Wikipedia:Wikimedia Strategy 2017/Cycle 2/The Most Respected Source of Knowledge
Theme: The most respected source of knowledge
We will work toward ever more accurate and verifiable content. By 2030, Wikimedia projects will be seen as the most high-quality, neutral, and relevant source of knowledge. We will increase the depth of knowledge available and maintain our standards for verifiable and neutral content. We will invite experts to join us. We will help people understand how our processes make us reliable. We will show the most relevant information to people when and where they need it.
Sub-themes
edit
This theme was formed from the content generated by individual contributors and organized groups during cycle 1 discussions. Here are the sub-themes that support this theme. See the Cycle 1 Report, plus the supplementary spreadsheet and synthesis methodology of the 1800+ thematic statements.
|
Insights from movement strategy conversations and research
editInsights from the Wikimedia community (from first discussion)
edit- Week 1 summary
- Week 2 summary
- Week 3 summary
- Week 4 summary
Insights from partners and experts
edit- Summary of 20 expert interviews from India, Indonesia, Nigeria, Egypt, Brazil and Mexico (2017)
- Summaries of salons, meetings, and interviews with experts and partners
Insights from user (readers and contributors) research
editOther Research
editOpen citations
edit- I4OC, Initiative for Open Citations: https://i4oc.org/
- Mozilla Internet Health Report, see section on open innovation and access to cited work: https://d20x8vt12bnfa2.cloudfront.net/InternetHealthReport_v01.pdf
- "The Enclosure of Scholarly Infrastructure," Geoffrey Bilder: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWPZkZ180Ho&feature=youtu.be
Scholarly articles
edit- "Distinguishing Scholarly from Non-Scholarly Periodicals: A checklist of criteria, introductions and definitions," Cornell University Library: http://guides.library.cornell.edu/scholarlyjournals
Questions
edit
These are the main questions we want you to consider and debate during this discussion. Please support your arguments with research when possible.
|
If you have specific ideas for improving the software, please consider submitting them in Phabricator or the product's specific talkpage.