Hoi,
The basic assumption of Wikipedia is the article. When we are truly to
reach out and take a next step, it has to be more than Wikipedia, more than
obsessing with articles. People are not looking for articles, they are
looking for information on subjects. Information on subjects may be
delivered in the format of articles but it may also be delivered in the
format of books data presentations and images.
This obsession of Wikipedia being the objective of all of that we do, the
format that is to apply to everything we do is holding us back. A few
examples; we do not officially present the data of Wikidata in a format
that is useful to humans. Such formats have existed for years in the format
of Reasonator and recently in the format of Scholia. Compare that to the
bickering about including Wikidata in Wikipedia and it is obvious how
Wikipedia is holding us back. Several volunteers used data from many
sources and created a wealth of Wikipedia articles that would otherwise
have hardly any at all. The verdict: it is not by a community and
consequently it cannot be maintained. No research has been done, no
outreach happened. It is a success story that does not fit the mold and is
ignored. Within the movement there is a general agreement that the gender
gap affects us all. It is why we celebrate the success of the diminishment
of this gap and rightfully so as it is pervasive and recognisable in all of
our projects. It is however not our biggest bias. Our biggest bias is the
AngloAmerican bias.
The only way out of it I see is in a change of outlook. Our outlook needs
to be less Wikipedia and its articles and more about what DO we have on a
subject and expose them in any form we have. Expose them together with all
the organisations that have a compatible outlook. When we actively engage
people who seek information by asking them to expand on what they seek, we
will slowly but surely increase the amount of information we hold and have
this information in all of our languages.
This different approach can happily coexist with our Wikipedia bias. It
does not take much to get it of the ground. What it does take is the
realisation that Wikimedia is NOT Wikipedia. This is necessary for this
experiment to start..
Thanks,
GerardM
On Sat, 13 Apr 2019 at 17:56, Samuel Klein <meta.sj(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat., Apr. 13, 2019, 2:27 a.m. Gerard Meijssen,
<
gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Wikipedia is indeed clearly the core global brand. The notion that
Wikidata will "never match Wikipedia whatever its future success" is a
sad
argument.
You misunderstand me. I do not mean in importance: Wikidata will surely be
equally important to knowledge sharing, and more pervasive, though the two
are hard to compare and not independent.
I mean purely in the memetics and brand sense: the history of humanity will
keep a mention of Wikipedia for centuries, should we persist that long.
Its success, elegance, and defiance of previous assumptions remains in many
places the dominant shorthand for crowdsourcing, period; for editable
websites; the standard visual template for reference works.
Other projects that follow in those footsteps, even if they become much
more influential or pervasive, will not surpass the deep and broad appeal
of the original.
====
That said !
Aside from recognizing confusion around 'Wikimedia' that we can reduce, I
reckon a central
branding focus should be making our messaging and core interactions
(including Wikidata and Commons meta pages) truly interlingual. This takes
a combination of software, translators, and brand focus. It is the obvious
way to meaningfully amplify reach and participation in underrepresented
regions: literally underrepresented because the projects don't seem to
speak to or to know how to hear from them; and because of iterative network
effects of those on projects inviting their friends, enemies, and
colleagues.
Rather than the somewhat zero sum efforts to change branding in a way that
shifts around community expectations (and may not attract any more
contributors), a branding effort that enhances cross language connection
and reminds people of the global bounty of the projects, would be an
updraft for all.
Run translation drives every month, posting banners in other languages on
each project inviting participation. ;). Revel in the experimental
brokenness of multilingual-talk-page tools and invite pan-language web
designers to.come play + iterate with us, w a bit UN and translator-network
campaign.
We don't have to keep repainting the sign on our house, we can now
relandscape the entire neighborhood.
SJ
p.s. if Commons hates 'Wikicommons' we can vid up and return to its
original name, MultimediaWiki.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>