Talk:Wikimedia Movement Strategic Plan Summary
|Thread title||Replies||Last modified|
|Thoughts / Ideas/ Questions while reading Wikimedia Movement Strategic Plan||1||11:59, 23 July 2012|
|Please add these two links to the page||2||20:51, 7 June 2012|
|Mainpage enwiki discussion||0||11:49, 24 July 2011|
|Strategic Plan Userbox||1||18:50, 4 November 2011|
|My reply to Wikimedia Movement Strategic Plan||1||02:21, 4 June 2011|
|How I can do the Spanish version?||1||19:43, 17 March 2011|
Last edit: 19:22, 17 May 2011
As an over 50 "average",retired, Caucasian, Female living in the Pacific Northwest area of the United States, I have had occasions when the query of my interests received the "start a page with my [search terms] . The request(s) have intrigued me, BUT, being, as I said "average" has set me to wonder if my education would be acceptable?, If my unexpected interruptions would appear as if I had lost interest and be considered that I had not been serious with regard to my commitment?, or (EVEN WORSE) be thought of a a whiny "old w o m a n" ... Granted, I have had my share of dissatisfaction with much more serious issues, and I have been challenged by volunteering upon occasion ...But as an individual, I exercise calm, and take my best "Cheshire grin" and do the best that I can, constructive criticism has been a method of my continued learning process since I was old enough to listen to people that cared enough to "take my hand". I am a firm believer that it far better to "ask a [stupid] question than to make a [stupid] mistake". Being a woman over 50, I could see where the idea of creating more interest could include the introduction of the "Wiki-world" to many of the more mature members (retirees)of our societies, many of which have acquired a wealth of knowledge that if coached, would add so much to all of our lives and perhaps enrich society in general. Edit away! and PLEASE be aware that I did, and DO have a smile on my face!
Gender aside; I personally like this kind of attitude. While debates (discussions) offer ideal points (pros and cons) it is the tone of voice used commenting that will turn myself away from an otherwise satisfying engagement; important issues, relavent to missions, inundated (heavily) with points of view producing the sort of stuff known as editwarring; which, personally, is abhorring. Wikimedia rocks in it's strategy, mission, movement, ideals and it's freedom of expression.
I am Orschstaffer, a recent new contributor;this is a school project,
- Wikipedia:Signatures helped achieve this:
I think the printer friendly version could be more printer friendly, if you removed all large colored surfaces in the document to save some printer color. Why would this document be more printer friendly that the screen friendly by the way? Maybe you could just frame the surfaces that are colored now. And the screen friendly version was not very screen friendly on my computer! Why do you have two pages right next to each other, in the horizontal direction? If I should be able to read the text, I have to zoom in so much that both pages won't fit to the width of my screen, and then I have to scroll sideways in order to see everything. Not screen friendly! The printer friendly version was much easier to read on my screen. Hope I didn't sound too pessimistic :) Kri (talk) 20:51, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Just posting here as I figure some metawiki strategists may have given some thought to how we look on the front doorstep. There is a discussion on enwiki about the main page and its design. Hence anyone who's done any research would be very welcome to chip in with some observations. Cheers, Casliber 11:49, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
For anyone who's interested, I've created a userbox to show support and understanding of the Wikimedia Strategic Plan .
I had written a paper on this subject before but after handing them to other ppl, they told me it was too brutal, too offensive. I try to remain calm now and try to argue about the paper in a decent matter.
Sue Gardner and others want to increase the total number of people served to 1 billion. Why? And why do we have to increase the number of Wikipedia articles to 50 million? And why do we have to increase the number of female editors to 25 percent and the number of Global South editors to 37 percent?
Does wikimedia not consist of wikis? That is, a collection of pages to which anyone who is willing can contribute. So, people not willing to contribute will not do that.
The wikimedia pages are made by volunteers and supported by volunteers. So they are the ones that make wikimedia. They decide what is in it or not. Are there dissatified women? Great, let them complain.
There is one thing though that struck a chord in me and that was the number of active editors. I could relate to that.
Ever tried to upload a svg-file to wikimedia commons, for example? No? Then try it. It will give you headaches by trying to do so. There will be some difficulties that you will encounter. Not that no information is out there telling you how to make a proper svg suitable for wikimedia commons. It is just that the pages are all dispersed over wikimedia.
I have two suggestions in order to create more order in the chaos that editing now is:
- What needs to be done is to create more pages like the welcome-template. In one single page there is information and, more important, links to other pages. So, there should be pages like welcome svg, welcome edit, welcome templates. There should be templates that point to important pages, so that in one view one has a complete view.
- Create youtube-videos about editing wikipedia-pages.
Any sincere answer will be read and answered.
I believe that there are multiple works in progress to improve the welcome and training of new editors. You'll find one such project here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ocaasi/The_Wikipedia_Game. You'd be welcome join the conversation on the discussion page. Pine (GreenPine) t 02:21, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Adolfoasorlin, do you mean 'how do I make a version of this exact report in Spanish?'
You're welcome, and most encouraged, to translate the sections and pages of the report as they appear on the wiki. That would be the first step, and you are also encouraged to lay them out and design them in any way you'd like - you can take inspiration from this version of course. It's a CC BY SA work, with the exception fo the official marks of the Foundation.