you may leave your ideas/comment/suggestions about 2007's program here:
program ideas in 2006: http://wikimania2006.wikimedia.org/wiki/Program_ideas
Main Conference (8/3~8/5)
Add your own here! Some miscellaneous suggestions that have come up in the past
- Experience sharing: Promotion of wikipedia projects in elementary school -- perhaps educational track
- Open content art exhibition
- Award: video clips remix competition
- A panel or a keynote discussion internet freedom of speech and expression. I would like to invite Josephine Ho (Professor of National Central University) to talk what issue our Wikimedia contents will face in different culture environments. --Theodoranian 12:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC) or http://gsrat.net/ staff as she reports she is not available. Jidanni 02:49, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Wikimedia use in higher-education: I'm working with my students on multiple Wikipedia entries for an intermediate composition course in the US, and I recently attended a small conference on wikis for our state-wide university and colleges system. There seems to be growing interest in the use of wikis in higher-ed -- a move away from fears regarding the open nature of Wikipedia. 188.8.131.52 19:46, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Presentation augumented with Microsoft Powerpoint slideshow - Introduction to Halopedia & Trollfeeding - to be submitted under "Wikimedia Communities". Cheers, RR
- Youtube is 1/3 the age of Wikipedia but both are Web 2.0 environments. Sight and sound are used in a video format and is very subjective where as wikipedia is text based and requires objectivity via consensus. What is the future middle ground of these two environments is the discussion topic. RY
- There should be an effort to have audio pronunciation of every single title of every article in wikipedia. This would be similar to www.m-w.com audio pronunciations. There should also be a pronunciation guide placed under each article title. This issue could be addressed at wikimania. 184.108.40.206 00:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
- Cosign this idea. TSR
- The philosophy of philosophy on wikipedia. In particular moral philosophy and ethics. There is ambiguity as to the role of wikipedia on moral philosophy concerning the balance between factual reporting and interpretaion of historical publications in this area. The ambiguity arises ultimately from the ambiguity of language itself, but I think it would be good to sit down together and discuss the role of wikipedia; and try to answer such questions as, "is there a more uniform way to present philosophical themes which makes it easier for the student to compare them" and "to what extent should criticisms of theories be presented in the articles which delineate those theories". The importance of wikipedia's articles on philosophy is only increasing in this world of propaganda we live in. I reckon there is a need for a debate and discussion and workshop on the presentation of philosophy articles. 220.127.116.11 01:41, 8 May 2007 (UTC) (this is wikipedia user ojl, I was logged into wikipedia at the time I posted and didn't realise the login isn't also for wikimania)
Open Space Track
All participants are encouraged to suggest topics for our Open Space track, which will be an ad-hoc opportunity to discuss and present ideas at Wikimania without a fixed schedule; and to build discussion of your work and ideas on the conference wiki.
The idea of the open space tracks is let participants manage your own agenda, based on previous experience, many interesting and attractive new ideas and suggestions have been born through the open space track, please do sign on your idea and join our event.
previous discussion about "Bofs" and "Lightning Talks" will be move to another page, for more information: http://wikimania2007.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Space
Citizen Journalism Unconference (8/2)
Hacking Days Extra
- Taipei has a strong community of facilitators. Ask for volunteer facilitators to hold self-organizing group discussion sessions by using the large-scale method like Open Space Technology. Participants of the conference will have the opportunities to raise their topics and select a time slot to hold their own discussion group. Any topics that are interested enough could be surfaced and discussed. Refer to http://www.openspaceworld.org/cgi/netwiki.cgi for the facilitation method "Open Space Technology". Refer to http://www.openspaceworldmap.org/ for local Open Space Technology practioners. I can be of service if the conference committee needs more information about the facilitator community in Taipei or the facilitation method.
- Rating in Reference desk, so important question with good answer could be accessed easily. Roscoe x 08:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- A Q&A page beside the main article where it is appropriate, so user could find important issue quickly. Roscoe x 08:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- How about an automatic lock for user pages so that only the user (logged in) can edit his page, That way no personal attacks will appear anymore
Previous discussion about open space
now moved to new page, please discuss there http://wikimania2007.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Space
Suggested Birds of a Feather discussions (BoFs)
(may be more or less informal, geared to a specific group, etc)
Knowledge and Learning (philosophy and advocacy)
- The BoF section on the definition of "knowledge", as the problem baffled the wikimedian a lot. The outsider questioned if wikipedia provide "substantial knowledge", and always critize the wikipedia itself.If a definition of knowledge is being made, there would be a sharp apporoach thaT the ENCYCLOPEDIA can follow; even if the definition couldn't be set, the content of discussion would be worth researching, and the BoF allowed more attendant to share their idea as well. --18.104.22.168 11:48, 15 May 2007 (UTC) (this is Johnny zh:user:黑武士仲尼 from chinese wikipedia , i hope it would be useful)
- I have proposed a round-table or panel discussion entitled "Wikipedia and Taiwanese Students: A Good Mix." I am an American attending college in Taipei, and have seen many English-speaking Taiwanese students use Wikipedia in their classroom presentations. I know they rely on it, but there is a very negative backlash from many Taiwanese professors who dismiss Wikipedia, and forbid it's usage (for the standard reasons). So this is a good debate, which Taiwanese students have a good role in, and view of. The use of Wikipedia as an English language education and learning tool is also part of this discussion. I also just want to hear Taiwanese students' views on the use of Wikipedia, it's value (or lack thereof, everyone would be free to speak), and their Wikipedia stories.
Equality and other issues
- A community round-table/BoF to compare a set of practices across language communities (e.g. arbitration)
- WikiChix BoF
- An enwiki ArbCom/OTRS BoF (or Wiki-en issues at large?) [private?]
- Researching the phenomenon of free/libre knowledge and "libre learning". The aim is to bring together people interested in researching the phenomenon of
- A social sciences research Birds of a Feather -- discuss research studies, new projects
Open Space Topics
Why media Wiki is not (yet) the ideal Wiki-engine to use for educational purposes
60 Minutes BoF submission for persons using Wiki in education.
Wiki is a phenomenal tool for active constructive computer supported learning environment for many subjects and purposes.
- Each wiki has an educational purpose, or do you use Wikpedia without learning something?
- Which are the occurrences of a Wiki to be used by persons to keep the ‘technical cognitive load’ deep in order to permit a high level learning performance?
- What is necessary to improve usability and to avoid oversimplification?
- The discussion will turn around the ‘need of educators’ regarding the tool.
- It is not enough to provide a Wysiwyg editor, learners and educators need other sustain to improve learning.
I'm interested in having a Birds of a Feather conversation at Wikimania in Taipei about Wikimedia event planning and how Wikimania, as well as other Wikimedia events, are organized and executed.
Wikimania has, in the three years of its existence, become a large and extremely complicated conference that is executed almost entirely by volunteers, with help from many quarters. Additionally, in the last year, many other exciting events have also taken place, from the "Wikipedia Academy" to the "Wikimedia Conference Netherlands" and dozens of smaller local meetups.
I'd like to talk about the goal of these events and what their scope should -- or could -- be, and what we as a community want out of future events. How can planning be made easier? What do we want to see in a conference? What is the highest priority for attendees, and how can we collect the historical memory of participants and organizers to make planning easier in future? What are our dreams, and what are some practical suggestions? What are your ideas? phoebe (brassratgirl)/talk 01:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- I suggest this be towards the end of the conference, though not sure I want to miss the afternoon sessions on the last day. Are there any scheduled activities for Sunday night? or is there time open after the closing session.
- Some suggested things to discuss:
- I'd be curious to know how many submissions we did get for the call for papers? how does that compare to last year in Boston? also, registration numbers this year compared to past years. sponsorships this year compared to past years? how are we doing compared to expectations, in these respects or other ways? Will someone have numbers for these?
- In my situation, I was hesitant to submit a paper, because of the travel involved, the costs, the time away from work, etc. When I did submit, the scholarships had already closed, and thus am covering travel costs on my own this year. Next year, I won't be able to cover costs all on my own. The deadlines should be coordinated better.
- I think we should look at ways of improving sponsorship. Doing better to help presenters could possibly increase the number of and quality of submissions to choose from in putting together the program.
- If you are going to be involved with planning Wikimania from year-to-year, or having other people stay on the "planning committee" (if we have one), would help bring experience to future Wikimania planning.
- The place for future Wikimania conferences needs to be selected further out than one year. A one-year planning process (especially as the conference grows) is tight, in my opinion.
- Lastly, the Foundation is moving towards setting up local or regional chapters. Possibly, a formal structure and local organizations can be helpful in planning and bidding to host Wikimania. Also, what other events (besides Wikimania) could we or do we want to hold on a regional basis? Aude 03:01, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- Transforming 'Capital' in Capitalism Understanding the systemic source and changing the system from inside out through participatory democracy and Initiative in view of Millennium Development Goals
- I have proposed a paper presentation entitled "Bright Air, Brilliant Fire: The Mind of Wikipedia." The ideas described here are based on the work of Dr. Gerald Edelman, but are entirely mine, and please remember that my proposal has been accepted by the Wikimania conference, and I plan to present these ideas in August, in Taipei. However, I welcome any ideas or additions you might have. Jim Nightshade 08:40, 12 June 2007 (UTC) (Jim Nightshade is also my user name on the main Wikipedia page, and you could contact me via my Talk page there).
- I want to examine the structure of Wikipedia as a new facet of human community epistemology and communication. My approach is based on the theory of Dr. Gerald Edelman, who has proposed a unique theory of consciousness (the title of my paper is the title of Edelman's 1992 book). Edelman’s theory, which I will apply to the "mind" of Wikipedia, is that human consciousness stems from neuronal networks in the brain, which are structured in massively parallel formations of overlapping data maps and circuits. These maps and circuits receive huge amounts of independent inputs, which are managed and “interpreted” by way of reentry signaling and feedback looping mechanisms, all of which distills and assembles information, and strengthens conceptual creation, organization and disposition in the human mind. This entire system, from which the fantastic and mysterious perceptivity of human consciousness emerges, is dynamic to the extreme, densely complex, entirely self-organizing and highly adaptive to new inputs, responses and outputs. We see in Edelman’s descriptions a virtual mapping of the Wikipedia system. For Wikipedia too, the very basis of the structure is the "map"--each page in the Wikipedia library, and above this “global mappings” by way of higher-level organizational theory and practice, all chock full of existing and newly-inputted information, linked in re-entry structures with other pages, which are constantly changing and developing, feeding information into one another, with manifold updates and additions, cancellations and deletions, alterations and edits, detachments and catchments, etc. This “jungle” is comprised of overlapping arbors--not just slices--of information that “overlap and ramify in myriad ways” and “give rise to maps and circuits that automatically adapt their boundaries to changing signals” (Edelman 69). These arbors, maps, circuits and boundaries evolve into ever-improved conceptual organization on Wikipedia, which are applied by Wikipedia users. My view is that the individual human mind and consciousness, emerge from a nodal, connectionist network of re-entry mapping and feedback looping mechanisms, with a community of editors distilling and assembling credible information. The essential way that intelligent, individual humans gather and interpret information is by way of systems of comparison and contrast, inclusion and exclusion, debate and discussion, updating and changing, all in a community effort--exactly as the "mind" of Wikipedia.
- This idea is linked to Wikipedia's community reference effort, which is in stark contrast to more autocratic, "elitist" methods of information organization. My view is that communities of knowledge like Wikipedia are a key step toward actual, complete human knowledge and understanding--one of us is not as smart as all of us, and this conception includes the views and knowledge of many people who would normally be excluded from contributing to what humans know and can know (such exclusion is not only, often, immoral, it carelessly eliminates valuable data, a failing of any "elitist" views). In the Wikipedia world, we are all "elite" sources (or, most of us are), and the key to eliminating aporias in our knowledge of the world--and these gaps have plagued humanity since time immemorial--is the combined effort and a widely democratic development in the assembly, organization and ultimate concretization of knowledge in human communities.