Jump to content

Where is Wikimedia now?/mr

From Strategic Planning

आपण सध्या कुठे आहोत

तुमची मदत हवी आहे

What is the current state of Wikimedia? Please help us craft a summary statement here. You might correct the statements if you have better facts.

You will find some supporting analysis at the fact base.

:... प्रकल्प?

See also project reports on meta. However, the last project report was compiled back in 2006.

  • Wikipedia as a project dominates all 'other projects' of the Wikimedia Foundation. The English language version of Wikipedia still dominates all other languages versions of Wikipedia combined.
  • The emergence of the internet, search engines and Wikipedia can be seen on one hand while at the same time publishers of paper encyclopedias have disappeared and at least one major online competing encyclopedia recently announced that it would close up shop.
  • The projects have attracted some ten million registered users, of which less than thirty thousand could be labeled active contributors.
  • Wikipedia grew exponentially from the year 2001 to the year 2006. Wikipedia is still growing in number of articles, however the number of active editors has more or less stabilised.
  • (...)

:... फाउंडेशन (प्रतिष्ठान)?

  • The Foundation turned six recently. As a young and growing organization it has already outgrown several internal crises, maturing very rapidly, becoming professional in its operations. Day to day operations are carried out by paid staff, led by paid executive(s). The Board consists of unpaid trustees who oversee operations from a distance.
  • The Frankfurt retreat in Spring of the year 2005 had set a series of goals to be achieved within three years. All those goals have been accomplished.
  • The Foundation has matured with paid staff and executives, a board of (unpaid) trustees and a record (2005 Frankfurt retreat) of achieving its goals. Establishing the future sustainability of the foundation, identifying threats to the nature of wikipedia which the foundation may be be faced with would be of value.
  • (...)

:... चॅप्टर्स?

  • One view has chapters as entirely legally independent institutions at grassroot level friends gathering to support Wikipedia and other projects of the foundation potentially turning the value of the Wikipedia brand into self serving benefits, another view has chapters as an integral part of the Wikimedia movement side by side with the Wikimedia Foundation. Maybe there are three or four more views (fill in your view here). The current strategy process has as one of its subgoals to clear out the chapter/foundation relationship.
  • The Wikimedia Foundation has some thirty national chapters across the globe and presence on all continents. Europe is covered pretty much, Africa and Arabia are the least represented regions. Reach and participation tend to correlate with presence of local chapters. The number of chapters is still growing. Chapters are very diverse in multiple respects.
  • Chapters of friends support Wikipedia, though it is incompletely clear what benefit if any the friends gain, and how this level of organization should mesh with the Foundation. The chapters are global, but the density of chapters mirrors the location of typical contributors.
  • (...)

:... योगदान कर्ते?

  • Contributors fall in two categories, on the one hand editors, Wikipedians, Wikipedists and on the other hand those people who have made a small dollar amount contribution in one of the fundraisers.
  • Contributors edit, and donate. Most of Wikipedia has been and continues to be written by single well educated young males and a small number of editors do most of the edits. The state of donations, and need for them is unclear in the reviewer above.
  • (...)


  • The UNU-Merit survey acknowledged what we knew: the average contributor is a single well educated male in his twenties. Another thing we know is that 1% of (registered) users are responsible for 99% of the edits. Recent research confirms that long term or active editors aren't as welcoming to newcomers anymore as they were welcoming prior to the year 2006.
  • (...)


  • (...)

:... सध्याचे आणि भविष्यातील वाचक?

  • Current readers are global, with, again, fewer than expected by chance from Africa, Arabia and mainland China.
  • (...)

सध्याचे वाचक

  • Wikipedia reaches nearly everyone with a computer and an internet connection with the exception of regions/countries in which governments actively discourage use, such as mainland China. However, the distribution of computers and internet connectivity over the global population is quite uneven.
  • (...)

भविष्यातील वाचक

  • Africa, Arabia and mainland China might contain the greatest pools of potential readers.
  • (...)


  • Posed as points for change, the position of wikimedia might be summarised as follows. Wikipedia and English language Wikipedia are the largest elements of the wikimedia and have displaced printed and other online providers. Do print versions need to be considered? Does wikipedia need to create its own competition: or, with open editing, has it perhaps provided the equivalent of competition or rendered it unnecessary?
  • A tiny fraction of readers edit, and 99% of edits are made by 100th of these editors. Moreover the number of editors appears level: neither consistently rising nor falling. Should more users be editors? How would we know? The steeply skewed distribution of contributions is normal in many domains. Should wikipedia expect to be any different? These statistics are at times posed as if they might be issues, but might also be considered simple facts of the creative content generating world and an indication of maturity and saturation for wikimedia model. Would it help (or harm) wikipedia to change these figures and trends?
  • (...)


  • Fact base is a collection of relevant facts about the movement and its current context.