Strategy project

The strategy wikiproject is an ongoing discussion about how best to develop, assess, and update strategy for the movement -- including aligning movement-wide and entity-specific plans, and tracking proposals and opportunities and risks.

Topics

Initially drawn from past strategy docs and category:issues. Feel free to add your own.

[[: :Category:Communication|Communication]]; [[::Category:Discussions|Discussions]]; Translation; [[::Category:Multilingualism|Multilingualism]]; Community engagement

Content: Controversial content; Maintenance and Management; Multimedia and Formats; Quality; Peer review

Cultural institutions: GLAM projects; Government docs and data; Work with professors and grads

Education: Work with schools; Offline snapshots and texts

Planning and policy: [[::Category:Essays|Essays]]; Research, Editor surveys; Paid editing

Governance: Conflicts

Legal issues: Privacy; Intellectual property

Infrastructure: Distributed infrastracture; Preserving the right to fork

Patterns: Problem statements

Vision: Mission; Wishes

Hard questions

How can we encourage participations from new communities of editors?

How can we strengthen our current communities without realizing the Iron Law of Oligarchy?

How can we provide for fast multilingual communication, across language communities?

How should we support the development of the open Web, and the preservation of freedoms that our projects need to be successful? (NB: the WMF has $1M/year we can spend on advocacy before we have to start separating out those costs and paying taxes on them. Currently we spend none of that.)

How can we resolve these open controversial issues:

Being thoughtful about our impact on the lives of others
- Being respectful of others, especially living people profiled on our projects. When does the value of a controversy outweigh the harm to its principals? When are we willing to republish and broadcast negative information that has appeared in other less prominent media?
- Limiting harassment by editors of other editors, and by editors of article subjects
- Providing for the needs of children using our projects (reading, editing). Comfortable spaces to contribute and edit with other children; customizable reading and writing experiences.
Allowing everyone to contribute to the best of their ability
- Allowing experts in a field to provide feedback and peer review, without requiring them to also learn to edit and debate with the community (others can choose how to act on their feedback)
- Helping casual readers and editors to contribute knowledge they care about, even when it is hyperlocal, or does not fit the scope of the first project they try to contribute to.
Creating a rewarding and customizable experience for readers and contributors
- Allowing readers to set preferences for seeing/hiding NSFW content
- Allowing editors to socialize or limit socialization as they see fit (e.g., social network features on the one hand, and killfiles on the other)
Improving quality and attribution, while increasing awareness of content limitations
- Making last-edit timestamps, lists of contributing editors, and talk-page discussions visible on article pages
- Increasing the visibility and specificity of disclaimers
- Increasing the use of flagged revisions and similar tools
- Developing and implementing annotation to increase visibility and specificity of comments and quality flags

Interested Participants

SJ
Jan-Bart
Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 12:46, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
trm^ger 14:20, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Arnaugir
Abbasjnr (talk) 10:05, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
LauraHale (talk) 14:25, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
...

Discussion

All comments and reflections are welcome here. If your community is working on its own roadmap, strategy, or other plan, please link to it.

How should we develop this project so that it does not itself suffer from systemic bias?

Past comments are on the talk page.