Key questions/ja

From Strategic Planning
Jump to navigation Jump to search

どんな質問が私たち(コミュニティー)に役立つ建設的な意見だと思いますか。質問を書き加えてください! たくさんお質問をいただいており、さらに多くの質問をいただきたく思います。質問の整理のお手伝いをしてくださる方には下記のことをお願いします。

例えばこんな例があります。

開発途上国の参加者の数はどうすれば増やせますか。#利用者 #事業参加者#empowerment
  • たくさんの興味深い提案ができており、そのうちのいくつかは上記の質問に関連しています。上記の質問に関連する提案にリンクしてください。
  • また、質問にある質問の要約をお願いします。

あなたの国の言語での質問はここにしてください

  • How can we improve the dispute resolution process so that repetitive disputes with no resolution do not distract or discourage contributors? Is there a pattern among content/behavior disputes that seem to go on and on with no end?
  • Ich habe den Eindruck, dass die Wikipedia fortschreitend komplizierter wird. Immer mehr Artikel ufern zu wissenschaftlichen Abhandlungen gespickt mit Unmengen an Fachvokabular und komplexem Formelwerk aus. Das mag auf der einen Seite sinnvoll sein, wenn zum Beispiel Studenten nach dem Begriff "Gravitation" oder "Schwerkraft" suchen. Aber in dem Fall das ein Dritt- oder Viertklässler wissen will, was Schwerkraft ist, hat das keinerlei Wert. Daher stellt sich mir die Frage: Wäre es nicht möglich, besonders Artikel, welche für unterschiedliche Altersgruppen gleichermaßen relevante Themen behandeln auch in auf die einzelnen Altersgruppen abgestimmten Versionen anzubieten? Beispielsweise zum Thema Schwerkraft eine Version streng wissenschaftlicher Natur für Studenten, mit Formelwerk und Co, einer "umgangssprachlichen" für Leute die Allgemeinwissen über Schwerkraft suchen und zum Beispiel einer Grundschüler-verständlichen Version. Wäre das möglich? Und wäre das nicht auch sinnvoll? DBQ424 22:29 UTC, 29. September 2009
    • I can confirm this point. The present status of the nature-science-article-world in Wikipedia is, that it is only useable for people with academic status. And that means only for a minority part of the population. Wikipedia is dominated by students. People who learned a profession (in german called "Berufsausbildung") are not allowed by the others to describe an article that way, they learned it at school. Often this is marked as "wrong". The students cannot accept, that there are different "truth'(s)" in nature science, i.e. if the knowledges are based on "Axioms" that are not as exactly described, as in the university. Nevertheless the result of the work of the not graduated people performs in the daily life. Thus their "Axioms" cannot be wrong. --- Another problem is the Lost in Blue-Links-syndrome. Every article is based on others. And nowhere you can find a basic entrance. If you do not have previous knowledge you cannot enter a new knowledge area with the help of Wikipedia. If you are clicking through the links you often come back to the links you already searched an explanation for. Thus there should be a structure-reform: Some articles should be basic articles as an introduction. -- 84.132.122.143 04:14, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Wie kann man erreichen, dass mehr Personen freien Zugang zum Internet haben und diesen auch nutzen möchten?
  • My major interest is to make Wikipedia a more active participant in the Semantic Web. Yes, there exist the "gateways" to content through Freebase and DBpedia. However, adding more ability for a contributor to make annotation (semantically-intended markup) can increase vastly the usefulness. The contributor is the best person to provide structured metadata for semantic access. What is already happening in this arena? How can I contribute? Proposal:Semantic_Wikipedia Deeptext 27 August 2009
  • How can we get more diverse contributors? #participation2
    • How to identify possibly untapped sources of contribution?
      • Why are they untapped?
        • Probably because they don't have Internet Access. see Proposal:Distributed_Wikipedia for a way to solve that. Lkcl 13:42, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
        • How do we create incentive || lower the barrier?
    • Maybe the number of edits per user, correlated with article categorizations could allow some insights? I.e. which kinds of topics are edited by what user profile? (We currently do these things on database dumps, is that right?)
  • How do we move our focus away from western culture and encourage cultural contributions from non-wired (or less-wired) places? #reach2, #participation4
      • Why? Wired people read this and wired people want the knowlegde and opinion of wired people.
    • Let us first concentrate on supporting the contributions of non western cultures that are wired. Let us first ensure that languages are technically properly supported.
      • Why? I trust that the point of this strategy session is to work out ideas rather than define in advance what problems should be solved. Lkcl 13:42, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
    • Once we support our existing languages, we should look on how to find support for non-wired or less-wired people and places.
    • When we focus on other cultures, the first priority is to ensure that other cultures are represented in our projects, in this way we remove systemic bias. Systemic bias is essentially indicative of a non neutral point of view.
  • How do we more effectively communicate that the WMF is a charity? #basics1
    • By making it easy to donate. In Europe for instance most people do not use paypal and only pay into accounts within their country.
      • On the contrary, plenty of Europeans use Paypal. What part of Europe are you from? Certainly here in Western and Northern Europe Paypal is common.
        • Yes paypal is common in Europe, but I doubt that the majority of people use Paypal, where as the majority do have a bank account.
    • Are there other ways of getting that message across, allowing donations doesn't necessarily indicate that WMF is a charititable organization.
      • Why not tell people WMF is a charity? Telling people even an obvious truth can go along way.
      • Are donations tax-deductible? If so, say so!
      • Publicize your contributors, large and small. "WMF is supported in part by the Mickey and Minnie Moneybags Charitable Trust, an educational grant from Burger Bell, the Save The Blibbet Foundation ... and by [web] viewers like you."
        • How about like gmail's web clips?
      • Suggest people ask about employer matching gift programs. This is an quck way to double the sizes of some donations.
  • Where will the world, particularly technical and online world, be in 5 years? #organizational_environment1 (short answer: orbiting the sun)
  • It seems increasingly clear that the future of news will include a significant "citizen journalism" component, especially in the form of professional-amateur collaboration. However, English Wikinews and most other Wikinews projects have failed to reach a critical mass of participation, and many Wikimedians see the current Wikinews model as inadequate and unlikely to succeed-in part because the Publication system of Wikinews prevents the kind of feedback cycle of Wikipedia, where readers are shown incomplete content and given a chance to improve it and write more. How could Wikinews or another Wikimedia project be reworked to provide a compelling way for people to participate in the production and consumption of journalism on a large scale? #projectissue1
    • Old news is no news. What is old news good for?
  • Ditto for the future of textbooks and the Wikibooks model. #projectissue1
  • Ditto for the future of educational courses, learning objects, and the Wikiversity model. #projectissue1
  • Which metrics should be considered? For example, how important is number of donors versus number of editors, and are the stats needed to assess this being tracked in a useful way? #fundraising101
  • Who are the Wikimedia stakeholders? #organizationalenvironment2
    • How can we make sure their interests are represented? #organizationalstructure1
    • How are their efforts supported and possibly funded? #organizationalstructure1
  • As increased work goes into branding Wikimedia, how will that brand be conveyed consistently across all languages? #quality0
    • For example, one of the above points is "effectively communicate that the WMF is a charity" - how can you make this happen globally, beyond simple translations of US press releases?
      • You have to understand that the American concept of "charity" is not the same in other countries. Even if it is clearer that it is a charity, it will not help. In Europe we do not show patronage the same way, we help organizations through our taxes. We contribute less directly on an individual basis. The American charity patronage system exists because of your history, economy and tax system.
  • Do we have an effective process for the creation of new large-scale projects, such as wikifamily or wikikids? (Question by SJ, transcribed by philippe) -- Philippe 04:58, 29 July 2009 (UTC) Answer: Yes. See m:Proposals_for_new_projects, so there is a process. Please clarify which part isn't effective in that process.
  • How should MediaWiki look like five years from now? Is en:Google Wave the next MediaWiki? #meta
  • What is key, our content projects or our contentprojects using MediaWiki.
    • If MediaWiki is not essential to our projects, what aspects of MediaWiki are ?
  • Maybe en:distributed databases like CouchDB (our database is MySQL) would be better in countrys where data transfer to the United States is expensive and unreliable (technically and politically). #meta
  • What do you think about a text-to-speech system or a speech-to-text system as a front-end for MediaWiki? (A lot of people can´t read or write and even more don´t have computers but telephones) #reach (Proposals/Audio offerings)
    • It should be easy to run up a very basic java based java/swing/freetts based wiki reader (I've already done a Project Gutenberg reader for a friend of mine which will be heading into the PD at some point when I get round to cleaning it up a tad). It becomes problematic the moment you need anything more sophisticated. Alink to my blog where I expose the engine is here:[1] The problems I have so far identified are as follows: 1. availability per user of a java JRE (so maybe we need to use java webstart + a browser client or something similar in a full blown one); 2. availability of a workable voice per language (most of the PD voices e.g. kevin are frankly horrible) and because the voices are language dependant you will need one for every language to be supported, constructing (or even locating these in the first place) is not a trivial matter; 3. speech recognition or some other context appropriate mechanism to allow the reader to change flow and follow a link or a hyperlink; 4. speech recognition or other mechanism to allow searches; 5. the reader will need to understand wiki page layout in order to handle tags and miscellaneous directives; 6. other as yet to be identified issues... Sjc 07:45, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Most of the available speech-to-text systems are specific to a given language, and even to an individual speaker (The software needs to be trained before use. I doubt that even in five years time there will be sufficient technological advances to make this possible in an automated fashion. Maybe users could record speech and others could transribe, and still others translate where necessary. It is certainly a great idea to look into as many input methods as possible to increase the possibility of participation.
    • AT&T has a good online text-to-speech reader with several languages (http://www.research.att.com/~ttsweb/tts/demo.php), someone from Wikipedia should contact them and see how much they would charge for using it.
  • I have been looking into Special:Log for doing some statistics. I was interested in what happens after creating a new user account. I found out, after login some editors start editing within five minutes, most editors need between five minutes and one hour, but there were also some who start editing the next day. Editing immediately means they don´t read the welcome text with much attention. Remembering that most editors do less than 5 or 10 edits at all, investing more than a few minutes in reading the help text might be to time consuming for some minor edits. Maybe we should think how to increase the number of edits of these short time editors. Which information do they need to edit MediaWiki? #participation
  • Can we ensure a long-term financial stability, matching (exponentially) increasing costs with donations?--Yaroslav Blanter 18:19, 29 July 2009 (UTC) #reach
    • How can we ensure long-term financial stability? Government grants, non-profit/NGO sponsorship, endowment? 98.226.198.121 05:53, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
    • The internet archive has found that while the amount of data they need to archive is growing exponentially, the cost of storage is decreasing exponentially, both coincidentally (or not-so-incidentally) at the rate predicted by Moore's law. So it's quite possible that our costs will remain fairly stable. --Kim Bruning 11:01, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
  • From our common life experience it follows that no project can be in an uncontested leadership position in the information and communication field for more than 10 years. Are we ready to face serious competition in 5 years?--Yaroslav Blanter 18:31, 29 July 2009 (UTC) #quality #participation
    • Competition is growing now, what with all the people we've jilted and all. Look at Tropeswiki for a project that is growing fast --Kim Bruning 19:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Are we ready to repel possible organizer efforts, say by governments, to recruit editors in order to establish NPOV in certain topics?--Yaroslav Blanter 18:31, 29 July 2009 (UTC) #meta #reach #quality
    • We've already been doing that for a while now. --Kim Bruning 19:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Is developing "professional" articles like science topics our priority? How are we going to attract highly skilled editors able to write such articles? --Yaroslav Blanter 18:32, 29 July 2009 (UTC) #quality #meta #participation
    • That would be hard. At one point, scientists did occaisionally write a wikipedia article first, just to establish priority. With the advent of vastly over-the-top Original Research policies, we are now no longer as attractive. --Kim Bruning 10:48, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
    • First: Yes. Second: I think science people live from getting quotes. If a scientiest writes an exceptional article, maybe it should be possible to quote him (you have to take sure that this article is not edited after that too much then, too).
    • Another Idee: What do you think of different levels of information about a topic. Often the "normal user" needs only some plain informations about the topic. This could be done in an encyclopedia entry. But for more interested users oder experts in this topic, this is not enough. In my profession there is a serious difference between what amateurs want (and have) to know an what eperts want and have to know.
  • How do we make this a productive use of time, and not just a long-winded exercise in vacuous corporate-speak? Ideas like "strategic planning" and "mission statements" and "vision papers" are the death of productivity, as they take time away from actually solving real problems. I have no problem working through problems as long as that's what we do, and not just develop empty meaningless documents filled with the latest corporate-babble culled from some management textbook. This should be productive, and not just a Franklin/Covey conference. --Jayron32 22:45, 29 July 2009 (UTC) #process
    • Each of us can try to find problems that look interesting, and we can BOLDly start taking steps to work on solving them right away. There's no need to wait. {{sofixit}}
  • Can we find a way for every publisher of any sort that does basic data mining and research into primary sources were to share that work directly on WP and sister projects. Publishers using free media and spending time and effort vetting their licenses should update the license info (with any high-fidelity assurances they tracked down) directly on Commons. Librarians curating an exhibit, even in cases where they are not willing to or cannot make their digital works available under the right license, can share their curatorial comments and bibliographies. As long as professional publishers and curators feel unwelcome on the projects, they won't discover the ways in which they have already-free knowledge to contribute. - question by SJ on foundation-l. Added by -- Philippe 00:05, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Are we willing to increase effort and spendings to reach out to underdeveloped/developing countries, and thus make Jimmy Wales' often repeated statement on interviews almost from the beginning a less empty promise? #reach
    • One way would be to define a set of topics that cover basic human needs (hygiene, health, nutrition, etc) and focus on providing articles within those topics in all major non western languages, then focus on cost effective means of distribution of the content so that as many people as possible can have free and easy access to that content in their language of choice. Added by Erik Zachte 01:46, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Are any central (WMF) efforts to promote creation of 'essential' content (see previous point) in small wikipedias compatible with the philosophy of empowerment, independence and self-reliance for each individual wikipedia? Added by Erik Zachte 01:46, 30 July 2009 (UTC) #projectissue2
  • Since as many as 50% of the medical doctors in the United States at least occasionally consult Wikipedia, and about 10% of those at least occasionally edit;[2] [3] how can we improve both the quality of our medical articles and improve the quality of the editing of doctors? Fred Bauder 02:18, 30 July 2009 (UTC) #quality
    • Digital Signatures, backed up by "Web of Trust", on contributions. look up the Debian Keyring. Any edits going into "medical" category could be required to use a desktop application (which has convenient and secure access to the GPG key) or ... to go via an IP address that is known to be a Medical Establishment, or... something. any contributions NOT made by people with GPG or other Digital Certificates should be automatically highlighted in "red", with a big warning at the top of the page. There should be several different categories of "medical" - "western medical" as well as "homeopathic", ayurvedic etc. so as to avoid lock-in. there's enough problems with western medicine as it is, without spreading its reach and insane costs over to the rest of the world (look up cuba's preventative medicine practices as a counter-example, and also look up how the victorians used to cut the fingers off of ayurvedic doctors, in india) Lkcl 13:58, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
  • As Wikipedia settles into being a prominent website, more and more businesses are attempting to either create or edit articles for public relations purposes. How can we either reasonably accommodate them or manage their editing? Fred Bauder 02:18, 30 July 2009 (UTC) #quality
  • How about a serious study of error: its origin, detection, correction and control following up on this essay in the English Wikipedia En:User:Fred Bauder/Error management. Fred Bauder 17:06, 30 July 2009 (UTC) #quality, #projectissue3
In addition to Fred's essay, there was an intriguing study of the 100 biographical articles about the U.S. senators, which found them to be deliberately wrong about 6.8% of the time. -- Thekohser 17:34, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
  • What metrics do we use to measure the health of a wikimedia community in a particular language? Number of articles? Contributors? Rates of growth? Article quality?
    • Quantity and quality of localisation, the relative ability of MediaWiki to support that language. The size of the target audience..
    • I think we also need to look at what point the wiki is in the wiki-life cycle, number of people who actually understand how the consensus system works (or whatever else the wiki is using), etc. --Kim Bruning 19:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
  • To the extent that wikis in a language important to developing world users (Hindi, Urdu, Swahili, Bengali, Tamil, Marathi, Hausa) are smaller, less active and lower quality than those of European languages with a small number of speakers, is this a "problem" the community needs to address to meet the stated social and development goals of the project?
    • I suspect it's actually somewhat hard to recruit people from different cultures, partially because they are different cultures; that might not put the same value on things like wikipedias ;-) --Kim Bruning 19:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
  • If there's a need to promote development in certain language communities, what actions are appropriate by the Wikimedia Foundation? Paying contributors? Campaigns to recruit volunteer contributors? Outreach to universities? Ethanz 18:42, 30 July 2009 (UTC) #reach, #participation
  • Should Wikipedia start to take action against the exclusionism of some activities, such as Requests for Admininship, etc? Just because someone doesn't edit a lot, doesn't mean they wouldn't be a good administrator. #participation Iceflow 14:13, 30 July 2009 (UTC) #projectissue4
  • Can Wiki(pedia, versity, etc) survive in the long term with one leader managing ALL the projects? Iceflow #meta 14:13, 30 July 2009 (UTC) #rhetoric
  • Should we look at branching out into other Wiki formats, such as a parenting wiki, and a children's wiki? YaHooligans came out well from having a kids only service. Maybe we need to look at widening the Wikiscope. #reach, #participation, #scope Iceflow 14:13, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Does Wikia fit this bill? --Kim Bruning 10:58, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
  • What do we do with all the really tiny fiddly wikis which hardly anybody uses? If we close them, we risk robbing people of an opportunity to use their own language. Should we have a Wiki Task Force dedicated to promotion of the tiny wikis, so that we can help maintain their survival? #reach, # participation Iceflow 14:13, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
  • How can we adapt the work of OmegaWiki for Wikisource? Is there any way that we could merge the two? NuclearWarfare 15:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Why wikisource? Omegawiki is an online translating dictionary. Wouldn't a merger with wiktionary be more logical? --Kim Bruning 19:42, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
  • Should we devise a large survey for national populations (ie, one without a free response bias) about the WMF projects? NuclearWarfare 15:55, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Should non-wiki formats be developed to store data that is compatibly licensed but not appropriate for MediaWiki storage? Eg, weather data, USGS history of earthquakes. --Brian McNeil 09:45, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Commons provides mashing ability to external MediaWiki wikis. Would it not make sense for us to mash the data from partners who are happy to procide the data to us?
    • When GLAM make their data available online, would it not make sense to mash their data on Commons and on our projects? It might even make it easier for our community to help with annotations ...
    • Better to retrieve the data (more or less) live from external sources (authorities in their domain), for example using the extension | External Data? 84.56.234.228 09:54, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • What about using IdeaTorrent to track community ideas and proposals? from foundation-l, through -- Philippe 21:05, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Have you already edited one of the Wikimedia projects? Will you come back and edit again? #participation (Proposals/Alumni)
  • For Google-news the English wikipedia is a news source. What are the consequences? #reach
  • How do we strengthen the credibility of Wikipedia articles (academic / social / political credibility?) Is it even an issue? Will increased credibility allow Wikipedia articles be used more often as formal reference? Such as in academic discussions? #reach
    • What about a Wikipedia trust-metrics system? See De Alfaro and Massa works.
  • How do you use the content of the wikimedia projects? #meta #participation
  • How should Wikimedia engage with organizations or groups with shared mission, such as health educators, cultural sector with education and outreach mandates, formal education, out-of-school time education, cultural heritage preservationists etc.?#reach #participation #quality
  • Caffeine, Google's new search engine is in beta. Apparently, trials of the new algorithm are dropping Wikipedia results lower down results pages. Thoughts? Insights? User:Serita Aug 13, 2009
  • What makes an encyclopaedia useful? What makes this encyclopaedia more useful than that one? (I would suggest when you look something up, that there is an article on it. Deletionists please think about this.)
  • What are Wikimedia Embassy for? #meta
  • How do we weed out experts using Wikipedia to promote their POV from experts using Wikipedia to promote human knowledge? And how do we do it without driving away the very people we want to keep?
  • How do we attract more female contributors? Our reach statistics show a predominance (overwhelming) of men. How can we be diverse and leave out that large chunk of the population? -- Philippe 04:04, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
  • How can one discover and benefit from Wikipedia articles when blind, driving, or with eyes closed?
    • How useful are text-to-speech engines atm? --Kim Bruning 10:58, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
  • How can we handle references better, since the actual way of referencing sources in the MW software is rather poor?
  • How we can update external data more easily into articles?
  • Is wikisource just another Project Gutenberg? --88.102.101.245 08:50, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
    • This might be a possibility for articles that have proven overly contentious or where trivia keeps crowding out more important material. - Jmabel 16:27, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Can we come up with a more active way to let some large number of people know about articles we are missing and should have? #participation - Jmabel 16:32, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Can we work with academia so that writing for a wiki is more of an academically taught skill? #participation #quality - Jmabel 16:35, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • What can we do to get academics to release more of their own writing under free licenses? #participation #quality - Jmabel 16:35, 22 September 2009 (UTC)


戦略のプロセスに関する質問

  1. これらの質問をチェックしてから提案のページにもどる方法がありますか? Philippe(ユーザー) 2009. 7.29 17:52 (UTC)

利用者に関する質問

  1. 今現在この事業に参加しているが使わない人とどのようにしてコンタクトするのですか? #利用者
  2. まだインターネットにアクセスしたことのない人、インターネットにアクセスしない人にもこのサービスを利用できるようにするために何をすればいいですか? #利用者
    1. このサービスがその言語で使えることをまず最初に伝えなければならない。様々な言語のサポートはいまだ大きな問題。
  3. 政府がアクセスを禁止している国の人にもこのサービスを利用できるようにするために何をすればいいですか? #利用者
    1. 一番よい方法はその地域に回線がなくてもウィキペディアにアクセスできるようにすることだと思います。
    2. ウィキメディアは、その国の人のため、インターネットの知識に無料でアクセスできるように政府にはたらきかけていくべきだ。失敗しても、案が通るようにウィキメディアは政府にはたらきかけていくべきだ。そしてその国に西洋の民主主義を教えていく。そうすればその国の国民はウィキペディアの全コンテンツにわたりアクセスするかもしれない。 #交渉
  4. 急増している携帯機器ユーザーにもこのサービスを利用できるようにするために何をすればいいですか? #利用者
  5. 使いやすいフォームでずっとこのサービスを利用できるようにするために何をすればいいですか? #コンタクト
  6. 多言語でしかもまだ大きなウィキペディアコミュニティがない発展途上国の人にもこのサービスを利用できるようにするために何をすればいいですか? #コンタクト
    • アフリカだったら支援団体にたのむべき。アフリカのウィキペディアオフィスは我々にお金の支援を求めているならやったらいい。そうすればそこで若者は彼らの言語でウィキペディア事業に参加できるし、少ないが給料も得られる。コンピュータの使用料、従業員の賃金のためにお金が必要だから、1、2年たってその言語での投稿が少ないのならお金の支援を打ち切ればいい。 Mats33 2009.9.22 10:23 (UTC)
    • 携帯機器に対応し続けていくには何をすればいいですか? #利用者4
      • JSONRPC かウェブ・ベースのRPC APIがあればいいとおもう。そのページがれば編集もできる。だけど特定の機器があれば開発者はカスタマイズできてしまうという問題がある。(ちょっと質問を超えちゃったね。ゴメン。)Lkcl 2009.8.23 13:46 (UTC)
    • コモンズは英語が使えない人にはあまり役にたたない。500万ものメディア・ファイルから目的のファイルをどうやって探すか。それが問題だ。#クオリティー
      • 昔オメガウィキにひっかかる小さいプログラムを書いたけどおかげで特定の言語のかわりに「defined meanings」を検索できた。それぞれの言語で検索は可能だとおもう。Kim Bruning 2009.9.3 10:58 (UTC)
  7. 閲覧者数を表示するシステムはウィキメディア利用者を増やしていますか? #利用者
  8. この事業の参加者を増やしこの事業の存在を利用者に知らせるにはどうすればいいですか? #利用者

事業参加者に関する質問

  1. 事業の中心になっているボランティアにどう支援するか? #事業参加者
  2. 新しく事業にボランティアに参加しようとする人にこの事業の価値をどう伝えるか? #参加者
    1. その価値をどう拡めるか? #参加者
  3. メディアウィキをもっと使いやすくするためにはどうすればいいか? #事業参加者
    1. プレゼンテーションとコンテンツを切り離すべきか?メディアウィキの情報はメディアウィキのリピーター以外には理解しづらい。
  4. インターネットに常時接続していない参加者をどう支援するか? #事業参加者
  5. 教師や作家をウィキペディアにどうとりこむか?
  6. 参加者をどう理解し報いるか?今の現状で彼らは満足か?これからも参加してくれるだろうか?
    1. 他のボランティア(編集者、イメージファイル製作者、ビデオファイル製作者、オーディオファイル製作者、寄付者)にくらべて参加者には理解があるか?
    2. 商業目的の寄付者、参加者にはとても感謝しているが、こういう理由でなく寄付してくれる人をどのようにして把握できるか?
  7. 参加を楽しくするにはどうすればいいか?

クオリティーに関する質問

  1. 効果的に目に見えるかたちで著作権を主張する団体とどう協調していくか。彼らに著作権を解放させるためにどうすればいいか? #クオリティー
  2. 専門分野の記事で、効果的に目に見えるかたちで大学組織、その他の組織とどう協調していくか。彼らに我々の記事に参加してもらいウィキペディアのクオリティーを上げてもらうためにどうすればいいか? #クオリティー
  3. クオリティーを損なう編集(破壊の意志のある編集、悪意のある編集など)を避けるためにどうすればいいかどうすればいいか? またそういう編集をされた場合にどう回復させるか? #クオリティー
    どうして匿名の編集をマークしないのか(ますます厄介になる悪意の編集など)?
    そういうことをすれば、アカウントをつくろうとしない有能な編集者をまた失うことになる。とくにはじめて利用する人、校正する人。ドイツのウィキペディアは誰でも編集できるようにしているが、記事を保存するまえに匿名で編集する人は登録しなければならない。 "zur aktuellen version" (最新のバージョンを読む).という文字をクリックすれば記事を読める。このシステムは他の国のウィキペディアでも使えると思う。匿名ユーザーに見られていると感じても気軽に参加できる。
  4. ユーザーにクオリティーの低い記事を見つける手伝いをしてもらうにはどうすればいいか?またそういう記事をみつけた場合にどう修正するか?またそのリポートをもらった場合、その記事を修正するにはどうすればいいか? #クオリティー
  5. よい貢献に対して名前を掲載するためにどうすればいいか?
  6. 編集の自由度を制限せずに専門家の記事を優先させるためにどうすればいいか?
  7. ウィキペディア財団はCitizendium or Veropediaのようなウィキペディアほど自由に編集できる環境のない事業を支援すべきか? #クオリティー - Jmabel 2009.9.22 16:27 (UTC)
  8. (たとえば政治的経済関心で)議論に乗っ取られたページでの意見のカルテルをどう防ぐか?そういうページをどうみつけ議論を専門家にどう判断してもらうか? #クオリティー
  9. そういう忠告をしてくれる人をどのようにして優先するか?どの分野の記事にそういう忠告が必要か?
  10. 異なる言語のウィキペディア間でのクオリティーコントロール機能をよくしていくにはどうすればいいか?

Can we encourage other language versions of wikipedia to implant the best quality control process from others instead of reinvent the whole process? #quality - (Xiaowei) 小為 16:32, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

  1. How can we strike a better balance between objectivity/NPOV and first party contributions? Current practice/policy discouraging or excluding first party participants shrinks the pool of subject matter experts. Paul C. Lasewicz 13:39, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Questions regarding GLAM technical issues

  1. What does GLAM mean? GLAM is an acronym for galleries, libraries, archives and museums.
  2. What is the impetus for GLAM (galleries, libraries, archives and museums) to connect with wikimedia?
  3. What does free culture mean to GLAM?
  4. What makes GLAM-WIKI outcomes unique?
    • Clarification requested on the term "GLAM-WIKI"
  5. How does this partnership translate to KPI?
    • Clarification requested on the term "KPI"
  6. Who owns Wikimedia content created in partnership with GLAM?
  7. Who funds new content development?
  8. Who and how is it branded?
  9. What links are established to connect to original content?
  10. Is wikimedia content supplementing, enhancing, subsuming GLAM?
  11. Who participates in the network?
  12. What is the role of content in that network?
  13. How is value generated?
  14. How do communities collaborate with institutions in the construction of knowledge?
  15. How are these networks maintained in the process of assessing, acquiring, collecting and distributing content over time?
  16. How can a blocked user be desblocked?
  17. Wie kann die Teilname an solchen Diskussionen für nicht englisch sprechende Wikipedianer verbessert werden. es sollten mindestens die sprachen der 10 grösten Wikipedias einbezogen werden. So ist z.B. bei der Usability-Initiative nicht möglich in einer anderen Sprache mitziarbeiten. 89.245.225.251 01:57, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
  18. How can we build APIs so that Wikipedia can be contributed to from 3rd Party Website? And also update 3rd Party Website? Is this achievable in real time using something such as XMPP pubsub both to lower the "pollin" load and to move wikipedia to Real Time which seems to be where the web is going (the web is all about compressing time and space)? The way I think APIs could be useful is that "sections" of Wikipedia should be able to be edited from more "expert sites". The expert site could be for instance a semantic extraction of all Medical articles, and integrated into a specific website of a Medical Universities, researchers etc... For APIs to work well I agree that Wikipedia must first excel in web semantics (so that semantic sections such as "all medical articles in English" can be extracted by an API). API are also a great way to attract financial contributions (above a certain number of API calls by a commercial entity these API queries can be charged for while remaining free from non-commercial entities). If we look into the future, I think there are lessons also to be learned from technological advances such as Google Wave. I think that the first lesson is that one of the component of the future of the web is to move to Real Time (using things such as XMPP) at least would be very nice for WikiNews. The XMPP "PubSub" mechanism is especially interesting overall (this is what the Facebook NewsFeed is built on I would assume). I also think that Wikipedia ought to be much more customizable and social. For this my suggestion is to enable to allow not only to "watch" an article but a Semantic theme such as: "Medical", "article containing events between 1900-1950", "Common Law", "criminal law", "any article linking to Descartes"; "any article linked from Descartes", etc....) and so that the user can get a customized feed for these. #participation

Questions regarding IT and other internal technical issues

  • Will Wikipedia move away from a centralised server? How about distributing server loads across different volunteers? You could cut costs and speed things up, but you'd need a new architecture to get things going and make it work reliably.
  • The text of wikipedia is safe, based on the large number of people who download the dumps. There is no database dump of the image database. How do we ensure long-term survivability in the event of a disaster? #reach5
    • Note that there are off-site backups of the image database, just not publicly accessible ones. See recent tech blog entry.--Eloquence 23:56, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
      • Cool. Budget would be good. "Real men don't make backups. Real men upload their data to FTP, and let the rest of the wolrd download it" --L. Torvalds ;-) Though... 4T is an issue, that's 4 HD's! Bittorrent might not quite be able to handle that... Perhaps we could sell sets of hard disks or so? --Kim Bruning 22:50, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
      • Proposal:Distributed_Wikipedia - a peer-to-peer distributed protocol would make it "unnecessary" - or should it be called "automatic" - to make "separate backups". Lkcl 13:42, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
  • How can we move knowledge from flat text to a structured ontology? This would allow for improved machine responses to questions and assisted automatic translation. RDF?
  • One thing which would radically transform the landscape would be a wiki tools factory. A number of the proposals are already looking at using wikis in a less than traditional client-server fashion, and if this is to be achieved, tooling across a disparity of both programming and natural languages is almost an inevitability. One way forward would be to have a development site not dissimilar in concept to something like Sourceforge, for construction, versioning and distribution of the tooling. Sjc 08:21, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • How to make wikipedia a credible resource - it is still not trusted as a valid source of information in the commercial sector

資金に関する質問

将来的な戦略(現状維持においても同様)は、資金の戦略があってはじめて完璧なものとなる。 ウィキペディア財団は実際の請求に答えるために資金をもつ必要がある。資金は寄付によってまかなわれる。これが唯一にして最大の戦略ではないか?この戦略だけで十分だろう?資金の戦略はもっと議論されるべきだ。 現在の資金に関するアイデアは、 こちらをご覧ください。

戦略的ウィキ案内

参加をお願いします!

Dialog-information.svg タスクフォースが求めるものを語り合いましょう。
Emblem-question.svg 知識の基本Wikimedia-pediaに投稿しましょう。
Emblem PR.svg 言葉を広げましょう

選ばれた内容:

Wikimedia-logo.svg ニュース:
Strategy Memo to the Board
Wikimedia Strategic Planning logo (3).svg 知識ベース:
Participation
Emblem-star.svg 提案:

Right to Left support

Cog-scripted-svg.svg 参加方法

この時点で質問と提案を集めてきました。今こそ討論し、どのように大きな方向性に結び付けるか理解すべきときです。関心があると思われるリンクを数個下記に掲げます。

答えが必要な質問は討論を始める重要な点です。

»  ウィキメディアはどうあるべきか
»  参加申し込み
»  タスクフォースはどんなものか
»  参加方法
»  ウィキ上で手助けするのに何ができるか。

Cog-scripted-svg.svg この計画の進行状況

»  この運動について
»  コミュニティーの指針
»  FAQ