This discussion is based on how to get to wikipedia 1.0. We need to start to think about Wikipedia 2.0 discussionpage:Talk:Question of the week

The effort over the past 9 years has been all about getting the basic information recorded and formatted, the projects and languages set up. We can begin to see the outline of what a world where that has been achieved would be like.

• As more and more articles are brought up to high school standard we will need contributors with undergrad knowledge to improve them.
• As Universities see quality rising some will use editing wikipedia as part of course work. Others will follow. Every scientist has to pass a language requirement. Writing an lead para for a science article which covers all our style points should fulfill that requirement in most cases.
• As some GLAMs start to release material there will be less room for tourist snapshots of the same objects.
• As some GLAMs start to release materials other GLAMs will come under pressure to follow.

Most significant of all

• As the corpus of knowledge on Wikipedia grows and becomes more reliable it becomes more useable for other purposes.

Wikipedia 2.0 will be all about accessing Wikipedia and Wikimedia content in other ways that the traditional wiki page. My prediction: in 10 years time less than 10% of access to our data will be via our sites.

We need to start thinking about what we need to do to unleash our data, how to make it reusable, searchable, parseable.

• moving the infobox data out of the articles into a semantic wikidata so it is reusable and editable in other language WPs and outside WPs
• Doubling down on getting lead paragraphs just right - since many reusers will need no more than that.
• Look at ways of making sure there is a path for readers who access our data via reusers to become editors.

There is a real question of how many editors we will actually need when the info base is more secure. Apache is open source and free but how many web users feel obligated to contribute patches? If the number is less than one in a million does that make it less free?

Good point! What are the tools available for data mining today? What tools would be useful?

Creating open source API:s for different purposes would be great, one such could use cross refferences between different language wiktionaries to construct a dictionary for example. Don't know if it exists allready, but if not I don't think there would take much coding to get one working.

Interesting vision. Many other websites pull directly from Wikipedia already. Regardless of how the information if delivered in the future, it is important that we work on improving the quality of the information. Wikipedia 2.0 needs to include more emphasis on improving the quality of articles. MissionInn.Jim 14:48, 26 November 2009 (UTC)