Cantiere - Contributi utente [it]

Bar italiano

2013-05-18T13:30:14Z

Saxuulangela:

'''<big>La pagina delle discussioni generali</big>'''
{{Cantiere}}

{{ScriviMessaggio|Bar}}
''[[Aiuto:FAQ#Che cosa è il Bar?|Che cosa è il Bar?]]''
{{Cantiere:Bar/Archivio}}

{{TOCright}}

== Piano per gennaio/febbraio 2009 ==

Il periodo di "riflessione" si sta prolungando, anche perché ora parto per qualche giorno in vacanza e poi ci sono le Feste.

Durante gennaio e febbraio lavorerò a committenze esterne al Cantiere. Vorrei però nello stesso tempo realizzare il primo episodio della [[WikiGuida]] e poi, entro fine febbraio il terzo episodio delle [[LinuxDay|PinGuide]].

Sto cercando anche di chiarire chi è biasco.ch / il Cantiere, come si definiscono le collaborazioni e i finanziamenti e come coordinare i lavori. Ci sono ancora alcuni nodi da sciogliere, ma penso che la situazione di stallo si stia sbloccando grazie anche ad interessanti scambi con nuove collaboratrici!

--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 14:48, 12 dic 2008 (CET)

:Ci sono, anche se non sono molto attivo nel Cantiere. Si è accumulato tanto lavoro e tanti progetti. Inoltre non sono convinto ancora della struttura attuale del Cantiere.
:Ieri ho avuto un lungo incontro con [[Utente:Andrea|Andrea]] e fra i mille temi affrontati gli ho spiegato la mia intenzione di riuscire a realizzare una Wikiguida entro metà febbraio. Attualmente però sono un po' bloccato con il lavoro e non riesco ad andare avanti con la scrittura del testo. Se qualcuno a qualche idea si faccia avanti!
:--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 12:22, 13 gen 2009 (CET)

::Ho finalmente scritto [[Discussione:Introduzione a Wikipedia|qualche punto/frase]] che mi piacerebbe portare nella Wikiguida. Modificate! --[[User:Andrea|Andrea]] ([[User talk:Andrea|discussione]]) 16:03, 14 gen 2009 (CET)

== Nuovo focus del Cantiere: i testi! ==

Sto pensando di rivoluzionare un po' la struttura del Cantiere. Da tempo sono cosciente che l'attuale struttura non è efficace. Sono intervenuto con dei template di progetti e qualcosa è migliorato, ma non ancora abbastanza.

In questi giorni però ho riordinato le pagine del sito principale e ho finalmente capito che il focus lì erano i video e così mi è venuta un'idea per il Cantiere.

Fondamentalmente qui il fuoco di tutto sono i copioni, dunque forse vale la pena riorganizzare le pagine tenendo presente la centralità dei testi. Proverò a fare i seguenti cambiamenti:
* Gestire in un'unica pagina Copione, Fonti, Bibliografia, Sinossi, Argomenti
* Dare un nome più consono alle pagine dei testi e fare tutti i redirect necessari
* Dare maggior risalto alle pagine in lavorazione

Propongo inoltre che le nuove varianti vengono mantenute sulla stessa pagina o sostituiscono le precedenti e viene segnato il link alla versione precedente.

--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 15:32, 13 gen 2009 (CET)

:Ho semplificato le pagine del progetto [[WikiGuida]]. Fondamentalmente ora ci sono 3 pagine:
:* la pagina principale del progetto ([[WikiGuida]]), che serve per descrivere il progetto nel suo insieme, ma fondamentalmente è una pagina statica.
:* la [[WikiGuida:Portineria|Portineria]], che è il luogo in cui principalmente si discute e che contiene anche un riassunto delle cose urgenti da fare
:* le pagine degli episodi, in questo caso, per il momento, solo il [[WikiGuida:Episodio 1]].
:Che ne dite?
:--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 00:47, 14 gen 2009 (CET)

:Mi sembra buono, adesso lo testiamo ;-) E spero anche che si possa successivamente spostare ''WikiGuida'' a ''WikiGuid'''''''e''''' :-D --[[User:Andrea|Andrea]] ([[User talk:Andrea|discussione]]) 13:41, 14 gen 2009 (CET)
:Sinceramente, non sono sicuro mi piaccia molto avere il ''copione'' nello stesso posto di tutto il resto. Forse si avrebbe più respiro ad averlo da solo, in una pagina a parte, dato che fra l'altro ci possono essere più versioni nella stessa pagina. Provate a convincermi ;-) --[[User:Andrea|Andrea]] ([[User talk:Andrea|discussione]]) 15:03, 14 gen 2009 (CET)

::La nostra chiacchieratona di lunedì è stata molto utile e con i miei lunghi tempi sto rimuginando. Credo però di aver finalmente realizzato l'essenza dinamica del software MediaWiki rispetto alla gestione di un sito/progetto e il riferimento che hai fatto alle pagine di "disambiguazione" e ai "redirect" sono state illuminanti.
::Provo a convincerti (ma soprattutto a convincermi!) dei cambiamenti. Tre ragionamenti mi hanno portato a questo cambiamento:
::# in genere le altre pagine relative ad un episodio sono poco sviluppate (non molto lunghe). Le pagine dei sottotitoli sono inutili, meglio un file già pronto per essere usato.
::# le informazioni utili sono contenute sulla stessa pagina e non bisogna navigare troppo. Diciamo che è la logica di una voce, chessò, su una nazione in Wikipedia. Tutte le discussioni in merito a quell'episodio sono lì. Anche per chi segue saltuariamente è tutto più raccolto.
::# prima pensavo che più pagine erano necessarie per avere più versioni insieme. Ma niente vieta di avere più varianti sulla stessa pagina (i testi per definizione non sono lunghi) e se una variante viene abbandonata la si può comunque linkare nella cronologia.
::A proposito, si può linkare in modo relativo all'interno di una pagina? Il mio dubbio è infatti che se uso il link assoluto, nel caso viene cambiato il nome alla pagina, non funziona più.
::PS: Pensavo anch'io di correggere il titolo della pagina. Faccio subito!
::--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 15:50, 14 gen 2009 (CET)

:::Per linkare ad una sezione di una pagina, scrivi il nome della pagina + ''#SEZIONE''. Funziona sia con i link interni che esterni. Per es: [[Introduzione a Wikipedia#Livello 0]], o http://biasco.ch/wiki/index.php5?title=Introduzione_a_Wikipedia#Livello_0. Se teniamo tutto in una pagina sola allora snellirei la pgaina, diminuendo le sezioni e rendendola più leggibile: con tutte quelle sottosezioni e grassetti io mi perso un attimo, se la pagina è lunga ma visibilmente leggera allora non ci sono problemi. --[[User:Andrea|Andrea]] ([[User talk:Andrea|discussione]]) 16:00, 14 gen 2009 (CET)

::::Scusami, ho posto male la domanda: come posso linkare in modo relativo '''ad una vecchia versione della cronologia''', era questo che intendevo.
::::--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 16:05, 14 gen 2009 (CET)

== Il Cantiere osservato dalla EU! ==

Il [http://www.scienter.org centro di ricerca Scienter] di Bologna, su incarico della Comunità Europea ([http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ Institute for Prospective Technological Studies]), sta effettuando una ricerca per studiare come l'apprendimento abbia luogo nelle community non espressamente create a scopo di istruzione/formazione/training.

'''Il Cantiere è stato incluso in questo studio!'''

Secondo me è una buona occasione per capire finalmente che cosa è, che cosa potrebbe diventare, che cosa vorremmo che diventasse il progetto Cantiere: un nostro esame di coscienza.

Avete 5 minuti per rispondere al [http://server2.scienter.org/phpesp/public/survey.php?name=cantiere questionario online e anonimo] entro il 10 febbraio 2009?

[http://biasco.ch/news/2009_02_03_il_cantiere_osservato_dalla_eu Per saperne di più]

== Celtx: programma di pre-produzione ==

Ciao a tutti, passo velocemente per segnalare un eventuale strumento utile per la pre-produzione audio/video ovviamente libero, dalla cui pagina web cito la descrizione :

''Celtx is the world's first all-in-one media pre-production software. It has everything you need to take your story from concept to production. Celtx replaces 'paper, pen & binder' pre-production with a digital approach that's more complete, simpler to work with, and easier to share.''

http://www.celtx.com

--[[User:PauLoX|PauLoX]] 10:30, 3 mar 2009 (CET)

:Grazie Paolo della segnalazione. Conoscevo Celtx ma non sapevo che fosse evoluto così tanto. Da tenere d'occhio, anche se mi sembra di capire che chi collabora dovrà perlomeno installarsi il programma sul suo computer. Comunque è sicuramente fonte di ispirazione! A presto!
:--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 11:38, 3 mar 2009 (CET)

== Blocco modifiche per non registrati ==

Dopo diversi mesi di esperienza ho notato che i collaboratori al cantiere sono tutti registrati e gli interventi anonimi sono solo spam, o qualche utente (io spesso), che si è dimenticato di fare il login. In più la registrazione permette comunque l'anonimato e ad ogni intervento viene assegnata una firma. Fatemi sapere se ci sono obbiezioni.

--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 17:48, 9 mar 2009 (CET)

:Sono ritornato sui miei passi dopo averne riparlato con Francesca. La registrazione forse rappresenta un blocco psicologico.
:--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 17:58, 21 mar 2009 (CET)

::Basta spam. Ri-blocco le modifiche anonime. --[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 03:45, 25 apr 2009 (CEST)

== [[Brogliaccio da Skype: Andrea-Christian 12 marzo 2009]] ==

Con Andrea abbiamo chattato per un'oretta questa sera. Sono venute fuori alcune delle novità di questi giorni: il lavoro sulla Storia di Wikipedia e l'idea di fondare un'associazione in particolare. --[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 03:09, 13 mar 2009 (CET)

== Nuovo Namespace: Fonti ==

Ho creato un nuovo Namespace, denominato '''Fonti''', in cui si potranno inserire (appunto) fonti, soprattutto originali, in forma integrale, da compartire con altri utenti per essere studiate. Per evitare problemi con il copyright saranno visibili e modificabili solamente dagli utenti registrati.

--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 04:21, 21 mar 2009 (CET)

== Nucleare vs energie alternative ==

L'altro giorno per caso abbiamo sentito questa [http://www.radioradicale.it/scheda/274703/gli-scenari-energetici-possibili-intervista-a-nicola-armaroli intervista a Nicola Armaroli] sul tema dell'energie rinnovabili, sul ritorno al nucleare,...

Ci è piaciuta molto. Ci compreremo sicuramente il libro, chissà che non ne possa venire fuori qualcosa di interessante...

--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 04:37, 21 mar 2009 (CET)

== Niente osservati speciali ==

Non riesco ad inserire le pagine negli osservati speciali. E' un problema solo mio o è un bug che coinvolge tutti? Come posso risolvere il problema? --[[User:Aushulz|Aushulz]] ([[User talk:Aushulz|discussione]]) 17:31, 2 feb 2010 (CET)
:Ho notato adesso che se clicco sulla linguetta "Segui" non funziona, ma se prima di salvare la pagina clicco in "Aggiungi agli osservati speciali" non ho alcun problema. --[[User:Aushulz|Aushulz]] ([[User talk:Aushulz|discussione]]) 17:33, 2 feb 2010 (CET)
[http://majesticessay.com/ majesticessay.com]

C-SPAN, 25 settembre 2005

2013-05-18T13:30:11Z

Saxuulangela:

{{Navigazione|WikiGuide}}
{{Navigazione2|Press Coverage}}

{{TOCright}}

'''Analisi della fonte'''

È un'intervista VIDEO!

{{cite news
|title=Q&A: Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder
|author=[[Brian Lamb|Lamb, Brian]]
|url= http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1042
|work=C-SPAN
|date=September 25, 2005
|accessdate=2006-10-31}}

* [http://www.diigo.com/0587r Pagina evidenziata ed annotata] da Andrea. --[[User:Andrea|Andrea]] ([[User talk:Andrea|discussione]]) 18:32, 25 mar 2009 (CET)

==Citazione==

{{Citazione|One of the big misconceptions about Wikipedia, people imagine that it‘s something like one million people each adding one sentence each and somehow miraculously it becomes something useful. But in fact what actually makes it work is the community. There‘s a really strong community of people behind the site and they are in constant communication by email and IRC chat rooms and things like this. And so they are monitoring every change that goes to the site – there are people who are looking at it and vetting it and trying to see if it‘s good or not.|--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 03:53, 25 mar 2009 (CET)|<ref>{{cite news
|title=Q&A: Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder
|author=[[Brian Lamb|Lamb, Brian]]
|url= http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1042
|work=C-SPAN
|date=September 25, 2005
|accessdate=2006-10-31}}</ref>}}

==Citazione==

{{Citazione|LAMB: As I was doing – well, using Wikipedia to do the research for this interview I kept thinking when will Google or Yahoo! put Jimmy Wales out of business. And then I – as I read further, you‘re in business with them in some way.

WALES: Yes, in some way. I think we have – we‘re a non-profit organization that I founded. And we‘ve gotten support from Yahoo! already and Google is very interested in supporting us. We‘re just still talking to them about what to do.

And Yahoo! has donated some servers. And I think what‘s interesting about that is that if you – you know, it‘s almost a joke but it‘s completely true. If you think about well why – why do Yahoo! and Google want to do this and well, their business model depends on the Internet not sucking and we hope the Internet not suck. So it‘s that the Wikipedia for a lot of people hearkens back to what we all thought the Internet was for in the first place which is, you know, when most people first started the Internet they thought oh, this is fantastic, people can communicate from all over the world and build knowledge and share information. |--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 03:53, 25 mar 2009 (CET)|<ref>{{cite news
|title=Q&A: Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder
|author=[[Brian Lamb|Lamb, Brian]]
|url= http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1042
|work=C-SPAN
|date=September 25, 2005
|accessdate=2006-10-31}}</ref>}}

==Citazione==

{{Citazione|LAMB: Where are the servers and how many are there now?

WALES: Right now there are around 90 servers. The bulk of them are in Florida at a big co-location facility there. We‘ve got around 20 in Amsterdam and six in Paris. And coming on line very soon are – there‘s 20 some servers in South Korea that were provided by Yahoo! And then there‘s 20 more on order so I think within the next few months we‘ll be at 150 servers. And they are really overloaded at the moment so it‘s really a challenge growing the technical infrastructure. But we‘ve got a lot of good people working on it. |--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 03:53, 25 mar 2009 (CET)|<ref>{{cite news
|title=Q&A: Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder
|author=[[Brian Lamb|Lamb, Brian]]
|url= http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1042
|work=C-SPAN
|date=September 25, 2005
|accessdate=2006-10-31}}</ref>}}

==Citazione==

{{Citazione|LAMB: Where are the servers and how many are there now?

WALES: Right now there are around 90 servers. The bulk of them are in Florida at a big co-location facility there. We‘ve got around 20 in Amsterdam and six in Paris. And coming on line very soon are – there‘s 20 some servers in South Korea that were provided by Yahoo! And then there‘s 20 more on order so I think within the next few months we‘ll be at 150 servers. And they are really overloaded at the moment so it‘s really a challenge growing the technical infrastructure. But we‘ve got a lot of good people working on it. |--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 03:53, 25 mar 2009 (CET)|<ref>{{cite news
|title=Q&A: Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder
|author=[[Brian Lamb|Lamb, Brian]]
|url= http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1042
|work=C-SPAN
|date=September 25, 2005
|accessdate=2006-10-31}}</ref>}}

==Citazione==

{{Citazione|WALES: Right. Yes, so one of the interesting things about Wikipedia is that people assume – you naturally assume that – particularly on controversial topics that the big debates within the Wikipedia community would be somehow roughly the party of the left versus the party of the right.

It turns out on those types of topics it‘s actually the party of the thoughtful and reasonable people and the party of the jerks. And those aren‘t left or right, they can come from all sides you‘ve got jerks.

So within the community there‘s never really been any real controversy about say the George Bush article. Of course the article is edited a lot and there are a lot of editorial disputes over exactly how to word things, but there‘s no real fundamental question there. The article should be comprehensive, factual, sourced. It shouldn‘t be a one-sided political rant on either side. It should discuss criticisms of the President and it should discuss support of the President.

And so the article has always been, you know, fine within the community. But there are some times vandals, some people come in and they just think it‘s funny to post a disgusting picture or something, you know, replace Bush‘s picture with a picture of Hitler. Well we revert that within a minute …

LAMB: Who is we?

WALES: … because there‘s – the community. So there‘s …

LAMB: I mean you don‘t even know who does that?

WALES: Well, I mean, I can – I can look it up. I mean you can on the site – part of the reason the site works is it‘s – you can be anonymous but the people in the community have a consistent identity and so there‘s accountability. So people gain reputations within the community for doing good work, so you can look at the history of the article and see who is fixing the vandalism and things like that.

And even, you know, ordinary, reasonable people who intensely dislike the president will agree that an encyclopedia article shouldn‘t replace his picture with Hitler, I mean it‘s ridiculous.

So we had to – we always have to lock articles from time to time when they are under a particular attack but the …

LAMB: Who does that?

WALES: The administrators, the people – the community. So within the community people can be elected as administrators and can lock articles and block IP numbers. So if somebody is causing trouble they can be blocked from editing temporarily.

And when we had to lock the article for less than two percent of the time – the Bush and Kerry articles were locked for less than two percent of the time during 1990 – during 2004, I‘m sorry.

And so what Time had reported is that, you know, Wales had to lock the article for most of 2004 and that was mistaken on two fronts. One it should have said we did not lock the article for most of 2004, but also that the article sort of gave the impression that I personally had something to do with it and that‘s really not accurate, it‘s the community that cares for it. |--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 03:53, 25 mar 2009 (CET)|<ref>{{cite news
|title=Q&A: Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder
|author=[[Brian Lamb|Lamb, Brian]]
|url= http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1042
|work=C-SPAN
|date=September 25, 2005
|accessdate=2006-10-31}}</ref>}}

==Citazione==

{{Citazione|WALES: Well, one rule, for example, is verifiability. So if you want to write about, you know – most people, you know, you say well I want to write about the street where I live. Well, there‘s really no information that other Wikipedians can verify about the street. And so we would have no way of know if you were hoaxing us or something so those articles can‘t stay.

That‘s one way, you know, if most viewers say, oh, well, I want an article about myself. Well, if you‘re notable in some way and there‘s press coverage of you and things that people can verify that will be fine. Probably preferable that you don‘t write it yourself, there‘s something a little tacky to me about writing an article about yourself for Wikipedia.

But for most people who would think that, you know, our answer would say will that‘s fine, I‘m sure you‘re a wonderful person but we can‘t find any information about you so there‘s no way we can confirm you‘re not just making things up. So that would be deleted. So that‘s one.

No original research is another rule.

LAMB: Explain that.

WALES: Well, most of these rules have really a dual purpose to have the purpose the epistemological or intellectual purpose of saying this is what an encyclopedia should be like. There‘s also a social purpose which is somehow this rule helps us to get our work done collaboratively.

No original research, the original formulation of this came about when we realized that we were getting contributions from physics crackpots, of whom there are a great many on the Internet. So people have their own personal theory of magnetism that they made up and they want to write about it in Wikipedia. Well, this is obviously inappropriate because we‘re – as an encyclopedia we‘re not peer review to academic journal. We‘re not qualified to assess new research.

And that started in physics and it‘s kind of obvious there but it‘s also true in history. Somebody has a new theory of history they need to run it by academics. They need to get it published in a real place. We‘re not qualified to evaluate that. We are qualified to look at the sources and say well, yes, this was published in the journal of history, we can talk about it. But new research can‘t be done.

So from the point of view it‘s the right thing for an encyclopedia to do. But then also socially it‘s much easier to tell someone, you know, instead of saying you‘re a lunatic and your theory of magnetism is nonsense, that‘s hard for people to hear and then they just mad and cause trouble. But if you can say, you know, thank you for your wonderful submission; unfortunately we can‘t do original research, please go get it published somewhere, then you can treat people with respect even if you think they‘re a little dodgy. |--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 03:53, 25 mar 2009 (CET)|<ref>{{cite news
|title=Q&A: Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder
|author=[[Brian Lamb|Lamb, Brian]]
|url= http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1042
|work=C-SPAN
|date=September 25, 2005
|accessdate=2006-10-31}}</ref>}}

==Citazione==

{{Citazione|LAMB: But what if the person wants to appeal that?

WALES: Well, there are within the community there are various social processes so we have – you know, for the deletion there‘s a page – it used to be called votes for deletion but we just changed the name of it the other day and that‘s sort of in flux. They‘re changing the process.

But there‘s the deletion process. And then if it goes beyond that then there‘s an arbitration committee, partly elected, partly appointed by me – within the community which basically tries mostly to deal with behavioral issues. To say, you know, it‘s – you can‘t continue repeatedly doing the same thing over and over, that‘s annoying the community because eventually you just – you have to stop we have work to do.

So and then ultimately beyond that they could appeal to me. But that‘s very rare, it hasn‘t happened in …

LAMB: So you‘re the ultimate authority?

WALES: Yes, yes.

LAMB: In the end you can change things if you want?

WALES: Yes, yes. And that‘s an – that‘s an interesting role because the way I – the way I like to explain it is within the free software world where a group of volunteers is collaboratively writing software there is a long tradition in that world of having a benevolent dictator.

And so – and this isn‘t because programmers love tyranny or anything like this. It‘s just because when you‘ve got a small group of volunteers trying to get work done you don‘t really want to get into a whole system of voting on every change that goes into the program and things like that. So it just makes sense. It seems to be a viable model to have a trusted person who listens. You have to have the right personality that will listen to the different sides about what should be in the program and then make a decision and everybody can say well, OK, you know – in the Linux Kernel it‘s Linus Torvalds and he decides ultimately. The community of programmers around him makes all the tough decisions but if there‘s a real conflict he decides. |--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 03:53, 25 mar 2009 (CET)|<ref>{{cite news
|title=Q&A: Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder
|author=[[Brian Lamb|Lamb, Brian]]
|url= http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1042
|work=C-SPAN
|date=September 25, 2005
|accessdate=2006-10-31}}</ref>}}

==Citazione==

{{Citazione| I was talking about the benevolent dictator model and I don‘t want to leave the impression that that‘s our model because what I was going to say is I don‘t feel it‘s appropriate for any one person to be the dictator of all human knowledge.

And so we‘re moving from that model which was necessary when we had a small group of people to a model – I make the comparison of the British monarchy. That my power should decrease over time and become more symbolic. And it‘s more my job is to defend the community not rule over the community.

And so that‘s just – that was one thing I wanted to throw in. |--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 03:53, 25 mar 2009 (CET)|<ref>{{cite news
|title=Q&A: Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder
|author=[[Brian Lamb|Lamb, Brian]]
|url= http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1042
|work=C-SPAN
|date=September 25, 2005
|accessdate=2006-10-31}}</ref>}}

==Citazione==

{{Citazione|WALES: Yes, there‘s a lot of rules. No personal attacks is one of the rules in Wikipedia that‘s served us very, very well. A lot of Internet communities are quite hostile and rough. I think almost everybody has had the experience of signing up for a mailing list that sounded interesting and realizing after a little while that it is dominated by people who like to scream at each other.

And we try to make Wikipedia a safe space for the broad middle of reasonable, thoughtful people. And that‘s one of the reasons we‘re successful on controversial topics is we really discourage people from, you know, competitive, argumentative behaviors. And we try to say really we should be cooperating, we should be trying to find common ground.

And that‘s – it‘s very successful. And I don‘t mean to paint it as a utopia. Obviously it‘s a human project with lots of internal squabbling and so forth. But on average I think we have a really – we‘ve achieved something in the community in terms of getting together thoughtful people from a broad spectrum of political and religious and different ideological backgrounds but are which still willing to give some space for other people.

LAMB: Who sets the rules?

WALES: Some of the core rules were – have been set by me from the very beginning: neutrality policy that Wikipedia shouldn‘t take a stand on controversial issues but just report on them, that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia as opposed to a joke book or a compendium of random facts and things like that.

But the day-to-day rules within the community are set by the community through a process that no one really understands, it‘s quite complicated. It‘s a process of discussion, debate, consensus, some voting, some aristocracy, you know, people who are well respected in the community can make decisions and they‘ll be respected. It‘s quite a – it‘s quite a confusing mix. |--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 03:53, 25 mar 2009 (CET)|<ref>{{cite news
|title=Q&A: Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder
|author=[[Brian Lamb|Lamb, Brian]]
|url= http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1042
|work=C-SPAN
|date=September 25, 2005
|accessdate=2006-10-31}}</ref>}}

==Citazione==

{{Citazione|WALES: Yes, I actually have been – I‘ve been hoping to get the people who compile the statistics to get me the next narrower group because it‘s really interesting. There are – I did some research myself into who is editing Wikipedia because there is this – there are two models that people think about how Wikipedia works. There‘s the, you know, thousands of people each doing a little bit of work and then there‘s the core community view that says the works being done by the core community.

Well the statistics, when you look at it, show the core community is doing by far the vast majority of the work.|--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 03:53, 25 mar 2009 (CET)|<ref>{{cite news
|title=Q&A: Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder
|author=[[Brian Lamb|Lamb, Brian]]
|url= http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1042
|work=C-SPAN
|date=September 25, 2005
|accessdate=2006-10-31}}</ref>}}

==Citazione==

{{Citazione|LAMB: Last sentence, I mean last paragraph: "The user who visits Wikipedia to learn about some subject to confirm some matter of fact is rather in the position of a visitor to a public restroom." – I know you‘ve seen that …

WALES: Right.

LAMB: … many times …

WALES: Yes.

LAMB: "It may be obviously dirty so that he knows to exercise great care or it may seem fairly clean so that he may be lulled into a sense of – a false sense of security. What he certainly does not know is who has used the facilities before him."

Mr. McHenry‘s not very happy with you.

WALES: Well, I had dinner with Bob after he wrote this article. And he‘s a really very thoughtful, nice guy. So I don‘t actually know if he regrets this inflammatory rhetoric because now he‘s sort of gotten famous as the public toilet guy.

So – but the ultimate point there is an interesting point but one that I feel is invalidated by the fact that there is a community. And I suppose if you want to call it a public restroom you can but it‘s a public restroom that‘s kept immaculately clean for the most part. And most people are more than happy to go into, you know, the Four Seasons hotel and use the public restroom because it‘s cared for by people.

So the analogy is cute but it‘s strained I think. His substantive criticisms are things that, yes, I mean one of the interesting things about Wikipedia is that although the average quality of the articles is very, very high the people who use Wikipedia say, you know, you can – you can say, this is actually – it‘s a miracle that it works at all. But the fact that it‘s pretty darn good is really interesting.

But it is true, any article that you go to may have been edited just five minutes ago and destroyed. And so that‘s something that we‘re constantly studying within the community is how do we – particularly when we think about going into CD ROM or print, which is really necessary for our goals with respect to digital divide and developing countries, how do we identify particular versions of articles that we can say well, this is the one – this is the clean one and this is – this we don‘t know about.

So that‘s an ongoing discussion in the community is how do we get from our always in progress, always edited site to a 1.0 stable version that we can say well this is – these are articles that have been vetted by the community and that we feel are good enough in some sense. And that‘s our goal.

Our goal has always been Britannica or better quality. We don‘t always achieve that. |--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 03:53, 25 mar 2009 (CET)|<ref>{{cite news
|title=Q&A: Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder
|author=[[Brian Lamb|Lamb, Brian]]
|url= http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1042
|work=C-SPAN
|date=September 25, 2005
|accessdate=2006-10-31}}</ref>}}

==Citazione==

{{Citazione|LAMB: You‘re going to recognize this also. "I stopped participating in Wikipedia when funding for my position ran out. That does not mean that I am merely mercenary. I might have continued to participate were it not for a certain poisonous social or political atmosphere in the project." Larry Sanger. Who is he?

WALES: So Larry was an employee of mine who was editor and chief of a prior project, Nupedia, and was the first editor and chief at Wikipedia. And he was never comfortable with the very open social model. He tends to come from a more of a Britannica school of thought of vetted experts reviewing content.

And that‘s essentially a philosophical difference between he and I about that sort of thing.

LAMB: He calls it anti-elitists.

WALES: Yes, and I actually feel that‘s wrong. I think that I‘m – in my own way I‘m much more elitist then Larry even. And – but it‘s the difference between – it‘s perhaps anti-credentialist. To me the key thing is getting it right. And if a person‘s really smart and they‘re doing fantastic work I don‘t care if they‘re a high school kid or a Harvard professor, it‘s the work that matters. And you can‘t coast on your credentials on Wikipedia. You have to – you have to enter the marketplace of ideas and engage with people.

I feel his view on the social environment are a bit out dated. He hasn‘t been in the project for quite some time and so …

|--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 03:53, 25 mar 2009 (CET)|<ref>{{cite news
|title=Q&A: Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder
|author=[[Brian Lamb|Lamb, Brian]]
|url= http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1042
|work=C-SPAN
|date=September 25, 2005
|accessdate=2006-10-31}}</ref>}}

==Citazione==

{{Citazione|It was a very different feel from Wikipedia where you just plunge in and, you know, if it isn‘t that great that‘s fine, somebody else will pick it up and take it on. And you know it doesn‘t have to be a full complete article. You can just write one paragraph and you start off by saying it is. And in French Wikipedia they came up with a fantastic phrase, they call it the piranha effect which is you start with a little tiny article and it‘s not quite good enough so people are picking at it and sort of a feeding frenzy and articles grow. |--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 03:53, 25 mar 2009 (CET)|<ref>{{cite news
|title=Q&A: Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder
|author=[[Brian Lamb|Lamb, Brian]]
|url= http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1042
|work=C-SPAN
|date=September 25, 2005
|accessdate=2006-10-31}}</ref>}}

==Bomis==
{{Citazione|WALES: Well, Bomis is – it‘s a search engine so there‘s all kinds of content on there. And Bomis always had a market similar to say Maxim magazine. So it‘s kind of a guy-oriented search engine. But, yes, no. The story is much exaggerated by – through history so. |--[[User:Christian|Christian]] ([[User talk:Christian|discussione]]) 03:53, 25 mar 2009 (CET)|<ref>{{cite news
|title=Q&A: Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia founder
|author=[[Brian Lamb|Lamb, Brian]]
|url= http://www.q-and-a.org/Transcript/?ProgramID=1042
|work=C-SPAN
|date=September 25, 2005
|accessdate=2006-10-31}}</ref>}}
[http://fastpaper.org/ fastpaper.org]

Brainstorming sulla WikiGuida "Wikipedia"

2013-05-18T13:29:40Z

Saxuulangela:

{{Navigazione|WikiGuide}}

==Perché fare una videoguida su "Wikipedia"? Quali sono le aspettative?==
*http://outreach.wikimedia.org,
*[[Wikipedia:m:strategy:Proposal:Volunteer Toolkit|Proposal:Volunteer Toolkit]]

==A chi è rivolta? Perché? Perché non altri?==

==Che cosa si vuole ottenere di pratico dal pubblico target?==

Fare in modo che le persone e anche gli utenti (passivi) si appassionino al progetto e agli ideali che ci stanno dietro (la conoscenza è un patrimonio di tutti, che si costruisce in modo sociale e collaborativo, deve essere liberamente accessibile, chi contribuisce riceve più di quello che ha dato ed è la comunità che partecipa e che plasma e condivide le stesse regole).
Far conoscere il modello alternativo dei contenuti aperti.

--[[User:MarcoCaresia|MarcoCaresia]] ([[User talk:MarcoCaresia|discussione]]) 20:52, 14 gen 2010 (CET)

==Che cosa deve essere sicuramente detto?==

I numeri e la diffusione in diverse nazioni. La qualità e gli studi di confronto con le enciclopedie tradizionali. Il lavoro degli amministratori.
Gli altri progetti Wikimedia.
La creazione di un account, le modalità di creazione, modifica dei contenuti e lo storico delle versioni.
La questione del copyright delle immagini e la "libertà di panorama".

--[[User:MarcoCaresia|MarcoCaresia]] ([[User talk:MarcoCaresia|discussione]]) 20:52, 14 gen 2010 (CET)

==Chi è che sta parlando nel video, l'associazione italiana, la foundation?==

==Dove sarà visto il video? Perché lo spettatore dovrebbe essere invogliato a vedere il video?==

==Chi potrebbe essere critico del video e perché?==
[http://genuineessays.com/ genuineessays.com]