Proposal talk:Reach out by active promotion of content in wiki-weak large languages

From Strategic Planning
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Erik Zachte in topic Let the users request articles

The greatest problem of obscure languages wikis is that we can't really know how they're managed: which policies they follow, etc. Our wikis are successful because of their good policies (neutral point of view, assume good faith). English Wikipedia early users founded other languages Wikipedia and sisterprojects and so disseminated the project, but other wikis may not have any of such users. Maybe we should pay someone to translate core policies, or hire a sort of (local) "community facilitator" like Larry Sanger was? I really don't know. Nemo 07:55, 21 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

See also Proposal:Community sustainability. Nemo 08:00, 21 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

1000 articles every Wikipedia should have

I couldn't agree more that the list of 1000 articles is a good start, but that it is not in all points suitable for most new and small Wikipedias. Such a list should be more "dynamic". For example, the list says that all countries should have an article, but mentions 28 "high priority countries". But to a Swahili reader, countries like Greece or South Korea do not necessarily have such a priority. The Swahili Wikipedians may rather think: first the countries where Swahili is spoken, then the neighbouring countries, then countries with a special significance for our countries. E.g., Britain (as former colonial power) rather than France, country X for economic relations, country Y because many people from there immigrate to the Swahili countries and so on. Of course, the USA are a "high priority country" for all language editions. :-) And so on. History? Have a general article about the subject (what we understand by "history", a short summary of "world history", and the like), and then histories important to Swahili countries. --Ziko 09:28, 25 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. I expect the 100 articles that would target new communities on a practical level will have little in common with the 1000 article of above list. See proposal for more on this. Erik Zachte 19:07, 24 September 2009 (UTC)Reply


Some proposals will have massive impact on end-users, including non-editors. Some will have minimal impact. What will be the impact of this proposal on our end-users? -- Philippe 00:15, 3 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

This proposal is all about drawing in non-editors, and as such will have a major impact, for them and their community. It helps a new community kick off, so that they can help themselves further along. Erik Zachte 19:04, 24 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Encyclopedia vs. manual

Is an encyclopedia really the best format to provide information about health etc.? A howto seems more appropriate, and there are already wikis working on that, like Appropedia. Wouldn't it be better to collaborate with them somehow? --Tgr 06:44, 21 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

There are more ways to do this. And we should not reinvent the wheel. I'm all for collaboration, and asking other organizations to add their expertise. But I'm convinced Wikipedia with its broad international user base, infrastructure and funding would bring these outreach efforts to another level. And yes the form and presentation on Wikipedia might be different, befitting our encyclopedic nature. But even that should be open to debate. An example of an Appropedia topic that would get more notoriety (in a more concise and end user oriented rewrite): Solar and Energy Conserving Food Technologies. Erik Zachte 15:05, 21 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Let the users request articles

I can see the argument that us imposing a 1000 article core pedia would almost certainly become paternalistic. But if we simply supplied the funding and setup the wiki but left it to the readers in that language to request what articles they wanted translated (or expanded), then we avoid many if not all the problems. Its a wiki, let the readers who requested an article on banana pests and diseases protect it from vandalism. If we do a bit of media outreach in the relevant country or language media we could even start off a healthy discussion. Imagine the Yoruba news story what are people voting for to be translated onto Wikipedia - currently Islam, Nelson Mandela and Britney Spears are competing for the top slot with The Moon, Palm Oil, and Osama Bin Laden competing to be the 1000th article translated into Yoruba. WereSpielChequers 09:24, 16 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thx. I welcome the idea of local participation. But isn't there a chicken and egg problem here? You mention local readers. But without any content to start with there are no local readers to begin with. This proposal aims at jumpstarting the wiki by giving readers something worthwile to read. But maybe potential readers could be reached to vote for content even before the wikis starts? Erik Zachte 00:47, 9 November 2009 (UTC)Reply