Intervista a Jimbo Wales a proposito di Wikipedia: differenze tra le versioni
Contenuto cancellato Contenuto aggiunto
Nessun oggetto della modifica |
m fix messaggio traduzione |
||
Riga 1:
{{data|22 febbraio 2006}}
{{Damigliorare|'''Questo articolo non è ancora stato tradotto completamente.''' Se sei in grado, potresti tradurlo tu. Grazie.}}
{{WikimediaMenzione}}
Riga 26:
'''JW:''' We should be tightly focused on the quality of our coverage and content. The goal of Wikipedia is to create and distribute a freely licensed high quality encyclopedia. The path to that goal will require us to be flexible and thoughtful. The first steps will come soon with the article review system, which will initially be used simply to gather data. After we have data, we can begin to work on how we will focus our attention to improve quality.<br><br>
'''WN:''' ''[[w:en:User:GeorgeStepanek|GeorgeStepanek]] asks: "You've said that 'Wikimedia's mission is to give the world's knowledge to every single person on the planet in their own language.' But very few of the wikipedias in the languages of third-world countries are seeing as much activity as the first-world language wikipedias. Do you have any ideas on how this could be turned around?"''
'''JW:''' I am a believer in outreach. I would like for the Foundation to raise money specifically to pay one or more minority language co-ordinators. The goal would be to reach out in a more organized way to professors and graduate students and expat communities who have good Internet access, to seed projects for languages where the majority of speakers have poor internet access.<br><br>
'''WN:''' ''[[w:en:User:Jacoplane|Jacoplane]] asks: "How do you feel we will be able to reach Wikipedia 1.0? The tools currently available for vetting our articles are crude at best. The Featured article process seems too slow, and the article validation feature seems to have died a quiet death. Are you planning a big push on this front?"''
'''JW:''' Isn't that the same question as the quality question? The article validation feature has not died a quiet death at all.<br><br>
'''WN:''' ''[[w:en:User:Quadell|Quadell]] asks: "Most important decisions on Wikimedia projects are handled with consensus. However, we sometimes have to deal with legal issues, especially related to copyright law. For instance, we as a community may need to decide whether to consider a certain use "fair", or how to deal with conflicting copyright claims. Dealing with this through consensus is problematic, since we can't do something illegal even if there is widespread misguided support for it. In general, how can we as a community deal with these issues?"''
'''JW:''' I don't think there is any real problem with this. The community is strongly in support of following the law. I don't know of any particular cases of widespread misguided support for something illegal. In particular cases, there can of course be [dis]agreement, but I have never seen anyone in the community argue that we should not listen to the advice of our legal team.<br><br>
'''WN:''' ''[[w:en:User:Raul654|Raul654]] asks: "Where do you see Wikipedia in 10 years?"''
'''JW:''' I don't know. My favorite answer to this is to say, the real question is: where will the world be after 10 more years of Wikipedia. :) Seriously, I think we'll eventually see a tapering off of new article creation in the large language wikipedias as more and more "verifiable" topics are covered. At this point, most changes will be expansions and updates and quality improvements to existing articles. But in 10 years, it seems likely to me that many languages which are now quite small will have very large Wikipedia projects. Our community will continue to become more diverse as more and more people worldwide come online.<br><br>
'''WN:''' ''[[w:en:User:Kevin Myers|Kevin Myers]] asks: "The values reflected in certain Wikipedia policies (anti-censorship, neutral point-of-view) are problematic in cultures where freedom of expression is limited, as the [[w:en:Blocking of Wikipedia in mainland China|blocking of Wikipedia in mainland China]] and arguably the [[w:en:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy|Muhammad cartoons controversy]] attest. As Wikipedia expands internationally, do you foresee Wikipedia becoming increasingly controversial in countries where "Western values" are seen as a potential threat?"''
'''JW:''' I don't think that neutrality and objectivity are really controversial among most people of the world. It is true that the leadership in some places does not value these things, and may actually work against these things, but we can not deviate from our goals to accommodate them.<br><br>
'''WN:''' ''On a similar topic, [[w:en:User:Vsion|Vsion]] asks: "Are there currently any efforts being undertaken by the Foundation to address the People's Republic of China's blocking of Wikipedia or to alleviate its effect?"''
'''JW:''' Beijing-area Wikipedians are working to have the block lifted. Our position is that the block is in error, even given China's normal policies. Wikipedia is not propaganda, it is basic information. We expect that the block will be lifted.<br><br>
'''WN:''' ''[[w:en:User:David.Monniaux|David.Monniaux]] asks: "The Foundation receives daily accusations of libel from semi-well-known people who have an entry on Wikipedia or are mentioned in some Wikipedia entry. What do you propose? Would a strict application of the rule of citing controversial claims suffice, in your opinion?"''
'''JW:''' Yes. I think that our current systems do a good job of addressing these sorts of complaints, although it is very time-consuming for us here in the office. What really works wonders is a very strict application of the rule of citing controversial claims particularly relating to biographies of living persons. The new policy on biographies of living persons is a very strong step in the right direction.<br><br>
'''WN:''' ''[[w:en:User:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway]] asks: "In the past six weeks the number of [[w:en:Wikipedia:Userboxes|userboxes]] on English Wikipedia has risen from 3500 to 6000 and, despite your [[w:en:Wikipedia:Deletion review/Userbox debates|appeals for restraint]], the number pertaining to [[w:en:Wikipedia:Userboxes/Beliefs|political beliefs]] has risen from 45 to 150. Can the problem of unsuitable userboxes still be resolved by debate?"''
'''JW:''' My only comment on the userbox situation is that the current situation is not acceptable.<br><br>
'''WN:''' ''[[w:en:User:Larsinio|Larsinio]] asks: "How can Wikipedia effectively explain to the public its open-contribution model without simultaneously worrying the public about inaccurate information?"''
'''JW:''' I think we do a reasonably good job of that. The best thing is to point to our overall quality while at the same time pointing out that we are currently a work in progress. Over time, this answer will change as we move toward '1.0'. At that time, we can point to '1.0' for those who are made nervous by the live editing.<br><br>
'''WN:''' ''[[w:en:User:Robchurch|Rob Church]] asks: "Do you consider the encyclopedia to be 'finished'? Do you think it ever can be?"''
'''JW:''' Nothing is ever finished. Human knowledge is always growing.<br><br>
'''WN:''' ''[[w:en:User:Raul654|Raul654]] and [[w:en:User:Pavel Vozenilek|Pavel Vozenilek]] both asked, "What kind of cool new features/announcements can we expect to see in the next year or two?"''
'''JW:''' I think this question is too hard for me to answer. I almost never "announce" anything, and features are developed publicly by the community. I think other people have a better idea than I do what will happen in the next year or two. :) Ask Brion [Vibber].<br><br>
'''WN:''' ''[[w:en:User:Celestianpower|Celestianpower]] asks: "If you had not founded Wikipedia, and had just been referred to it by a friend, how active a contributor do you think you would be?"''
'''JW:''' [I] dream fondly of such a scenario. I might actually get to edit articles then. Instead of spend the morning (this morning) documenting transactions and taking phone calls.<br><br>
'''WN:''' ''[[w:en:User:OpenToppedBus|OpenToppedBus]] asks: "[
'''JW:''' The last fundraising drive was more successful than had been anticipated, by a long shot. It was the most successful fund drive in our history. [Regarding a quoted goal of $500,000], Mav wrote something like that somewhere, in a scratchpad kind of way. That number was just a placeholder and had nothing to do with me or the official view of the foundation. He's apologized repeatedly for it.<br><br>
'''WN:''' ''[[w:en:User:Thryduulf|Thryduulf]] asks: "What is your single greatest wish for Wikipedia?"''
'''JW:''' I would have to just point back to our original goal: a freely licensed high quality encyclopedia for every single person on the planet. That's what I remain focused on daily.<br><br>
Riga 87:
[[Categoria:Intervista]]
[[Categoria:Internet]]
[[Categoria:Scienza e tecnologia]]
[[en:An interview with Jimbo Wales]]
| |||