Village pump/en
In other languages: azərbaycanca (az) български (bg) Deutsch (de) English (en) français (fr) hrvatski (hr) македонски (mk) Nederlands (nl) português (pt) русский (ru) தமிழ் (ta) Türkçe (tr) Tiếng Việt (vi) español (es) | Add translation [edit]
|
Feel free to post general comments or questions here, or simply introduce yourself. You can also join the convenors during their weekly IRC office hours. |
- [View source↑]
- [History↑]
Contents
 First page |
 Previous page |
 Next page |
 Last page |
Wiki Research List: Proposals on "Open-Access journals for papers about wikis" -- and the future of research
Hello: I'm starting to collect ideas from a thread in the wiki-research-l list, in which many different proposals related to Open Access Journals and the "wiki way" of doing research were circulated.
I will start adding content to meta:Wiki_Research_Ideas please feel free to join me!
Hello!
I was thinking about Village pump/archive1#Page and Village pump/Archive3#PT and PT-BR translations, what for?, and then I've created Template:Language variation, which enables us to have only one subpage for Portuguese and then, in the rare cases where it is needed to use different words/sentencies in for those who has set 'pt' or 'pt-br' in their preferences, we can simply use the syntax
{{Language variation|pt= text more used in 'pt' (like "Ficheiro")|pt-br= text more used in 'pt-br' (like "Arquivo")}}
to get "text more used in 'pt' (like "Ficheiro")" or "text more used in 'pt-br' (like "Arquivo")", according to what the user selects in his preferences (or, after adapting Template:Languages, on the bar where it is shown the links for different languages).
I hope it to be useful to unify that pages.
(although I think the better is just to start the use language conversion also for Portuguese projects...).
Sounds good to me. One question: what will be shown if my language is Dutch or any other language?
If was not set any value for the parameter with the user language (or one of it's fallbacks), the template uses the parameter which corresponds to {{SUBPAGENAME}} (I'm supposing that at least "code=something" should be set in a page like "Page/code"). So, at "Page/pt", it is shown:
- the text passed to "pt-br=...", if the user choose "pt-br"
- the text passed to "pt=...", if the user choose "pt"
- the text passed to "pt=..." (because SUBPAGENAME is equals to "pt" in this case), if the user choose anything else (like Dutch).
(I just was not able to show this in the examples at Template:Language variation, because it has no "/code" in its title =) )
Maybe it is better to use {{GetFallback|{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}?
The template should be usable for other languages as well (for example to have en and en-gb at the same page, changin according to the user preferences).
By the way, I've added one line at Template:GetFallback
Write http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Participate/your_language_code (replace your_language_code with your language code)and then create that page.
Thanks!
I've created Template:Languages/Template:Participate and Template:Participate/pt-br. Could you confirm if is everything ok?
The "Languages/Template:Participate" tag will make the translation bar appear on every side that uses the Participate template. So I think it is better to remove that tag. I guess that is why it does not appear on the English page. Removing it complicates translation of that page though. But otherwise it seems fine!
Hi!
Currently the main page shows "wikimediastrategy" at the top (the two words together, without any space beetwen them). I would like to adjust the portuguese translation, but I don't know if this should be translated to something like "strategy of Wikimedia" ("Estratégia da Wikimedia"). Is this the intention there?
And there's never a sensible point to cut off a discussion in progress, or split a discussion in progress. So you end up with these huge discussions that are really hard to follow. At least in the normal wiki, you could click on the history, and then compare diffs with something 12 hours ago to identify the new posts. But now, I get notifications for threads that I'm trying to follow, but have lost all hope of following because of their length. Sometimes the new replies are hidden behind a "show replies" tab!
I guess what I'm asking for is a way to easily identify new posts in liquid threads. Highlight new posts? (Is that hard? I figure we can't be too far off, if the threads appear in my "new messages" every time a new post occurs.) Highlight posts from the last 24 hours?
Dude, are you using the "new messages" feature? It highlights new posts. That's the best way to read, I've found.
There's a new messages feature? As far as I can tell, when I click on on "new messages" it shows me the entire thread.
The newest messages should be in boxes that are colored grey :)
We've got some updates in the pipeline that will make things more linear and easy to follow. I'm hoping to be able to stick them on this wiki in the next few days/weeks.
Sounds good. From a usability perspective, the "new post" thing isn't obvious. Even a little "[NEW!]" would be helpful to complement the highlight, if you can't make the highlight more obvious.
I also think you should hide the "Link to" behind "More"... but reveal the "edit" button. I think that would reflect what people more commonly need to do.
agreed. Linking to a specific post in a message thread is not the most common activity undertaken and probably doesn't deserve to be the only one give the screen realestate.
Import all CC vids from youtube, remember to type in the URL it came from and republish it under the same license. In return, export all CC vids from wiki to youtube. :D.
im tired of the same thing lets have a game center a learning center
Wikimedia Strategic planning currently has no logo associated with it aside from the meta logo. -- とある白い猫 chi? 16:50, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
- Concept should perhaps be "chess" as google images imply. -- とある白い猫 chi? 06:22, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
You're welcome to make one and propose it here. Anyways, I saw your request on meta for here and outreach.
Actually, if I could share some history... the logo given on this wiki and outreach are the Wikimedia "Community" logos. They're intended for use on "community" but not "project" wikis. :)
I have created a vote for this at m:Logo for Wikimedia Strategic Planning wiki. There are 18 suggestions for a logo including keeping the current one. Feel free to vote. Meta is the more suitable location I feel as more of the community is there than here. :) -- とある白い猫 ちぃ？ 20:20, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
I suggest having a planned closing of this wiki in 2015 since this wiki is as Mono said, gathering dust. Check the "recent" changes. The plan would be finished, so this wiki would be useless.
I would suggest wrapping it up a lot sooner than that. The 2010–2015 planning exercise is finished, and the next round of planning will need to begin well before the end of the plan period. The Main Page gives the distinct impression that this planning is done, and there are no links to current proposals, research, or "next steps."
To the extent that some current activity may be percolating here, it is a backwater that is totally not visible to the community at large. As mentioned elsewhere,[1][2] it may be better to host meta-level activities at Meta to reduce wiki sprawl and give consideration of movement-wide issues greater visibility.
- PS: I only came here to look up an old discussion and, because this wiki is essentially inactive, I am not likely to notice any responses here. I can be reached at my "home wiki", Wikiquote.
- PPS: I loathe and detest the "Liquid Threads" platform, which has once again completely hung my browser – another reason I do not ordinarily visit here.
Actually, my bet is that there will be another type of strategic planning process, and a good deal of the data here would be quite useful for that.
By all means do keep the data and the discussion history. It is and will continue to be a valuable resource.
But it has much less value as a venue for ongoing activity. Recall that this wiki was created for the express purpose of garnering broad community participation. It succeeded very well at that. Now that the plan is in place, it has become a backwater that no longer serves that purpose.
- PS: Having logged into a Liquid Threads enabled site I will be rebooting my computer again, so 'bye for now.
Is the reason for closing Strategy is because its not being utilized? I'm wondering what benefit we get from closing Strategy? I believe that Strategy could be used at some future point, and we could re-open it. Just wondering what the reasoning is here. Thanks. - Hydroxonium (T•C•V) 19:18, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
Hydroxonium (T•C)
If there's a plan for another strategic planning process we may as well keep it around. But if that's not going to be until 2015, we should really wrap it up sooner.
I have a proposal for strategic planing:
I am registered at 309 Wikies. I tryed to write an article in dewikie. I wanted to write this article for all languages in all enciclopedia. The first thing a recogniced was, that a steward request username change was not able to rename my login at all 309 Wikies. 146 Wikies were not renamed by the administration. In addition I now am far away from the possibility to write an article in all languages at the same time, e.g. through automatic translators.
Should we refrain from blocking accounts that trigger the edit filter with spam?
Why would we do that?
The edit filter, despite a rare false positive, prevents the spam edits from being saved. However, some editors blocked the accounts that triggered the edit filter. My question is should we simply ignore these accounts so long as the edit filter is taking care of them or should admins block them?
Ah, now I get your point. There is no doubt that their edits should be stopped, so I think that we won't have any harm on doing it. Maybe you are worried about flooding recent changes with block log or about the time that users would have to spend by blocking accounts (those are the only issues I can imagine). However, when we block them, we avoid more account creation (due to autoblocks) and prevent any further edit, which might be useful in case they change their edit pattern to another not filtered. Just some thoughts.
Anyway, it is a good question. (Happy new year to everybody)
All those recently blocked accounts are related. They are being used to add blatant spam and not blocking them would just make things easier for spammers here. So I don't see a reason to not block them. We might, however, think on disabling or improving this filter (3) as it might trigger valid edits.
Hey guys; the WMF is working on a new version of the Article Feedback Tool, with the aim of getting more readers providing feedback and, hopefully, more readers turning into editors. It's primarily en-centric at the moment, but it may be rolled out elsewhere (after localisation, assuming it works, etc), so if this is a field you're interested in, your comments at the talkpage are very much welcome :). Give the proposal a read and tell us what you think! Okeyes (WMF) 05:58, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
I think we should have a deletion policy. I think that it should include:
- Proposals that should be on wiki; and
Inactive proposals that have no supporters.
I will be calling the incubator policy that is if there is no comments in a 7 day period, it means that no one objects so the policy is automatically approved.
I disagree. We currently only delete obvious spam pages, so there is no need for any policy.
Hi:
I have been doing some analysis on article quality for En-Wikipedia.
Have just now read the 2011 Strategic Plan. I am looking for more information on the "raise quality" objective. Either in documents, pre-plan debates, or post-plan debates. (I did try searching, but could not find much meat.)
For instance:
1. Definition of terms: Does raise high/very high to be an additional 25% reviewed mean (in effect) make the number of FAs and GAs be 1.25 times what they were in JAN 2011, by JAN 2016?
2. Is there some deeper discussion of methods (how we get there) than the few small paras on the strat plan document? I realize the actual methods will evolve and the Strat Plan document is more of a vision-y type thing, but perhaps in the strat plan development process there were more meaningful discussions, debates, etc. with some specificity?
3. Was there some debate over what the target should be? 25% increase sounds very timid actually. (It implies the rate of new quality articles actually dropping to half of what was done in 2001-2011.)
4. Also curious if a page view weighted quality increase was discussed at all, rather than number of articles? For instance, let's say on En-Wiki, right now 1% of page-views are looking at GA+ article...then the objective would be 1.25% views being of GA+. Still seems timid, but at least it would be reader oriented.
P.s. Hoping to be directed to threads or documents rather than starting a discussion here.
Hi. :) I just wanted to let you all know that the Wikimedia Foundation is testing a potential new communication system intended to provide a central address to which community members who need assistance from the Wikimedia Foundation or who have questions about the Foundation or its activities can reach out and find answers. This system is being unrolled on a trial basis to test its efficiency and usefulness to communities.
What happens to your question will depend on what type of question it is. Many questions are general interest, and answers to these are being posted to wmf:Answers. Generally, at least to begin with, I will be writing these answers myself, although staff members have assisted with some questions already and I don't doubt will assist with more. Some issues will not be general interest, but may require attention from specific staff members or contractors. These will be forwarded to the appropriate parties. Questions that should be answered by community may be forwarded to the volunteer response team, unless we can point you to a more appropriate point of contact.
I imagine most of you are familiar with how the Wikimedia Foundation works, but it's probably a good idea for me to note for those who are not familiar that the Wikimedia Foundation does not control content on any of its projects. They can't help with content disputes or unblock requests, and they are not the place to report general bugs or to request features (that would be Wikimedia's Bugzilla). The letters I've answered already have included primarily questions about finances and the Foundation's work. I've been asked to get feedback from staff on diverse subjects ranging from the amount of latitude permitted to a project in drafting their "Exemption Doctrine Policy" to whether or not groups seeking grants need tax exempt status first.
If you have questions for or about the Wikimedia Foundation, you can address them to answers. Please review wmf:Answers/Process for specific terms and more information..svg){kind=small}
wikimedia.org
It's clear this wiki is gathering dust. I'd like to start a discussion about shutting it down and transitioning the content to an ideas.wikimedia.org setup and moving processes to meta.
To be honest I completely disagree. I came here looking for something and looking at the recent changes that isn't all that uncommon. In fact it looks to be still in active use and has a lot more edits then many of our content projects. It also sounds a little bit odd to kill an active project moveing the content to a brand new and not active project (wiki or otherwise since ideas.wikimedia doesn't exist yet).
On a side note I think the sitenotice is unnecessary. All it serves to do is interrupt the reading or editing flow of people working here. If the community as a whole wants to put it up then I won't argue but I'm not sure the benefits outweigh the cost right now. People will see the discussion here and if they choose to respond can. I think given the type of people who come here anyone interested will see it in recent changes or a village pump check. Jamesofur 04:02, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
- Struck 2nd paragraph since mono actually already did it while I was typing. Sorry for jumping on so quickly :) Thanks! Jamesofur 04:05, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
I think we'd make more productive use of the knowledge and proposals we've built here if it were integrated into a more active project. The strength of Wikipedia has always been around activity. If there's no activity, the value is lost. Renaming it won't make it more active, but moving it into an active project (like meta) might.
Otherwise, leave it be and protect some of the better pages.
I'm a little afraid the opposite will happen. Having our own wiki gives us individuality. If we were to merge with Meta, the distinction between our operations and theirs might become blurred, and we'd end up taking a back seat since our community is considerably smaller.
I'd like to suggest that, since there are concerns about inactivity, we promote and publicise this wiki a little more among other WMF projects. That's a potentially easier way to infuse contributors than transitioning to a new wiki, which takes some time.
Can someone change this template to an Infobox?
Issues:
- It's Useless (Philippe: It is actually not useless.... there are a number of things dependent upon it.)
- It's Ugly
- hard to fill or edit (resolved. Thanks)
- Always takes about 40% of page. Unlike info-box.
- When the forth parameter is turned on, the forth priority turns into a long sentence:
-
- "Ensure that the underlying project infrastructure is secure, stable, and sufficient to guarantee the permanence of the projects and support ongoing growth".
- The current statements are not so clear.
-
- Like: focus on quality conent. if the proposal ssatisfies two priorities, it's not a "focus".
- There is no link to give a separate understanding. all linke go to movement priorities.
-
- Like: there is no good link to what quality content is. does it mean featured and good articles, books, ...? I studied for 30 hours (most interviews, case studies, illustrations, theory of change, articles in "quality part of wikimedia-pedia) to find out what that is. people have really different opinions.
- When in the page, pictures for first paragraph behave bad:
-
- The thumbnails and non thumbnails push the table of content forward, instead of pushing it down. like: here
- The right aligned pictures like [[File:Example.jpg|left|75px]] falls over the table of contents!
It is actually not useless.... there are a number of things dependent upon it. I'm sorry you're having problems with it... do you have some usability suggestions?
Suggestions: I've drawn a better one. I tried to edit the template (2.5 hours honestly), but those codes are so hard to understand and edit. gotta go. I'll answer later.
It's a good one. but I have a side-box here
Benefits
- everyone will like it
- colored background! blue is cool
- narrow width
- not as long as it looks here.
My suggestion:
title ------------------ | | | | | Picture | | | | | ------------------ caption Strategy: {{strategic priorities | status = | Infrastructure = no | Reach = no | Quality = no | Participation = yes | Innovation = no }} Effects Priority: Very high (10 votes) Impact: High ( 9 votes) Feasability: Medium (10 votes) Desirability: Very low (10 votes) Your vote (This one is ambitious) Priority (Drop down menu: Very high? High? Medium? Low? Very low?) (Nomber of votes) Impact Feasability Desirability Content: (one of these) {{fatured}} {{Draft}} {{UnderConstruction}} {{Historical}} {{Notice|sample text}} {{SectionNeedsWork}} {{Fact}} Members: (it's not a part of proposal. so it should come here Arman Philippe wikiwookie Progress: (one of these) {{Merge|pagename}} {{Deprecated}} {{Doing}} {{Done}} {{ArchivedDone}} Share: |f| |t| |su| ... (you can use {{Share}}
My motto: Show more, talk less
"You Tube" type Possibilities for advance learning and creativity, and many other Topics
Visit the Link , Wikiversity:Colloquium/Gaon Yincang Abhinava... For more Material.--Gaon Abhinava 03:44, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Virtual Music Composition
1) Combine the Music Composition programs, of Composing/recording music and create the Virtual School in wikiversity, where students can express their Musical Talent. Write albums, Scores, Symphonys, Join virtual Bands with people from across the world etc... all from the convenience of their Phone or Screen platform, that can access W. V. , 24/7.
2) Create a "You tube" type Wikiversity class room, with a link, where students can submit created videos for school projects, educational resources, and watch teachers Lectures etc... Videos will go through a very strict Screening process to Filter out, any Propagandic, Innapropriate, Obscene, offensive or other wise Mentally Damaging Information, we want to be Smarter and Free as Students, and Not become Manipulated by clever, deceptive, evil Psychology etc.. If they fail the screening process, material will be rejected, and Proper, Logical, Productive disciplinary Actions will be taken, The student being subjected to Having different Degrees of School Participation Removed. ( there is allot of details to discuss ) We aren't here to play mind games, We are here to Learn, encourage, and Grow... Together, And Dissention and Disruption will not be Tolerated.
Overseers:'Career Position for info. Screening.'
I also Propose the Creation of an Online Virtual Career Position, The Information awareness and assessment of the "Over-Seer", they have to, see over, any Information submited to Wikiversity that Would Sabotage it's Structure, or disrupt True learning, This is an Important Job, and the selection process would be strict also..... are you a future Over-seer ?
They Will Study the many aspects of the submissions, in detail, acting as a brain filter, to recognize possible Malicous intention, which is always the origin for Atrocity, and we will plan to Prevent that non-sense, straight at it's roots.--Gaon Abhinava 11:37, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
Melodic Expression Videos
Students can Learn to Dance, By watching the Videos of Dance Lessons, on their Phone/Virtual Screen, and Mimic/practice the movements they are viewing. This would be fun and Expressive, thus Making Wikiversity the best Distance Education Provider on earth.--Gaon Abhinava 08:31, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
( Note )
Any Combination of software ideas that would simplify and Produce Mind Growth, or enhace cyber security, should be discussed and Utilized simplisticly, effectivly stream lining wikiversity as the Top global Innovater.--Gaon Abhinava 08:31, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
Questions, Comments, Welcomed--Gaon Abhinava 08:39, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
Visit the Link , Wikiversity:Colloquium/Gaon Yincang Abhinava... For more Material.--Gaon Abhinava 03:44, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
In this page history you can see mainly strange contributions from a unique user (nearly all contributions under IP and several sockpuppet), and that impacts several other page (such as the page containing the translation of the message from Ting Chen : [1]). The creation of strange pages : Jxwww1...
Strange contributions on the talk page are mostly copyposting from French Wikipedia Village Pump, and French Wiktionary Village Pump (and some Sysop board). Most of the stuff added can be found in his own blog : [2] (blacklisted in wp-fr).
This user has a long history with Wikipedia and Wiktionary and has been ban for all the troubles he generated.
I prefered to inform the wiki about this problematic stuff, since I do not know the way you work around here, but I feel that this user might have negative impact on the whole WMF if we let him have such a column inside the tool of the WMF.
(Recap page on WP:FR: w:fr:Wikipédia:Faux-nez/Jeandefoix
Regards Loreleil 19:52, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
That doesn't look good, thank you for pointing it out. I'm surprised no other admin saw this yet.
My French ability is not very good, but from what I can tell none of the copied commentaries have anything to do with Strategy Wiki. I think we should delete the pages, but I'd like to hear from other admins first (plus, embarassingly, I'm not sure how to delete threads in liquidthreads).
Sticky Notes: Adding expandable comments to the margins - for beginners (no wiki code or markup knowledge required)
From the lead of the page for w:Wikipedia:Sticky notes (as of August 19)
You're busy, so I'll summarize in this lead. Sticky Notes is a feature that displays short comments and highlights relevant text (see Figure 1 on the right). Every sticky note on the main page also generates a new section over at the discussion page. Only the sticky note indicators are visible by default; the comment and highlighting remain hidden (see Figure 2 on the real page) for a professional look.
Most importantly, these sticky notes are easy to use; in every article section header, there would be a button that says "sticky note". It could be right next to "edit". Readers just click that button, highlight some text, and leave a comment in a popup window. Done.
A page of sticky notes will remind readers that Wikipedia is THE online encyclopedia project that anyone can edit, and that it is always a work in progress (just like this Sticky Notes idea is a work in progress for those of us discussing it over there). Sticky notes are so easy to use that we we will capture more of those productive comments that would have otherwise gone deterred. Possibly the biggest benefit is that an easy way to get involved like this will also, ultimately, lead to more long-time editors for the project.
Interested? Please read more, check out some of the discussion, and show your support to help this idea take form.
Please reply here first!
That's an interesting idea. I think this would be especially useful for the editors at en.wikinews, who have for a long time expressed an interest in something to this effect. Perhaps you could share it with them?
I'm a little wary of it being used on Wikipedia, however. It, like many open-access features of wikis, can be abused, especially on a project plagued by vandalism. Would the sticky comments appear in recent changes to be vetted by patrollers? Will it be possible to find a history of comments? Can inappropriate information be expunged or oversighted? Would high-traffic articles be clogged with unhelpful commentary? The current page at w:WP:Sticky notes doesn't seem to address any of that.
That was a great suggestion about the wikinews group. I updated them.
Those are also really good questions. Thank you. I will update the page, somewhat based on the discussion.
(that was me again, forgot to log in)
You're welcome. I think the idea has a lot of merit, but, like any complex and bold new proposal, needs to be thoroughly thought out before we can dream of implementing it. The strategy wiki is in a bit of a lull right now, so I wouldn't expect a lot of replies here in the immediate future, but I'll try to advertise this page on other wikis and in IRC.
Thanks for your work!
I recently read the Wikimania Haifa synopsis and I think the ideas proposed by one of the attendees to the WMF board to create new projects is a good idea. Why isn't there something like a genealogy wiki that people can use. Genealogy should be open source but its controlled by various greedy companies like ancestory.com. Heck, the new project could even be called along the lines of something like WikiFamily.
i would maybe propose as a new project a real open internet websites directoy or also enterprise directory
i think this kind of active and really open directory is very lacking ....
There are a lot of new projects that could be created. However, many of the ideas have already been taken up by non-WMF open source sites (IMSLP and WikiTravel come to mind). Geanealogy is the one thing that doesn't appear to have an open source representative on the Internet. I'd be interested for strategy users to have a "brainstorming" session sometime to discuss the feasibility of new projects, or perhaps it could be discussed at the next Office Hours ... ?
First page |
Previous page |
Next page |
Last page |
