' for every community there is some bias
* more people would read and use the information provided by the movement
|* Redefine what are reliable sources|
* if we can agree on a list of reliable sources, that would be great for the community
* with a common understanding of quality, we can better measure our impact and verify if we are heading in the right direction;
|* A perspective that unreliable sources is really diverse between communities|