From my perspective, when you consider collaboration with an Indian perspective, there are two several ways to approach this. When you look at the magnificent work done on the localisation of MediaWiki, Telugu is the first language that has met the requirements of the Betawiki localisation for all four categories. Many other languages are also doing extremely well in the process of getting their localisation to a level where the readers and writers of their language can contribute to the language. The one language that is sadly doing not so well is Hindi.

So when you look at it from an INDIAN perspective, things are looking up. When you look at the English Wikipedia, there is a lot of writing that can be done about Indian subjects. There is bound to be an en,wikipedia project that deals with this.

When you look at the ease of use, some of the templates as used in the projects are so complicated that I would not even try to understand them. However, that does not mean that I cannot use them. Now these templates can be localised to a large extend and this will make it less complicated for people to use them in their language.

In conclusion, when you look at Wikipedia with an Indian perspective, things are not bad at all. It takes time to get accustomed to the way Wikipedia works but with the improved localisation that is becoming less complicated.


On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 7:02 AM, Utkarshraj Atmaram <utcursch@goowy.com> wrote:

On 10 March 2008, Sidin Vadukut <sidin.vadukut at gmail.com> wrote:

> However one of them mentioned that it is slowly becoming more and

> more difficult for new writers to join in as contributions have

> become extremely complicated. Some of the simplest things lead to

> disputes and trivialities cause locks on certain articles.


> I was wondering if you guys had an opinion on this? Is Wikipedia

> increasingly becoming more and more difficult for first-timers? I am

> talking about those who intend to specialize in certain topics and

> be active and regular.

I am not sure what exactly do you mean by "contributions have become

extremely complicated". Are you referring to Wikipedia's now-somewhat

stringent standards for accepting articles? Or do you mean that the

wiki-syntax is too difficult? Or are you concerned that the cabals,

vandals and trolls are scaring away the new contributors?

As a society, Wikipedia is bound to grow more complex as it grows.

If the new contributors face a problem that they do not know how to

deal with (vandalism, another abusive user etc.), they can head over

to the new contributors' help page (the link to this page appears on

the help page):


Wikipedia's standards for accepting articles have evolved over the

years. Most Wikipedians will accept that the standards have become

more stringent, but these standards are necessary because in addition

to a lot of positive contributors, Wikipedia also attracts a number of

vandals, trolls and spammers. Very short articles created without

references, inappropriate pages, images uploaded without a license or

text copied from another website are bound to get deleted. Most

newly-created articles or newly-uploaded images are deleted because

they're either copyright violation (e.g. image of the user's favorite

actress copied from a film website) or because they're outside

Wikipedia's project scope (e.g. an article on an little-known school

band). New users can avoid such experiences by learning a few basics

of contributing to Wikipedia. On the article creation page, the users

are presented with a few instructions and a link to

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Your_first_article>. Creating

an article that'll not get deleted is as simple as following these


The disputes (trivial or non-trivial) are a part of any large

collaborative project. This is not something specific to the new

users; controversial topics (e.g. Israel-Palestine) will always

attract disputes. The new users generally find themselves embroiled in

disputes, when they make controversial edits an article without going

through the talk page archives (where the issues might have been

discussed more than once in the past). An example is the article on

Muhammad -- many new users try to remove the images from the article,

without bothering to read the talk page, where the rationale for

including the image is explained in detail.

The vandals and trolls are a serious problem. Citizendium

<http://en.citizendium.org> is trying to deal with them (and other

issues like reliability) by disallowing anonymous editing. At

Wikipedia, we have an article validation proposal

<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Article_validation> in the works. It

can be tested at <http://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandbox>

As for understanding the wiki syntax, and the Wikipedia policies and

guidelines, these are the minimum basics. The users who joined

Wikipedia three years ago also learned them.

Wikipedia is just like any other project open to public

participation. Before people start contributing, they need to learn a

few basics. The set of "basics" grow larger as the project grows larger.




Wikimediaindia-l mailing list