Gcm forex demo hesap ac46 comments
Trading binary options abe cofnas pdf 60 second signals
Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m Aumentar a quantidade de editores? Seguem links para conversas em que aparecem argumentos relacionados a isso:. Precisamos tirar vantagem disso e fazer uma propaganda quando aparecer um doodle deste jeito sanando o ponto 2. E a demanda por essa parte do trabalho os dados se mostrou preemente.
Job Purpose Volunteer editors are the lifeblood of Wikimedia projects. In recent years, the number of editors contributing to our projects including Wikipedia has been stagnant. Brazil is a country whose population has had more access to internet and education - and where access to knowledge and educational resources is key for the development of the country.
Given the potential of emerging countries, particularly Brazil, the Wikimedia Foundation would like to support increased participation by building a team focused on Brazil and Portuguese language projects.
The role of the team will be to support the community in experiments and data driven decision processes, aiming both at improving the community environment and routine in administrative tasks and at enhancing participation and retention of editors, ensuring that the community remains vibrant and able to sustain the projects.
The data and experiments consultant will work closely with the existing PT: WP community to research, explore and implement potential enhancements to the processes of PT: We encourage every interested person in applying, especially those from the community already involved in data analyses. We're opened to make adjustments on the job position if necessary. Vou estudar um pouco o assunto. Ele foi ativado e depois removido em outras wikis certo?
Teve aumento nos vandalismos? Ficou tudo na mesma? Mais pra frente devo ampliar um pouco pensando no caso de ataque a wp. Ele foi sensacional em mandar tudo mastigadinho assim! E as outras wikis? Hoje, com a estrutura que temos, poderia ser trabalho redobrado porque, como trabalhamos remotamente, precisaria relatar a uma pessoa que vai relatar a todos. Acho que precisamos amadurecer um pouco isso.
Confiante de que podemos fazer mais e melhor. Precisamos retomar o papo e ter claros interesses e propostas. Quem gostaria de se envolver? Como o movimento Wikimedia pode ajudar a promover o crescimento desses projetos, fortalecendo o "ecossistema" de compartilhamento do conhecimento? Uma parceria com a biblioteca nacional digital , por exemplo, seria uma forma de alimentar o Wikisources? Que tipo de parceria? Mas sei que precisaremos de um processo que demonstre maturidade e capacidade institucional de lidar com este tipo de modelo.
Isto permite fazer projetos coordenados e centralizados, permitindo integrar e eliminar todos estes projetos e grupos paralelos. Quase como fazer um FAQ sobre consenso. Uma consultoria sobre como fazer isso bem feito. Eu vejo que tem mts pessoas com vontade de aplicar o processo de consenso mas sem saber direito como fazer. Esse projeto podia dar uma ajuda nisso. Talvez tenha sido o Helder que ajudou a achar. That is my first question.
If the focus of all projects should be strictly or much more focused on the Portuguese Wikipedia, how much time should the projects spend on offline community? What about those goals for other Wikimedia projects?
Similar to what I am going to speak later on the Education Program, I believe we must bear in mind the very basic fact that: Wikipedia is an online community. After my experience with Wikimedia Brasil in the last years, I am pretty skeptical now on how effective are some of these offline activities for retaining or bringing new Wikipedia editors or, sometimes, even other Wikimedia projects.
To raise awareness and outreach Wikimedia projects including Wikipedia , offline activities can be pretty good and important - and should be done we need photos, videos, to appear in the media etc. But if the focus is "saving" the Portuguese Wikipedia, shouldn't our strategy be focused mostly on trying to solve the existing problems of this online community instead of trying to bring new contributors to a hostile environment?
I remember a presentation of Jessie one year ago it was the time I first knew about the Education Program and I was impressed with some data, like the low usage of talk pages and that WP PT is one of the Wikipedias where editors are less satisfied that may be just a drop in the ocean.
If the actual users are not satisfied, what are the main reasons? For such small community as compared to WP EN, aren't there pathological cases of users scaring new contributors? I am quite impressed by the amount of complaint about particular users. On Jessie presentation it is suggested where should we go:. The only visible project we've tried to implement so far is the Wikipedia Education Program WEP , which doesn't seem for me a project for bringing new editors see here - was this really known a priori?
So it's really difficult to make this research with these new temporary editors from the WEP, so we need think other strategies to do it. I also think we need more research for the actual community that includes conflict resolution, but not only - is the community really overloaded, for instance? Also, I think that a person working closely to Steven and Mariana can be useful.
Do we need statistical analysis to conclude that the actual messages for user are awful? Or don't we know that a new user feels really confused with the actual rules and most simply don't receive a welcome message, quite the opposite, they usually receive those nice messages already saying they can be blocked if they don't stop editing.
I started these days asking if WMF has some agreed metrics on community health. I must tell here that my fear is that when it was said that number should be shown, they would be focused on active editors. I would like to know: For instance, the dynamics of people using talk pages seems to be much different of WP EN look at this interesting article on the dynamics of conflicts. Why are WP PT editors not using articles talk page?
Is it just because we have less active editors? Or as pointed out previously, if we realise that the actual editors are overworked fighting against vandalism, wouldn't this be an essential problem to be tackled? I really wonder what does it mean having more editors on average when after some more experience with the WP PT you begin to realise how many problems they have that likely are impeditive for a healthy and sustainable growth.
I also really really cannot understand having the number of articles growth as a goal. I would love to understand how this can be a good measure of success and why seting it. If we see they can be useful for some project, great, but those projects don't seem for me useful I may be wrong. I really would like to see if someone will start using Wikibook for a collaborative production.
We have better things such as connextion and there are other sites appearing to publish free books or that motivates more an author than using a wiki site. And I even motivated some friends with good wiki skills to write a book on wikibooks and they prefered to install their own MediaWiki.
I know it's just one example, but should we spend our time trying it? Maybe trying some partnership to have something like PediaPress could be good, but there should be a need of a huge translation effort and we need see if this pediapress really works are people really buying those books?
Regarding WikiSource, we have Gutenberg and archive. I cannot see any usage for those wiki site and I would love to see good examples. One thing that I am really missing in the goals is community projects continuity.
I have seen this on Wikimedia Brasil since , when I first began to involve with the group and I am noticing the very same thing happens with a lot of WP PT projects. Why are those projects not having an end? Why people just start adding their name in a participants list and things just get stuck? Should we help the community again, depending on the focus, mostly WP PT community to design, plan and have goals to achieve for particular projects?
I'm aware there are some wikipedians already getting involved in some projects, but why don't we have an online community dynamics as WikiProjects on WP EN do? Look for instance the WikiProjects, most of them are simply dead. After starting a discussion with the community on a possible path for the WEP, this subject on the WikiProject appeared and there is a volunteer which helped a lot with the WEP pages and discussions!
I am not saying this proposal is the answer, but when talking to Oona on possible paths for a WEP in Brazil, one idea was to focus on a particular subject and try to foster a community around it to improve WP PT articles. I really think a good measure of success can be to have some projects we helped to design and achieved a particular goal - this is a good exercise and a good learning for the community, because if well documented, other groups can try to follow the example.
And maybe we don't need necessarily colossal projects, but if we have a small one that is succesfull, that can be quit motivating for volunteers and we should congratulate them as much as we can.
Can we gather actual editors to do a project together? I really cannot answer this, because the solely thing I have is this number of active editors. What are those editors doing most of the time? Would they engage on some productive contribution to a project other than the time they are already speding on the site fighting vandalism or discussing blocks?
Statistics of WikiProjects A volunteer from Portugal very involved with the univeristies project has raisen a list of the WikiProjects and how active they are, see here. The great majority of all WikiProjects are simply not active. An idea he just gave me is to gather those WikiProject in the maximum of 8 and add sitenotices inviting professors for a particular WikiProject of his specialization.
I must tell I am glad to see this research on WikiProjects , by Jonathan Morgan a name I just heard a few days ago when I began to question the numbers here " We believe that WikiProjects are still important for Wikipedia in In fact, given that the community and the Foundation are currently seeking ways to a draw in new productive contributors, and b focus on quality over quantity , WikiProjects might be even more important now than ever, since they provide ready-made interest communities for new members to become a part of as they learn the ropes, and since they focus so much effort on improving article quality and coverage within topics.
We also believe that WikiProject Pulse is a good idea , and that in general WikiProjects would benefit from better tools to help them coordinate and track their work especially ones that replace or supplement difficult aspects of the interface, rather than an adding levels of complexity so that they can spend more time editing and having fun.
So exciting to see Jonathan work quick search now and research interests! I remember the first time I told Jessie on complex adaptive system because of the nature of Wikipedia and I am glad to see a researcher working with WMF that is aware of that.
Maybe for this my general reaction and prediction was somewhat refractory. On 1, the authors analyse the influence the social influence of social identification with the larger group on contributions' behavior and find a significant and growing influence through groups structure, mainly through WikiProjects. That is totally in favor on what I am saying about treating Wikipedia as an complex adaptive system important reading and the great challenge here is to form a critical mass of volunteers that can self-organize to improve content of a particular theme or other important tasks for Wikipedia.