Well, respectfully I disagree, Gerard, on your view, or analysis of the stats. Edit is used vague on our community: from writing a FA almost alone to doing a WiiGnome task. We need both, but those two activities require not a same amount of communication skills as well involvement to wiki editing commuity lives.
We have a certain number of people who edit several languages. I edit English Wikiquote and Japanese (even most of those edits are on talks or project name spaces). I know some translators who edit several languages - but I'm not sure we assure every those "multilingual" editors edit main namespace of each projects mainly. I was honored to be called Aphaia on all wikis once by a certain editor who visited #wikipedia.ja, but it didn't mean I was then active as writer of articles - rather it may have meant I created interlang links aggressively.
So I'd like to ask in which way we keep and assure our community as multilingual? Honestly I have been thinking this for years seriously. Even on meta, it was not once I was accused just because I left a note in Japanese - when I had a hardship to express my opinion enough in English. I remember still how I was accused then - I was accused because I didn't write in English "the language everyone can read".
How then can such a community multilingual? Or in other words, what have we been doing for making our community multilingual? We have devout translators - and always I thank them and feel honored to collaborate with them, but, or because I have been working with them, I feel we need more other ways to assure and empower multilingual aspects of our Wikimedia community.
Cheers,
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, Recently research showed that the majority of our editors is multi lingual and edits on multiple projects. This is without considering Commons ... I have a user on 491 projects and I am certainly not the only one who has many many profiles.
As we did not know the extend to which we generally edit in many languages, we have not considered the needs of this majority. Our view has always been on single projects. We can do better and we should do better for our majority. Thanks, GerardM
http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.com/2011/06/in-defence-of-social-networks-ii...
On 28 June 2011 13:27, Peter Coombe thewub.wiki@googlemail.com wrote:
On 28 June 2011 08:35, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, I have read the replies that are against social networking functionality.
In
my opinion you are all missing the point. Our projects are crowd sourced projects and we do not support collaboration, we do not support special projects. We need to.
Yeah! Special projects with a narrower focus would be great, how about giving them a catchy name like "WikiProjects". Maybe we could give every article a "talk page" for users to collaborate on. Heck, let's go mad and give users their own talk pages too! Now if only there was some protocol for real time chats we could use...
Social networking in our context will not be a Facebook, a Twitter or an IRC. It will have the parts that we need and it will support our
activities.
Thanks,
I'm all for improving the interface around these things, but exactly what functionality are you asking for that we don't already have?
Pete / the wub
On 27 June 2011 18:24, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi. Wikipedia should be more like a social network. It provides us with
the
opportunity to reach out to people when we want to crowd source some activity. We have a problem in retaining people particular newbies.
When
we
show a social side to our work on open content (not only encyclopaedic content) we stand a better chance we are likely to do better. Thanks, GerardM
That's an interesting theory. Wikipedia is sort of the epitome of a social enterprise, and all of the good and the bad in the project can be traced to its social nature. Trying to make it more like a "social network" can only be interpreted as making it more like some other social network, perhaps by integrating purely social mechanisms a la Facebook. Of course, that could either help or hinder, with no way to know for sure in advance; perhaps encouraging more social interaction would exacerbate and personalize the disputes and conflicts that drive people away.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l