I'm not sure if this is the right place to share this report, seeing how it does not concern alleged misbehavior of admins, or directly applies to any other topic recently covered here, but I'd like to confess that I gave a presentation on Wikipedia last night to the local Linux Users' Group here in Portland (aka, PLUG) that was quite warmly received. The entire audience, about 30-40 in number, who I feel are a reasonable sampling of the technical elite of this town (with one very obvious exception), were all very familiar with Wikipedia, & quite interested to learn more.
I tried to cover the basics of Wikipedia: the software, the hardware, how Wikipedia works, all of the projects associated with it -- & the eternal problem of being sure that its content was reliable. I also tried to cover the community angle of Wikipedia, comparing it to the communities that have evolved with various Open Source software projects, Linux in particular, but at that point I felt I had been talking too long & forced myself to be very brief.
Some feedback from the audience I thought people here might be interested in: * A lot of questions about copyright, & how we make sure people do not slip copyright violations in. * Everyone wanted to see the Klingon Wikipedia Front Page. * The issue of sex-related content came up, which led to a review of a number of existing Wikipedia articles, including [[autofellatio]]. (I told an Intel employee who wanted me to show that page, "I'll let you take a look at it tomorrow at work.") * People were impressed in the fact that the emphasis at Wikipedia is not on regulating content, but in regulating the behavior of its contributors. * One person asked if the goals of Commons & Wikisource don't overlap the goals of the Gutenberg Project. I'm not sure I gave the right answer to his question. * Another person afterwards buttonholed me, & proposed Yet Another Method of stablizing Wikipedia content for the 1.0 release. I tried to assure him that David Gerard had the issue well in hand, & was working towards a workable implementation that would likely be released in 12 months' time.
I was also asked some in depth technical questions about how the servers handle the load on Wikipedia, something I know very little about -- but would be of immense interest to a lot of people. I also know that SysAdmin & Linux Journal pay money for articles they publish, so if someone who knows would make the effort to write an account, it would help subsidize their Wikiholicism. ;)
If anyone is interested in the slides to this presentation (I created 9 html files with links to selected pages), I'd be happy to share my work.
Geoff
Geoff Burling a écrit:
I'm not sure if this is the right place to share this report, seeing how it does not concern alleged misbehavior of admins, or directly applies to any other topic recently covered here, but I'd like to confess that I gave a presentation on Wikipedia last night to the local Linux Users' Group here in Portland (aka, PLUG) that was quite warmly received. The entire audience, about 30-40 in number, who I feel are a reasonable sampling of the technical elite of this town (with one very obvious exception), were all very familiar with Wikipedia, & quite interested to learn more.
I tried to cover the basics of Wikipedia: the software, the hardware, how Wikipedia works, all of the projects associated with it -- & the eternal problem of being sure that its content was reliable. I also tried to cover the community angle of Wikipedia, comparing it to the communities that have evolved with various Open Source software projects, Linux in particular, but at that point I felt I had been talking too long & forced myself to be very brief.
Some feedback from the audience I thought people here might be interested in:
- A lot of questions about copyright, & how we make sure people
do not slip copyright violations in.
- Everyone wanted to see the Klingon Wikipedia Front Page.
- The issue of sex-related content came up, which led to a
review of a number of existing Wikipedia articles, including [[autofellatio]]. (I told an Intel employee who wanted me to show that page, "I'll let you take a look at it tomorrow at work.")
- People were impressed in the fact that the emphasis at Wikipedia
is not on regulating content, but in regulating the behavior of its contributors.
- One person asked if the goals of Commons & Wikisource don't
overlap the goals of the Gutenberg Project. I'm not sure I gave the right answer to his question.
- Another person afterwards buttonholed me, & proposed Yet
Another Method of stablizing Wikipedia content for the 1.0 release. I tried to assure him that David Gerard had the issue well in hand, & was working towards a workable implementation that would likely be released in 12 months' time.
I was also asked some in depth technical questions about how the servers handle the load on Wikipedia, something I know very little about -- but would be of immense interest to a lot of people. I also know that SysAdmin & Linux Journal pay money for articles they publish, so if someone who knows would make the effort to write an account, it would help subsidize their Wikiholicism. ;)
If anyone is interested in the slides to this presentation (I created 9 html files with links to selected pages), I'd be happy to share my work.
Geoff
Thanks for the report Geoff :-) If you could upload (or link) your presentation here (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Presentations), you would be most welcome.
Ant
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Anthere wrote:
Thanks for the report Geoff :-) If you could upload (or link) your presentation here (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Presentations), you would be most welcome.
I'll try to get that done soon; since the files all fit into a 20Kb tarball, I just might upload it to meta.
I found it noteworthy that there are so few records of Presentations in the US. Is it because none of us Americans know about this page (my defense), or that none of us have tried to give a formal talk about Wikipedia?
In related news, I just received the latest copy of Linux Journal (August, 2005), & was happily surprised to read that LJ chose Wikimedia Foundation for its Editor's Choice Award in the category "Nontechnical or Community Web Site." Again, am I the only one who didn't know we were in the running? Has anyone written a press release?
Geoff
Geoff Burling a écrit:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2005, Anthere wrote:
Thanks for the report Geoff :-) If you could upload (or link) your presentation here (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Presentations), you would be most welcome.
I'll try to get that done soon; since the files all fit into a 20Kb tarball, I just might upload it to meta.
I found it noteworthy that there are so few records of Presentations in the US. Is it because none of us Americans know about this page (my defense), or that none of us have tried to give a formal talk about Wikipedia?
I might possibly dare say because many presentations in the usa are handled by Jimbo ? But in any cases, the page is not very well known yet. Not all presentations are listed either (definitly not the last one I made in english at least :-)), but it gives a good idea of who to ask when a new presenter want to start from an existing presentation.
In related news, I just received the latest copy of Linux Journal (August, 2005), & was happily surprised to read that LJ chose Wikimedia Foundation for its Editor's Choice Award in the category "Nontechnical or Community Web Site." Again, am I the only one who didn't know we were in the running? Has anyone written a press release?
Geoff
I do not think I knew... No press release has been done and afaik, it is not mentionned on the WMF site... If you write a little text, please think of telling us :-)
Seriously, the fact is mostly we are getting so big... it is impossible to know it all. Also, several awards, many big deadlines... lost the excitement somewhere and fewer press releases were done recently. We hit 2 millions articles recently and I do not think anything was done. I do not know if good or not good. In many countries, we are well known enough not to feel so much the need to announce these types of events... Still, it is important to document them... so that we have some references to show journalists hungry of such details.
As usual, if some editors are motivated to do it, it will get done. Otherwise it won't. Wiki way :-)
Ant
Anthere wrote:
I found it noteworthy that there are so few records of Presentations in the US. Is it because none of us Americans know about this page (my defense), or that none of us have tried to give a formal talk about Wikipedia?
I might possibly dare say because many presentations in the usa are handled by Jimbo ?
And I hardly ever give presentations in the US. A few, yes, but I give a lot more presentations in Europe than the US. Strange but true.
--Jimbo
On Sat, 9 Jul 2005, Jimmy Wales wrote:
Anthere wrote:
I found it noteworthy that there are so few records of Presentations in the US. Is it because none of us Americans know about this page (my defense), or that none of us have tried to give a formal talk about Wikipedia?
I might possibly dare say because many presentations in the usa are handled by Jimbo ?
And I hardly ever give presentations in the US. A few, yes, but I give a lot more presentations in Europe than the US. Strange but true.
Based on the response I got Thursday, I'd venture to say that there is a lot of interest in the US about Wikipedia. Giving talks like this is an easy way to encourage more people to join, & raise awareness.
And I hope someone with the technical knowledge does act on my suggestion about writing articles for money. I don't know if it would pay more than the price of a dinner out, but if a Wikipedian has gained the experience, & likes to share what she/he learned, then why not get paid for it?
Geoff
Thanks Geoff,
It's nice to see something Wikipedia related that isn't about problems and disagreements. It lightened up the list and this was certainly the right place to post it. Talks like yours are what we need to raise interest in new members.
Good job.
--Mgm
Geoff Burling (llywrch@agora.rdrop.com) [050709 03:59]:
- Another person afterwards buttonholed me, & proposed Yet
Another Method of stablizing Wikipedia content for the 1.0 release. I tried to assure him that David Gerard had the issue well in hand, & was working towards a workable implementation that would likely be released in 12 months' time.
Hah. It's stalled at the validation feature, which is stalled at Brion not liking the present code :-) But the code is getting some work and appears to be moving forward, which is good.
What was his Yet Another suggestion?
- d.
On Sat, 9 Jul 2005, David Gerard wrote:
Geoff Burling (llywrch@agora.rdrop.com) [050709 03:59]:
- Another person afterwards buttonholed me, & proposed Yet
Another Method of stablizing Wikipedia content for the 1.0 release. I tried to assure him that David Gerard had the issue well in hand, & was working towards a workable implementation that would likely be released in 12 months' time.
Hah. It's stalled at the validation feature, which is stalled at Brion not liking the present code :-) But the code is getting some work and appears to be moving forward, which is good.
What was his Yet Another suggestion?
To ask people to rate the articles, then based on an algorythm that would measure the rating against how many changes had been made to the article in the last time period.
By the word "rating", he appeared to suggest a method not as comprehensive as what I've seen discussed on the relevant meta page -- & didn't demonstrate any interest in my attempt to explain what work had already been done. Or maybe it was that we've hashed out this issue many times, & proposed many Yet Another Methods ourselves, & I wasn't all that interested in listening to a suggestion from someone who had only heard of Wikipedia that night & all he knew was what I had told him.
I hope the latter was not the case: I would hate to discover that someone had come up with a good idea, & due to my own prejudices I failed to give it a fair hearing.
Geoff
Geoff Burling (llywrch@agora.rdrop.com) [050710 10:49]:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2005, David Gerard wrote:
Hah. It's stalled at the validation feature, which is stalled at Brion not liking the present code :-) But the code is getting some work and appears to be moving forward, which is good. What was his Yet Another suggestion?
To ask people to rate the articles, then based on an algorythm that would measure the rating against how many changes had been made to the article in the last time period.
Oooo. That's actually an interesting wrinkle. That one could do with more thought.
& I wasn't all that interested in listening to a suggestion from someone who had only heard of Wikipedia that night & all he knew was what I had told him.
Aw. Don't Bite The Newbies ;-) We should take notice of the fact that Wikipedia is a fascinating structure as a geek toy.
I hope the latter was not the case: I would hate to discover that someone had come up with a good idea, & due to my own prejudices I failed to give it a fair hearing.
You've mentioned it here, so the idea isn't lost!
- d.
On 7/8/05, Geoff Burling llywrch@agora.rdrop.com wrote:
- One person asked if the goals of Commons & Wikisource don't
overlap the goals of the Gutenberg Project. I'm not sure I gave the right answer to his question.
Does Gutenberg do media other than whole books? That should answer that question pretty concisely. In any event, Gutenberg is clearly arranged around a very different model than us, which I think makes it pretty different (but still wonderful) thing. Gutenberg also doesn't allow self-publishing, to my knowledge, which would seem a good opposite to Commons, which encourages it.
FF