Who can conduct the interviews with employees from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's Global Libraries Initiative
As on-the-ground employees in India, China, etc. from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's Global Libraries Initiative expressed interest for interview, who of us can conduct the interviews?
We need understand their background and design a good questionnaires.
Hi Mountain, We (Bridgespan) suggested reaching out to contacts that we have through the Bill and Melinda Gates' Foundation's Global Libraries Initiative - they haven't requested an interview at this point.
If it seems like they could have useful information, we will take the lead on making contact. Does this help?
Last edit: 21:55, 1 July 2010
Thanks, Laura. I had gotten the info from People to Interview, but I might misunderstand it.
Just something to note - if you're doing "newsworthy" interviews it would be really good to see them go up on Wikinews - there is even a zh version. --Brian McNeil 01:38, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Very good idea, Brian. In general, there's an opportunity for us to be sharing lots of our work through Wikinews and other places. For example, perhaps the final output of our work should also be published on Wikibook.
Over the past few weeks, there's been some great discussions about the task force recommendations. There's some great energy here on this wiki, and I want to start moving toward completion. That includes:
- Integrating the feedback into the existing recommendations
- Filling in gaps (areas such as movement roles, expanding content, and reader conversion)
- Evaluation and prioritizing the recommendations
- Writing a draft plan
To get this work done, I'm proposing the creation of a Strategy Task Force. I hope that you all will read and help refine the proposal, and I especially hope that many of you sign up for the Task Force. Let's also move the discussions there so that we can have a central place to discuss next steps for strategy. Thanks!
We are all talking about this news in China. Many people believe that the government would not only stop Google.cn but also Google.com. We can wait to see the result. If Google.com were blocked, this would be a great failure of China. But I still think: Openness is the main theme of the past 20 years in China, none can change this trend in the long term.
If Google were blocked in China, what would that mean for Wikipedia in China? Any thoughts?
If Google were blocked in China again, this means a more difficult environments for the whole Internet industry in China.
- Last month, lots of rumors are there that the government would setup a white list of DNS, any website not in the white list are forbidden.
- They also setup a law that the ISP should take responsibility of the content which served by them; this law is a evil thing that a lots of small website were shut down only because one of them contains some sensitive information.
As a professional in IT industry, sometimes I can not image who made such stupid decisions. But the fact is the government do not think so.
Just as I said in the report, the tension between the regulation/censorship system and the public on Internet will continue in the new decade.
This group has done a lot of great work, given some tough circumstances. I've made a pass at reorganizing the main task force page to capture the work that you all have done.
- Some of the data is in Mandarin. Can someone translate it into English?
- What's Task force/China/Working draft supposed to be?
Also, it's time to start moving towards recommendations, which are due next Tuesday. You already have a start at Task force/China/Recommendation. Please look to complete that.
Has anyone considered placing mirrors of Wikimedia projects inside of China. A friend that has lived in China told me that as long as you visited sites within China, the internet connections where realy good. But as soon as you tried to connect to website outside it became increadibly slow. He had an internet connection of 20Mbit, but still it could take about a minute to login to facebook. If the projects are slow to connect to this will certainly lower the use of them.
There are some legal considerations for why we might not want to have system mirrors. I'll see if I can get Mike Godwin to post some thoughts.
That would be very good. Mirrors are something I have thought about whether it is a good idea to use over at the local language projects too, because I realy think access speed is a real problem for growth. And "within country" speeds seem to be severly higher than "global" speeds.
I added a few paragraphs to system mirrors with an explanation from Mike Godwin on legal issues.
The access speed is an important issue. If you look at the theory of change diagram, you can see that without an investment in fundamental issues like access speed, we're not going to be able to improve reach, participation, etc.
That said, I'm curious. Can anyone on China give us a qualitative sense of what access speed is like over there? It would be good to add on the China page.
I have asked a couple of friends that has lived for at least a couple of months in a couple of countries about this problem to try to get some feel for the different connection speeds around the world. My findings are in the "Could Wikipedia be to slow to load in many countries?" thread at the local language project (Don't know how to link to a thread).
This is the summary from a frind that has lived for some years in western China:
A lot has happened from 2004 to 2008. In 2008 I think I had an internet connection of 20Mbit, which I also think was the slowest choice available. As long as you visited sites within China the connection speed was very good. But as soon as you tried to access other sites it became very slow. It could take about a minute to login to Facebook. The internet provider where China Telecom (http://en.chinatelecom.com.cn/)
I hope you mean 20kbits. 20Mbits is fast!
China is a unique case. Wikipedia might be slow to load in regions with high bandwidth because of the firewall.
In general, you make an important point. I really like what you wrote on the regional bandwidth page (I renamed the page).
I should also clarify what I wrote before. Even though we don't mirror, we could certainly cache, which would improve access. I just talked to Kul Wadhwa about this, and he suggested there might be legal issues with caching as well. I'm updating the system mirrors page, and will try to get more information there.
Actually the answer I got from him was 20Mbit, but it was written and he can have made a typo and I havn't had time to check with him. But he said the connection was "very fast" within China so it could be that his connection actually was that good. But I guess someone from China could give better details on this (Mountain?).
I also think that mirrors or caches could be a solution for many different countries if it is not to difficult to implement or too costly to maintain. Because at http://www.numion.com/YourSpeed3/Graphs.php the statistics seems to indicate that the "within country" speeds are at least twice the "outside country" speeds. And it is not uncommon that the "within" speed is several times higher than the "outside" speeds, some times more than 10 times. The statistics on the page is not complete and I'm not sure if any African country is listed at all. With the limmited amount of cables connected to Africa (increasing though), it is likely that the differences are even larger there.
I move Josh's points on Strategy 4 here, and below are his advices:
- What about university student groups such as Linux Users Group and Open Source Software "clubs"? They usually have the time and education to be a Contributor/Editor and are already interested in Open Source and Open Web. If enough students are interested, could even form Wikipedia clubs at Universities.
- If Baidu does not want to form a partnership, what about forming a partnership with one of their partners, such as Sohu/Sogou. Could use their Sogou Cloud Pinyin service on Zh Wikipedia and help them redistribute Wikipedia content on their search engines, wikis, and mobile apps.
- Build a partnership with a Mobile Phone provider and give them distributed content in a mobile phone format, such as Wapedia.
- 1 Support Role that is necessary (Gov. Liason).
- 1 Opportunity: University Students
- 1 possible partner: Sohu/Sogou
- and one project: making it easier for Chinese companies to re-distribute read-only Wikipedia content with backlinks.
And corresponding Documentation or API. --JoshW 09:12, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Hudong.com Confirms Expansion into Overseas Market, Invading Wikipedia's territory By: PR Newswire Nov. 12, 2009 01:30 PM
BEIJING, Nov. 12 /PRNewswire-Asia/ -- Hudong.com, the world's largest Chinese encyclopedia website, today announced a strategic alliance with wenxuecity.com and other popular overseas Chinese websites that include sina.com, backchina.com and mitbbs.com, marking the first step in its strategy to expand into overseas Chinese market.
Hudong.com has rapidly gained popularity in overseas Chinese markets during the last two months. In early September, Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales visited Hudong.com and accepted the donation of Wikipedia's Chinese trademark from the company. The Company's appearance on the Reuters' Times Square billboard in mid-October provided Hudong.com with an extra edge grabbing the attention of US media and helped promote the website's recognition within the overseas Chinese community. This represented the beginning of the company's long-awaited expansion initiative into overseas Chinese market.
As to the reasons for expanding into overseas market, Dr. Haidong Pan, founder and CEO of Hudong.com, pointed out, "First, it's very easy for overseas Chinese to accept Hudong.com as the 'Wikipedia of China.' Second, Hudong.com is well recognized by a large group of Chinese-American scientists. Third, Hudong.com has more and more visitors from North America, and obviously it has been the first stop for overseas Chinese to seek the most up-to-date China-related knowledge like 'Cheating Horse' and 'Lonely Generation II.'"
Prof. Dan Qun Fang, a Chinese-American scientist living in Los Angles, is an expert on noise control and also a heavy user of Hudong.com. "I'm very glad to contribute my expertise to Hudong.com, the Chinese encyclopedia website. It's very interesting to do onsite interviews at the company's Beijing office and answer other users' questions," Prof. Fang said.
"It's the right time for Hudong.com to reach the overseas Chinese community," said Haidong Pan, a Boston University graduate. "We think we understand the Chinese language and people better than Wikipedia. We believe we can do a better job."
According to authoritative data, Hudong.com was ranked 72nd among all Chinese websites, climbing nearly 80 notches within half a year. The website's plan to enter overseas Chinese markets will be closely connected to its IPO plan within the next two years. The capital injection of US$30 million earlier this year by DCM, a world-leading venture capital firm, provided strong support for Hudong.com's fast-paced growth.
As the world's largest Chinese encyclopedia website, Hudong.com has been committed to providing hundreds of millions of Chinese users with vast, comprehensive and updated encyclopedic information. In addition, the website continues to improve the ways in which users are able to create, access and share information with the help of its new wiki platform that complies with Chinese users' habits. As of early November 2009, Hudong.com contained 3.92 million articles, 4.34 billion words and more than three million pictures that have been contributed by more than 1.9 million users.
I am very impressed with all of the work and analysis that the China task force is doing. One thing that I would like to encourage you all to do is to start filling out the recommendations template posted in the toolkit. Even if you only have hypotheses and do not yet have a firm recommendation it would be very helpful if you could start to fill it out. It is a new template that I have created to help guide the work of the task forces. Since the China task force has been working for the longest and is the most far a long, it would be great if you guys could pilot the recommendations template and gave me any feedback as to how it might be improved and made more useful so that we have the best possible tool for the task forces. Our idea is that task forces can start outlining possible recommendations early on in the process and use the template to help determine what type of analysis they might need to perform to confirm their recommendations. Also it will allow other people outside the task force to engage in comment on the recommendations as you are creating them as opposed to waiting to comment until you have created a final product. Sarah476 23:11, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Sarah, thanks for notification. I used the template, and below are my feedback.
- I was confused at the relationship between questions and strategies. In the template, it seems to suppose that 1 question vs. 1 strategy, but it is not true for our cases.
- For the question part, we should add sections for analysis to make current situation clear. The analysis is not assertion in strategy, but maybe related.
I change the template a little, please refer it at Task_force/China_Task_Force/Recommendation.
The idea of the template is that you use it to explain your strategic recommendations. Not every questions that is listed for your task force requires a strategic recommendation. For example, you need to understand the underlying causes of Wikimedia's limited take off in China- but that answer is not a strategic recommendation and therefore there is no need to fill out the template. The template should only be filled out when you are making a recommendation for what wikimedia should do. Hope that ezplination makes things clearer
Are we running a centralnotice on the Zh projects? I was just looking at the centralnotice schedule and saw that there's one running called "China Task Force". It says: 请您为维基媒体中国特别工作组出谋划策，提出Wikipedia在中国如何发展的意见和建议。
Can someone tell me what this is?
Hi, Philippe. this notice says: "Please contribute to China Task Force, and propose your ideas and advice." It had been shown on ZH Wikipedia for several days, I don't know who put this in centralnotice.
Disconcerting. I'd really really like to know about messages on centralnotice, particularly when they clash with the fundraiser. :( I'll see if I can track it down.
http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Centralnotice-template-ChinaTaskForce&action=history ; According to the history of the template, it was created by User:Shizhao. Since we have fundraiser notices about to run, I'm going to kill this centralnotice.
It's my very strong preference that I know about centralnotices when they run so that we can coordinate those...
During the block of Chinese Wikipedia, several other website related with knowledge sharing had been founded. Most famous ones of them are
- YeeYan: http://www.yeeyan.com/ A dedicate website for translating good articles in other language into Chinese
- Songshuhui: http://songshuhui.net/ A popular science website of which articles are wrote by volunteers
Their idea is similar to Wikipedia: volunteer-ism, knowledge sharing, focus on qualities; but with other kind of software support.
The two website absorb a significant number of skilled writers. I think we should study them also.
And since the value are similar, we may consider potential cooperation with them.
--Mountain 05:32, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
- Another website should be mentioned is Douban.com( http://www.douban.com , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douban ). In general, it provide user review and recommendation services for movies, books, and music, and it is also the largest online Chinese language book, movie and music database and one of the largest online communities in China.
- Based on my experience, the Douban community have huge number of well-educated users, their reviews on books can reflect this points. They have SNS elements to improve the interaction among users.
- The style of this website is very fancy, and people gathered there just for relax. The value of Douban is different from us. --Mountain 02:10, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
I agree with you on cooperation with other websites to build a wikipedia alliance. For example, if we can develop a convenient tool, such as a Wordpress plugin (is there any?), when Songshuhui's editor publish an article, he/she can add tags about the article, all tags link to the page on Wikipedia. If we have such tools, we can build partnerships with many well-selected websites.
Yes, for the 5-year strategy planning, I think we should give some outline of the alliance, list some potential partners or area.
- Knowledge-oriented website
- Geo-based website
- (maybe) Music: in fact, the introduce of artist in emusic.com was from Wikipedia
The wordpress plugin is helpful, we had discussed such kind of tools before, but did not implemented it.
Mountain, I would add online dictionaries (aside from Wiktionary) to your list since I think that the Chinese/English bridge is very important.
Yes, Phil, agree with you. I am not very familiar with online dictionary in China, I only know http://www.zdic.net/ ， are there any others? Could you introduce this area to us?
I am quite familiar with many of the online dictionaries in both China and elsewhere through my work with the CC-EDICT free online Chinese/English - English/Chinese Dictionary (http://usa.mdbg.net/chindict/chindict.php). When I have finished the current translation of the Wikipedia/Baidu Baike comparative analysis I will put together a list of online dictionary sites together with some comments.
(I thought you were afraid of their possible competition at first sight = =)
Well, as for cooperation or learning, I think it may be quite hard.
The spirit is hard to change. WP, YY, SSH and DB are all totally different things, like horse and zebra. So it'll be weired for WP editors to just translate passeges, or to write thesis focusing only on one point, or to express their view as if they were in a forum. No, none of them are WP. WP is very formal, with strict format rules and copyright rules and strateges. It is free, but not as free as them. Of course the not-so-free spirit keeps many new WP editors out, but if you're not going to change the 3 main strategy, I think it have to.
And it may be hard for people of YY, SSH and DB to give a hand to WP, because there is no time. Time is already too little to focus on one website, not to mention two.
If CPC want to delete some article or option what they don't like, or they want someone's IP, what will the China Wikimedia do? If the do not ,CPC maybe close the organization.
Last edit: 18:21, 3 November 2009
In fact,Many they don't like is begin from outside PRC. So,CTF can hold this stand side,first job of articles is create non-political lines. The Other lines include normal political line. The bad political lines can build by outside PRC chinese. We can build this by whole personal power for bad political lines,not by the Orgnazation or CTF. Notice: all "bad","good" in my chat means the CPC like or not.--Loadpage 17:56, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
I think Chinese Wikipedia are different from Hudong & Baidu Baike in below points:
- Community culture:
- NPOV leads to truly mutual respect, and open a chance for every counterpart to join the conversation.
- IP law enforcement: Copy-paste is common in Hudong & Baidu Baike
- interaction with other Chinese-speaking area, including Hong Kong and Taiwan
- interaction with other languages, esp the English Wikipedia
Above points made Wikipedia special in China and popular for a small portion of people. Although no scientific study on the contributors for the 3 website, they may not overlap too much. People like Wikipedia dose not tend to use Hudong and Baidu any more.
But for search result of search engines, Hudong and Baidu may be prior to Wikipedia, this will impact the quantity of newcomers. But we still lack scientific study on this topic.
Are Hudong and Baidu real competitors? I think it is still in question and need more study.--Mountain 13:57, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
- And commons, with millions of pictures from around the world, is a difference. The problem is at the moment, that you have to understand English. That means, Wikipedia is more international. That might be a negative Factor and that Wikimedia could be seen as a western project too. --Goldzahn 03:41, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
All four above mentioned items are advantages of Wikipedia over Hudong and Baidu, but we need to ask ourselves a question, how many percentage of readers in China really care about these four advantages? If our objective is to targeted mass Internet audience in China, we need to think from our users' point of views. From users' perspectives, I think Hudong and Baidu Baike are undoubtedly our competitors.
For search result, I selected 10+ keywords from Comparison with Baidu and Hudong with the criteria that all three sites have articles on the keyword, and Googled them, I found for most of the searches, Baidu Baike ranks No. 1 in search results. Wikipedia generally has better ranks than Hudong. I don't know whether it is possibility to enhance the ranks of Wikipedia.
Hi, Tangos. I think our objective is to targeted mass Internet audience in China. But that dose not means we should face trade-off on qualities. The long term value of Wikipedia is its free knowledge.
- Many social news on their home page to attract not-well-educated users.
- Move content by easy copy-paste.
"We know the market better" this statement is a deny for the intelligence of Chinese people.
I mean we should not follow their strategy which is totally wrong in long term, but take some positive actions for their competitions:
- Increase offline activities of the community
- Seek proper partners in China
- Enhance the coverage of content by some systematic way
- Adding geographic entries in China, this is very useful for mass users.
- Adding contemporary people entries in China
No, no, I don't mean that we need to sacrifice our quality and compromise our principle in order to attract more readers. But we need to fully understand the competitive landscape and acknowledge the strength of our competitors, and learn from them and to find our what factors we can leverage to increase our user bases.
ps. I totally agree with your last three action plans.
In a PR approach, Hudong is our competitor, Baidu is not, in the brand to be exact. Hudong obviously tried to use our brand, claiming themselves "the China's Wikipedia", even in online reports in HK. I didn't see Baidu had such thing
If you guys want me to do some more detailed media analysis, please reply --Yuyu 17:02, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Before we really start, I think we should do some meta work to determine the roles, process and topics.
- discussion is needed to share each members' expertise, decide roles
- reading fact base and problem set, discussion and decide the the research plan
- research work (investigations, online survey, interviews, etc...)
- draft report
- finalize report
--Mountain 03:09, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm very pleased to see this task force up and going! It looks like you're starting off with some tremendous research. I know that Sarah (from Bridgespan) and I will be watching with interest. In the discussion of "roles", I encourage you to 're-imagine' the list; if there are roles that aren't necessary, don't feel you have to fill them. If I missed something, add it. If you don't need any of them, don't feel you must. This internal skills-inventory should be driven by what you need as a group, not by what I think you might some day need. You can always change it later!
Is there a need for the Role of an Editor to make the final articles sound more like "Standard Business English"? At this time, my Chinese may not be strong enough to compare Chinese wikis but it is strong enough to make a few final Articles in English sound smoother and more fluent, especially after revision and discussion.
Hi, RalfX, I re-checked with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(infoboxes) , I think we can call them infoboxes. For my understanding, a infobox will provide guidance on a specific area, it is helpful. And design a good infobox will cost some of time.
I think this is worth reading for the comments from the Chinese side
Hi, Phil. Could you explain more on this? What make you think the comments from the Chinese side is interesting? For William Chang and Pan's statement - "No reason for China to use Wikipedia" and "We know the market better" - do they have any proofs?
While I can give some proof for why William Chang and Pan's statement is nonsense. In Douban.com, one famous online community in China, you will find below fact:
- the group of Wikipedia have 38724 members
- the group of Baidu Baike have 10 members
- the group of Hudong have 5 members
I have to say they have communities with no activity outside their own website.