Hoi, At the research mailing list two relevant activities were mentioned that do not adequately take place.
* *Gamified interfaces for microcontributions à la Wikidata game* ** **Ubiquitous outreach, supported by dedicated technology*
The notion exists that it is possible to do all kind of technological things to make things stand out more but the big problem is imho not technological. It is not content, it is the awareness that marketing is more than selling things.
A respected Wikimedian made the bold statement that "Wikipedia could absolutely have 100x the number of editors it has now".I would argue that this is correct
My question is not could marketing methods make a difference but what objectives do we have that will benefit from a marketing approach. What does it take to be more pro-active towards our objectives? Thanks, GerardM
Marketing can get someone to buy a product once; the problem is to get them to buy another, and that depends on the quality of the product. It is much easier to get new first time editors than to give them the encouragement and satisfaction to keep them going.
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 5:38 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, At the research mailing list two relevant activities were mentioned that do not adequately take place.
- *Gamified interfaces for microcontributions à la Wikidata game*
** **Ubiquitous outreach, supported by dedicated technology*
The notion exists that it is possible to do all kind of technological things to make things stand out more but the big problem is imho not technological. It is not content, it is the awareness that marketing is more than selling things.
A respected Wikimedian made the bold statement that "Wikipedia could absolutely have 100x the number of editors it has now".I would argue that this is correct
My question is not could marketing methods make a difference but what objectives do we have that will benefit from a marketing approach. What does it take to be more pro-active towards our objectives? Thanks, GerardM _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hoi, Yes. It is indeed another area where we could do a lot better. We do not show how effective the work is that people do. We do not inform them how many reads were done for new articles. All things that are really easy to do when we think of it. But we do not.
So yes we need marketing to get new people and we need marketing to keep the people that appear. That is also something that is of what marketing people do; how to get and keep a market. Thanks, GerardM
On 28 August 2016 at 17:19, David Goodman dggenwp@gmail.com wrote:
Marketing can get someone to buy a product once; the problem is to get them to buy another, and that depends on the quality of the product. It is much easier to get new first time editors than to give them the encouragement and satisfaction to keep them going.
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 5:38 AM, Gerard Meijssen < gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
Hoi, At the research mailing list two relevant activities were mentioned that
do
not adequately take place.
- *Gamified interfaces for microcontributions à la Wikidata game*
** **Ubiquitous outreach, supported by dedicated technology*
The notion exists that it is possible to do all kind of technological things to make things stand out more but the big problem is imho not technological. It is not content, it is the awareness that marketing is more than selling things.
A respected Wikimedian made the bold statement that "Wikipedia could absolutely have 100x the number of editors it has now".I would argue that this is correct
My question is not could marketing methods make a difference but what objectives do we have that will benefit from a marketing approach. What does it take to be more pro-active towards our objectives? Thanks, GerardM _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- David Goodman
DGG at the enWP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hi,
when you write "we do not inform them how many reads were done for new articles" you don't include all wikis, I hope. In the history section of the articles on Bulgarian Wikipedia [0] there is a link to a pageviews analysis [1] where everyone can see how often the article was read in the last up to 90 days.
Best regards, Nikola / User:Lord Bumbury
[0] https://bg.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%9B%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%BD%D0%B8_%D..., look for the word "посещенията". [1] https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/?project=bg.wikipedia.org&platform=a...
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, Yes. It is indeed another area where we could do a lot better. We do not show how effective the work is that people do. We do not inform them how many reads were done for new articles. All things that are really easy to do when we think of it. But we do not.
So yes we need marketing to get new people and we need marketing to keep the people that appear. That is also something that is of what marketing people do; how to get and keep a market. Thanks, GerardM
On 28 August 2016 at 17:19, David Goodman dggenwp@gmail.com wrote:
Marketing can get someone to buy a product once; the problem is to get them to buy another, and that depends on the quality of the product. It
is
much easier to get new first time editors than to give them the encouragement and satisfaction to keep them going.
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 5:38 AM, Gerard Meijssen < gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
Hoi, At the research mailing list two relevant activities were mentioned
that
do
not adequately take place.
- *Gamified interfaces for microcontributions à la Wikidata game*
** **Ubiquitous outreach, supported by dedicated technology*
The notion exists that it is possible to do all kind of technological things to make things stand out more but the big problem is imho not technological. It is not content, it is the awareness that marketing is more than selling things.
A respected Wikimedian made the bold statement that "Wikipedia could absolutely have 100x the number of editors it has now".I would argue
that
this is correct
My question is not could marketing methods make a difference but what objectives do we have that will benefit from a marketing approach. What does it take to be more pro-active towards our objectives? Thanks, GerardM _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- David Goodman
DGG at the enWP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hoi, I have followed what the WMF does for years and if proper marketing was done, it would be known what the effect is of the information you refer to and there would be an idea on how and why this information is available and what we can achieve with it. Consider, when I write 10 new articles, what articles are read often and why. Are specific topics more read than others? What effect is there when we write even more on a topic? Are there tipping points where the coverage of a subject starts to get more readers and editors?
Marketing is not only about having data, there is plenty of that. It is about what you do with it. Without a plan, a purpose accumulating data is an academic excercise; it is its own goal and it brings us little that is actionable. Marketing begins when you define what you aim to achieve and ask yourself questions like
- What can I do to share the presentations given at Wikimania (or any other WMF conference) ? - or how do we get more mileage out of Wikimania - What can we do to identify the women that are notable and do not have an article in a Wikipedia? - can we write articles that will actually be read about women? - What can we do to bring more references to Wikidata from Wikipedia? - our friends at DBpedia sit on a ton of quality data, how do we incorporate it as Wikipedians do not trust Wikidata without references?
For these three questions there are actionable ways of providing a better solution, the question is do we care to bring us to the next level. Do we dare?
Thanks, GerardM
On 1 September 2016 at 14:08, Nikola Kalchev nikola.kalchev@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
when you write "we do not inform them how many reads were done for new articles" you don't include all wikis, I hope. In the history section of the articles on Bulgarian Wikipedia [0] there is a link to a pageviews analysis [1] where everyone can see how often the article was read in the last up to 90 days.
Best regards, Nikola / User:Lord Bumbury
[0] https://bg.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%9B%D0%B5% D1%82%D0%BD%D0%B8_%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%BF%D0%B8%D0% B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8_%D0%B8%D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B8_2016&action=history, look for the word "посещенията". [1] https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/?project=bg. wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&range= latest-20&pages=%D0%9B%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%BD%D0%B8_%D0%BE%D0% BB%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%BF%D0%B8%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8_%D0%B8% D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B8_2016
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Gerard Meijssen < gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
Hoi, Yes. It is indeed another area where we could do a lot better. We do not show how effective the work is that people do. We do not inform them how many reads were done for new articles. All things that are really easy to do when we think of it. But we do not.
So yes we need marketing to get new people and we need marketing to keep the people that appear. That is also something that is of what marketing people do; how to get and keep a market. Thanks, GerardM
On 28 August 2016 at 17:19, David Goodman dggenwp@gmail.com wrote:
Marketing can get someone to buy a product once; the problem is to get them to buy another, and that depends on the quality of the product. It
is
much easier to get new first time editors than to give them the encouragement and satisfaction to keep them going.
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 5:38 AM, Gerard Meijssen < gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
Hoi, At the research mailing list two relevant activities were mentioned
that
do
not adequately take place.
- *Gamified interfaces for microcontributions à la Wikidata game*
** **Ubiquitous outreach, supported by dedicated technology*
The notion exists that it is possible to do all kind of technological things to make things stand out more but the big problem is imho not technological. It is not content, it is the awareness that marketing
is
more than selling things.
A respected Wikimedian made the bold statement that "Wikipedia could absolutely have 100x the number of editors it has now".I would argue
that
this is correct
My question is not could marketing methods make a difference but what objectives do we have that will benefit from a marketing approach.
What
does it take to be more pro-active towards our objectives? Thanks, GerardM _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- David Goodman
DGG at the enWP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hi Gerard and all,
This is a great topic, and one we think about often as the Communications team. In the past 2 years in fact, the Communications team has intentionally grown to better support Wikimedia project awareness and usage, including through new hires and approaches.
We generally use words like audience development, outreach, and awareness rather than "marketing," but it's a similar (and some may argue the same) idea. Of course, we're not a traditional organization or movement, so we need to adapt based on the fact that we're not "selling" anything. Instead, we're driven by our mission and commitment to Wikimedia values and communities. In short, the objective is to systematically grow audiences for Wikimedia in a mission-aligned way, using research, media (digital or otherwise), campaigns, and messaging.
We've hired people with specific experience in marketing and communications, including in audience growth, social media, branding, and awareness. You can learn more about our team here: https://meta.wikimedia. org/wiki/Communications. For more on our team's work, see this year's Annual Plan: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_ Annual_Plan/2016-2017/revised#Communications. This area of [insert industry term of your choice here] is relatively new for the Foundation and we still have plenty of room to grow. But we're optimistic that in collaboration with the community we can help grow future Wikimedia audiences.
Finally, we're interested in continuing to partner with community members and affiliates. We often collaborate with affiliates on campaigns (for example, around Wikipedia 15 https://15.wikipedia.org/), conduct trainings at events, and have recently further developed the Communications resource center: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/ Communications/Resource_center
In short, we are completely with you, and if you have ideas and questions about raising project awareness and usage, we'd love to talk.
Yours, *The Wikimedia Foundation Communications Department*
On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 5:32 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, I have followed what the WMF does for years and if proper marketing was done, it would be known what the effect is of the information you refer to and there would be an idea on how and why this information is available and what we can achieve with it. Consider, when I write 10 new articles, what articles are read often and why. Are specific topics more read than others? What effect is there when we write even more on a topic? Are there tipping points where the coverage of a subject starts to get more readers and editors?
Marketing is not only about having data, there is plenty of that. It is about what you do with it. Without a plan, a purpose accumulating data is an academic excercise; it is its own goal and it brings us little that is actionable. Marketing begins when you define what you aim to achieve and ask yourself questions like
- What can I do to share the presentations given at Wikimania (or any
other WMF conference) ? - or how do we get more mileage out of Wikimania - What can we do to identify the women that are notable and do not have an article in a Wikipedia?
- can we write articles that will actually be read about women?
incorporate it as Wikipedians do not trust Wikidata without
- What can we do to bring more references to Wikidata from Wikipedia?
- our friends at DBpedia sit on a ton of quality data, how do we
references?
For these three questions there are actionable ways of providing a better solution, the question is do we care to bring us to the next level. Do we dare?
Thanks, GerardM
On 1 September 2016 at 14:08, Nikola Kalchev nikola.kalchev@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
when you write "we do not inform them how many reads were done for new articles" you don't include all wikis, I hope. In the history section of the articles on Bulgarian Wikipedia [0] there is a link to a pageviews analysis [1] where everyone can see how often the article was read in the last up to 90 days.
Best regards, Nikola / User:Lord Bumbury
[0] https://bg.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%9B%D0%B5% D1%82%D0%BD%D0%B8_%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%BF%D0%B8%D0% B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8_%D0%B8%D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B8_2016&action=history, look for the word "посещенията". [1] https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/?project=bg. wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&range= latest-20&pages=%D0%9B%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%BD%D0%B8_%D0%BE%D0% BB%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%BF%D0%B8%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8_%D0%B8% D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B8_2016
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Gerard Meijssen < gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
Hoi, Yes. It is indeed another area where we could do a lot better. We do
not
show how effective the work is that people do. We do not inform them
how
many reads were done for new articles. All things that are really easy
to
do when we think of it. But we do not.
So yes we need marketing to get new people and we need marketing to
keep
the people that appear. That is also something that is of what
marketing
people do; how to get and keep a market. Thanks, GerardM
On 28 August 2016 at 17:19, David Goodman dggenwp@gmail.com wrote:
Marketing can get someone to buy a product once; the problem is to
get
them to buy another, and that depends on the quality of the product.
It
is
much easier to get new first time editors than to give them the encouragement and satisfaction to keep them going.
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 5:38 AM, Gerard Meijssen < gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
Hoi, At the research mailing list two relevant activities were mentioned
that
do
not adequately take place.
- *Gamified interfaces for microcontributions à la Wikidata game*
** **Ubiquitous outreach, supported by dedicated technology*
The notion exists that it is possible to do all kind of
technological
things to make things stand out more but the big problem is imho
not
technological. It is not content, it is the awareness that
marketing
is
more than selling things.
A respected Wikimedian made the bold statement that "Wikipedia
could
absolutely have 100x the number of editors it has now".I would
argue
that
this is correct
My question is not could marketing methods make a difference but
what
objectives do we have that will benefit from a marketing approach.
What
does it take to be more pro-active towards our objectives? Thanks, GerardM _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
-- David Goodman
DGG at the enWP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hoi, Heather, I posed only three questions. It is possible to easily make inroads on all three subjects if they are important to us. I have said repeatedly that we can achieve a much higher number of readers of finished Wikisource content (exponentially) when we market what we have. The first steps are under way to bring data to Commons. When the re-usage of Commons is a WMF priority it has implications for the implementation strategy.
When I read the draft of the communications plan, it is abstract. Not actionable. When Marketing is real, it is more than communication. It has key performance indicators associated with specific projects.
- Magnus has a framework for micro contributions. Do some small marketing and see if an interest can be generated. For instance find a topic for an existing game relevant to a small Wikipedia and target it for that language. (get some actual data) - We had lists of Wikimania presentations. Make them available widely. As these lists expand see if more people watch Wikimania presentations and make damn sure that the quality of the presentations is "good enough". Many London presentations are not good enough. - Wikipedians prevent the use of Wikidata data in info boxes in places because "there are no references". It is a bullshit argument as it says so little about quality but when you make a big spiel about this DBpedia data (that is what marketing does) and see what can be done to adopt this data expediently. It will not make the nay sayers go away but it destroys their argument. It is also a KPI for Wikidata. - We have data in Wikidata about Wikisource. Consider using it for the finished books and projects and have people actually READ them. Just a small link to Wikisource to indicate that there is more that is worked on. Learn from the Malayalam project (outside of WMF) that actually does it and make Malayalam Wikisource more relevant. This is a genuine marketing / sales job. - With Rosie I am working towards getting more women recognised because they are on a "Woman's hall of fame". Software by Magnus is used to compile and update these lists. There are several technical issues the most important one is that we have no proper way of dealing with red links in Wikipedia. The way the women in red pioneered this issue can be repeated for any issue or topic. A proper solution for red links will bring a quality improvement to Wikipedia and it can be implemented without changing all the set ways of the "golden oldies". It makes activism for for instance gender issues more effective and it allows for more focus for a drive for articles on speciality subjects. - Finally a warning. On Wikidata medical information on "FDA approved substances" are added without any consideration of the effectiveness of such substances. For many Cochrane makes comparisons with placebos and the conclusion is that existing sources do not prove it is better than a placebo and warn for side effects. Such indiscriminate inclusion of data is generally approved. There is no consideration of the effect it has on the quality of Wikidata and its NPOV. In my perspective people that import such data have an interest/involvement in such data. <grin> It is for you guys of marketing to have a proper answer when questions are raised </grin>
All these points can be implemented without too many technical issues. My question, is communication just that or can we really talk?
Thanks,
GerardM
On 2 September 2016 at 03:03, Heather Walls hwalls@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi Gerard and all,
This is a great topic, and one we think about often as the Communications team. In the past 2 years in fact, the Communications team has intentionally grown to better support Wikimedia project awareness and usage, including through new hires and approaches.
We generally use words like audience development, outreach, and awareness rather than "marketing," but it's a similar (and some may argue the same) idea. Of course, we're not a traditional organization or movement, so we need to adapt based on the fact that we're not "selling" anything. Instead, we're driven by our mission and commitment to Wikimedia values and communities. In short, the objective is to systematically grow audiences for Wikimedia in a mission-aligned way, using research, media (digital or otherwise), campaigns, and messaging.
We've hired people with specific experience in marketing and communications, including in audience growth, social media, branding, and awareness. You can learn more about our team here: https://meta.wikimedia. org/wiki/Communications. For more on our team's work, see this year's Annual Plan: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_ Annual_Plan/2016-2017/revised#Communications. This area of [insert industry term of your choice here] is relatively new for the Foundation and we still have plenty of room to grow. But we're optimistic that in collaboration with the community we can help grow future Wikimedia audiences.
Finally, we're interested in continuing to partner with community members and affiliates. We often collaborate with affiliates on campaigns (for example, around Wikipedia 15 https://15.wikipedia.org/), conduct trainings at events, and have recently further developed the Communications resource center: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/ Communications/Resource_center
In short, we are completely with you, and if you have ideas and questions about raising project awareness and usage, we'd love to talk.
Yours, *The Wikimedia Foundation Communications Department*
On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 5:32 AM, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com
wrote:
Hoi, I have followed what the WMF does for years and if proper marketing was done, it would be known what the effect is of the information you refer
to
and there would be an idea on how and why this information is available
and
what we can achieve with it. Consider, when I write 10 new articles, what articles are read often and why. Are specific topics more read than
others?
What effect is there when we write even more on a topic? Are there
tipping
points where the coverage of a subject starts to get more readers and editors?
Marketing is not only about having data, there is plenty of that. It is about what you do with it. Without a plan, a purpose accumulating data is an academic excercise; it is its own goal and it brings us little that is actionable. Marketing begins when you define what you aim to achieve and ask yourself questions like
- What can I do to share the presentations given at Wikimania (or any
other WMF conference) ? - or how do we get more mileage out of Wikimania - What can we do to identify the women that are notable and do not have an article in a Wikipedia?
- can we write articles that will actually be read about women?
- What can we do to bring more references to Wikidata from
Wikipedia?
- our friends at DBpedia sit on a ton of quality data, how do we incorporate it as Wikipedians do not trust Wikidata withoutreferences?
For these three questions there are actionable ways of providing a better solution, the question is do we care to bring us to the next level. Do we dare?
Thanks, GerardM
On 1 September 2016 at 14:08, Nikola Kalchev nikola.kalchev@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
when you write "we do not inform them how many reads were done for new articles" you don't include all wikis, I hope. In the history section
of
the articles on Bulgarian Wikipedia [0] there is a link to a pageviews analysis [1] where everyone can see how often the article was read in
the
last up to 90 days.
Best regards, Nikola / User:Lord Bumbury
[0] https://bg.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D0%9B%D0%B5% D1%82%D0%BD%D0%B8_%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%BF%D0%B8%D0% B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8_%D0%B8%D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B8_2016&action=history, look for the word "посещенията". [1] https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/?project=bg. wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&range= latest-20&pages=%D0%9B%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%BD%D0%B8_%D0%BE%D0% BB%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%BF%D0%B8%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8_%D0%B8% D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B8_2016
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Gerard Meijssen < gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
Hoi, Yes. It is indeed another area where we could do a lot better. We do
not
show how effective the work is that people do. We do not inform them
how
many reads were done for new articles. All things that are really
easy
to
do when we think of it. But we do not.
So yes we need marketing to get new people and we need marketing to
keep
the people that appear. That is also something that is of what
marketing
people do; how to get and keep a market. Thanks, GerardM
On 28 August 2016 at 17:19, David Goodman dggenwp@gmail.com wrote:
Marketing can get someone to buy a product once; the problem is to
get
them to buy another, and that depends on the quality of the
product.
It
is
much easier to get new first time editors than to give them the encouragement and satisfaction to keep them going.
On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 5:38 AM, Gerard Meijssen < gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
Hoi, At the research mailing list two relevant activities were
mentioned
that
do
not adequately take place.
- *Gamified interfaces for microcontributions à la Wikidata game*
** **Ubiquitous outreach, supported by dedicated technology*
The notion exists that it is possible to do all kind of
technological
things to make things stand out more but the big problem is imho
not
technological. It is not content, it is the awareness that
marketing
is
more than selling things.
A respected Wikimedian made the bold statement that "Wikipedia
could
absolutely have 100x the number of editors it has now".I would
argue
that
this is correct
My question is not could marketing methods make a difference but
what
objectives do we have that will benefit from a marketing
approach.
What
does it take to be more pro-active towards our objectives? Thanks, GerardM _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
-- David Goodman
DGG at the enWP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
--
*Heather Walls * Wikimedia Foundation annual.wikimedia.org https://annual.wikimedia.org/2014/ _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org