Thanks for the reactions so far, they have been very useful. Let me answer some of the points.
Re subject line: Obviously it is deliberately provocative to generate more response and reach out to more people. Whereas what I write I do seriously, if it stays a discussion of a dozen of people with the same views on the subject it is probably useful. Re milennials: this is clearly not a red herring. Just ask Facebook what their demographics is and why the 18- generation is not using it. Re introduction vs shorter articles: I agree that a well-written introduction is very important (though in practice it more often becomes a battleground than not, and for most articles on my watchlist with non-zero traffic it gets deteriorated with time, and it takes really a LOT of effort of the community to maintain them). However, there are many other things in the articles which are important as well, and I believe having non-introductory pieces separately, written in a simple language, and without excessive formatting is important. Currently, we can not accommodate them within the articles - because there are too many details to add, references, and formatting (the intro is an exception, it can indeed be written simply without references). Re fork: I actually do not believe in forking Wikipedia. One can fork Wikipedia but so far all attempts to fork the community were unsuccessful, and I do not think they will be successful in the future. I do not have a problem with forking, I just believe it is not going to happen. What I believe it will happen is a completely new platform suitable for new ways of getting information. Just to give a perspective, imagine someone started a project in the 1980s based on videotapes, and produced a lot of tapes. By now they have either been copied to other media, or got completely forgotten because nobody can play tapes anymore, at least unless one is a very serious amateur or goes to a specialized library. Re main point: People, let us be serious. We missed mobile editing (well, at least this has been identified as a problem, and something is being done about it). We missed voice interfaces. We are now missing neural networks. We should have been discussing by now what neural networks are allowed to do in the projects and what they are not allowed to do. And instead we are discussing (and edit-warring) whether the Crimean bridge is the longest in Europe or not because different sources place the border between Europe and Asia differently, and, according to some sources, the bridge is not in Europe. Why do you think that if we keep missing all technological development relevant in the field we are still going to survive? Cheers Yaroslav On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 2:50 PM Zubin JAIN <jain16...@gapps.uwcsea.edu.sg> wrote: > >That's exactly the point here! Maybe not everyone is like that, but > the pattern is supported by studies. The question is: how do we > support (or, how do we make Wikipedia relevant for) this category? > > But it's not supported by rigorous evidence, a few studies and a bunch of > clickbait headlines hawking a decline narrative aren't things that should > be used as a basis for deciding that the encylvopedia is out of date and > Wikipedia should change itself to a primary video format > > >> The idea that Wikipedia needs to be dumbed down > "Articles must be short and contain a lot of graphic information. May be > they need to be videoclips. Short clips. Or, at lest, they must contain > clips, with more voice and less letters." Dumbing down seems to be a fair > summary of the proposal > > On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 at 20:51, Strainu <strain...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > În dum., 30 dec. 2018 la 12:40, Zubin JAIN > > <jain16...@gapps.uwcsea.edu.sg> a scris: > > > These are gross generalizations > > > > That's exactly the point here! Maybe not everyone is like that, but > > the pattern is supported by studies. The question is: how do we > > support (or, how do we make Wikipedia relevant for) this category? > > > > > The idea that Wikipedia needs to be dumbed down > > Nobody proposed that. > > > > > On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 at 17:21, Jane Darnell <jane...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > We need better upload interfaces for fixing spelling mistakes, > > > > adding blue links, categories, media, and all other common tasks. > > > > I had a conversation with Dan Garry in Cape Town about why categories > > and navboxes are not shown on mobile and it seems they are not a > > "thing" anymore (aka not used by the readers, which prefer navigating > > through inline links). For the rest, I agree. What do you think of the > > CitationHunt tool? Would it help if integrated in the normal workflow? > > > > În dum., 30 dec. 2018 la 12:57, Anders Wennersten > > <m...@anderswennersten.se> a scris: > > > > > > In my little duckpond (svwp) we have guidleines for the introduction > > > part of the article. > > > > > > It should use (simple) language to enable 14-16 years old to understand > > > it (while the rest can use more complicated vocabulary) > > > > How very interesting! I've always thought that Wikipedia should be > > accessible for people with middle studies (highschool) but I've been > > accused of trying to "dumb down" Wikipedia. Thanks for the idea! > > > > More generally, yes, the introduction is the obvious candidate for > > what Yaroslav is proposing, the question is how do you put it to the > > best use? Are popups (currently enabled for anonymous users) enough? > > Movies and visuals are complicated for most people, would an audio > > help? Text to speech is pretty good (and dead cheap) these days and I > > know WMSE has done some work in this domain. Would an audio of the > > introduction help? What about reading the whole article? > > > > This is a major topic, we should probably try to extract 2-3 ideas > > that can be pushed forward from it. > > > > Strainu > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: Wikimediaemail@example.com > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > > -- > Sincerely, > Zubin Jain > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimediaemail@example.com Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>