This is the central discussion area for WikiProject Cooperatives. Feel free to discuss any topics relating to cooperatives here. It is recommended that members watchlist this page.
||This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot II. Threads with no replies in 700 days may be automatically moved.
Hello Wikipedia, I am working on a school project to improve wikipedia's information on retailers' cooperatives. They are very interesting, as each member is a business rather than a person. I am currently editing the wikipedia page for retailers' cooperatives. IF anyone has anything that needs to be added/deleted from the page, or any reliable sources/information on these cooperatives, let me know. I am modeling the page after the "consumer cooperative" page, with a section each on : DEFINITION, GOVERNANCE/OPERATION, EXAMPLES (and will sort these examples by country, and include more international examples), FINANCE/APPROACH TO CAPITAL ACCUMULATION, PROBLEMS, PURSUIT OF SOCIAL GOALS. There is also the "list of retailers' cooperatives" page that is missing many notable examples and has many incorrectly placed businesses- companies labelled as co-ops that are not. If anyone has any reliable sources on retailers' co-ops, any new examples for the list, finds any mistakenly added businesses on the list of retailer cooperatives, or has any other suggestions, please let me know! Thank you Ryan.smith12 (talk) 04:22, 22 May 2013 (UTC)RandyRabbit
There is currently a discussion taking place at TfD to determine whether to merge Template:Infobox cooperative into Template:Infobox company. Gobōnobō + c 01:15, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
Erroneous Photograph: The Normandy
The photo that is supposed to show The Normandy at this Wikipedia page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Normandy, shows instead the building across the street from The Normandy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 19:02, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
We are looking for advice on forming a group that will help artists connect with people who share their files. The possibility of creating a cooperative has come up, and we are looking at that as one option. The cooperative would be in the US, probably based in California.
There's a war going on between the record and film industries and people who are sharing files. This has lead to copyright maximalism, which serves nobody. There is a simple, obvious solution, which has been tried a number of times and works- if you give people who are sharing files a direct way to connect with and purchase from the artists, they are much more likely to do that than people that don't share files.
I'm a former professional musician who has made his living in the technology arena for the last 30 years. I have watched artists being bled from both sides. A few years ago I was involved with a very successful widget that sold Eric Clapton music video DVDs by distributing a free Eric Clapton music video, a free Carlos Santana music video, and several other things.
I have developed an early version of an app that offers many more options than the Eric Clapton widget. It allows allows artists to connect directly with people sharing files, whether the files are being shared on the P2P networks, through websites, or using cloud technology.
We are looking at ways to bring this to artists and file sharers. We are considering forming some form of cooperative group. We think that will give us more credibility with both artists and file sharers. There is even the possibility that the major labels and film studios would see this as a way to back down from their rather extreme approach.
The current fight is not doing anybody any good, and it has already started to limit free use of the internet. We're looking for ways to take things in a different direction. I would greatly appreciate your comments with regards to making this a cooperative.
Tjeffries1948 (talk) 03:13, 29 November 2013 (UTC)Tom Jeffries
Popular pages tool update
As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).
Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.
If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man) 05:00, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Plan to revise article
As part of a class assignment, I am planning on editing the article for Social entrepreneurship. The existing article on social entrepreneurship is rated C-class, and though it is relatively well-written, I believe that a few changes will make this article even better, hopefully to a B-class article. Currently, the article has large sections on "History" and "Current practice," but those are the two only substantial sections of the article. The article would benefit from greater depth and expansion of the article with several new sections and subsections, most notably in expanding the definition of social entrepreneurship in practice, and making subsections about key figures, an online presence, and major organizations involved. A "case studies" section will serve to further develop the definition of social entrepreneurship to help see how it applies to society today. A section on public opinion can provide a view on the net impact that social entrepreneurship has had on people. One of the users, philip.desautels, mentioned that there is some debate on the definition of social entrepreneurship, and my vision is that by both helping to cement the idea of social entrepreneurship as a theory and practice, any ambiguities about the definition and the ideas it encompasses can be cleared up. Deniselee26 (talk) 22:08, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
National articles on cooperation?
We are a group from Poland and we want to first and foremost write/improve articles in polish wikipedia. Should we jin this WikiProject or create our own? --Movonw (talk) 16:47, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
- @Movonw: Hi. You're welcome to join this WikiProject. This project is primarily for collaboration on the English Wikipedia, but I imagine we would enjoy working together with groups focused on other Wikipedias. On the English Wikipedia, so far, we have dedicated articles for the History of cooperatives in the United States, Chinese Industrial Cooperatives, and Cooperatives of Norway. Is your group interested in working only on the Polish Wikipedia or here on en.wikipedia.org too? gobonobo + c 22:56, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Leaflet for Wikiproject Cooperatives at Wikimania 2014
My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.
One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.
This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:
• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film
• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.
• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.
• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____
• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost
The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014
For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:
Adikhajuria (talk) 12:56, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi folks. With a small team of editors, I'm building a mentorship space that we are called The Wikipedia Cooperative, or the Co-op, as a part of an Individual Engagement Grant (see here). As such, I was hoping to be able to use the redirect WP:COOP that is currently pointing here. Thanks, I, JethroBT drop me a line 17:20, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
- @I JethroBT: your mentorship space sounds like a great new project. You waited 6 days for a response from us, which seems reasonable, despite the effort many people have put in to edit articles about co-operatives.
- I am not sure why you call your project a co-operative. Can you explain?
- Please suggest an alternative redirect for us to use.
- I have fixed some of the incoming links. Please fix up any remaining.
- --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 10:06, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Hroðulf. I chose the term co-op for this space because the nature of mentorship is, by definition, cooperative. Furthermore, while a small team is building the infrastructure for the space, the space will be run and maintained by the community for the benefit of Wikipedia generally speaking (i.e. editors come to learn the skills they need and can be more productive wherever their interests are). I previously added in WP:COOPERATIVES as a redirect to this WikiProject which was not there previously. WP:COOPS might also work. I have to get some rest now, but I will address the remaining incoming links soon. Thanks for bringing them to my attention. I, JethroBT drop me a line 10:18, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks I JethroBT. I think all the remaining incoming links are unimportant.
- As regards your project's name, almost everything we do in the Wikimedia project is co-operative (adjective), and it is great to add mentorship to that mix. However, when I say 'a co-operative' or 'the co-operative', (or 'co-op'), I usually refer to a business, or to students on classroom work experience. I encourage your team to choose a more distinctive name, which should help with your growth and publicity.
- --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 10:53, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
- @Hroðulf: I will speak with my team in regards to renaming our space; it's still early enough that we could do so. But in fairness, we have spent a reasonable amount of time discussing our name and identity for our space; the concept of food cooperatives is one that strongly resonates with us. Images of these kinds of co-ops at work like this one where people are working together in pursuit of growth makes the concept very attractive to us. It's true that a lot of work on Wikipedia is done cooperatively, but I do not feel that learning how to edit Wikipedia is necessarily one of them, and our project is aimed at editors who would prefer a learning experience with another person rather than on their own. I, JethroBT drop me a line 19:00, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Need help updating Alaska USA Federal Credit Union page
Hello, I work in marketing at Alaska USA Federal Credit Union. I don't want to violate conflict of interest rules, but we've noticed that the Wikipedia page about our company has outdated information. I wonder if there's an editor who can help make sure the information about our company is correct. Could I also suggest additional topic areas that could be added?LizannB (talk) 23:23, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Dear all, I would like to update the article on agriculture cooperatives based on my research and work with three cooperatives in Eastern India. I would particularly like to edit the section on why we need cooperatives, and add some information on how to start cooperatives (with India as an example). Do let me know if you have any thoughts. Thank you. Tanyajk (talk) 23:23, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
WikiProject X is live!
You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!
Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.
Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Protection of curiosity
This section relates to the talk section of the cooperative article. More closely to a portion of the talk page where there is a request for validation of the claims in the first two paragraphs is requested amongst other topics, and where factual correctness of the article/introduction (first two paragraphs) is topic.
wiki/Talk:Cooperative - sub section 12 "Validate!"
Considering the form of the article, probably posting here is better, even though Wikipedia permits comment to be made directly on the talk page next to the cooperatives article, really neat. :)
This comment is directed towards the form of the article, although it is also directed towards -Doug, who has re-written the first two paragraphs.
The heading was set because curiosity is nice for young adults.
body of message
The purpose of this comment is to tempt to provide constructive criticism while avoiding to promote rash changes in the form of the article.
It is curious how to figure out how to make a non-standard comment here. A general criticism would be applicable to many subjects listed at this site. Many subjects listed here are written by knowlegeable people but are also written at a come as you are mode. Contributors are encouraged or at least welcomed to contribute content with secondary regard to their language degree. Non-standard comment supposedly, as expressed here, is not necessarily applicable to other similar articles and topics available at this site, yet hopefully of value in illustrating the need to further moderate the form of this article.
It should be my aim to argue here the article is ruining the cooperative. In it's current form, the article is factual and bears the appearance of being very big. There is ample room for big articles at thie site (probably?) but the article about the cooperative should not be one of them.
In other articles purpose of introduction could be to establish factual basis and solidify respect to the subject being described. In the article in question here the purpose is not to develop the respect to the cooperatove as a serious party. Supposing the purpose is neither to achieve a smooth surfing/information gathering experienve. Neither is protection of curiosity the only priority.
This article would be more valuable on it's own provided changes are made to make it less valuable to lawyers, not for the purpose of making things more difficult for lawyers to gather information but to make the article a more productive component in the immediate availability to also children.
Claimed here, wikipedia should not be accused of hiding truth or ommitting fact were it to offer a more romantic introduction to the cooperative. Precicely what could fit inside a "romantic" introduction to the cooperative should be interesting to find out for Wikipedia. Hacking fast towrds the middle, "multi-stakeholder cooperatives" is a term which doesn't fit well in with a "smaller" introduction to the cooperative, in the first paragraph of the description.
In support of making the article less strict from the start my aim is to remove the first sentence.
A cooperative ("coop") or co-operative ("co-op") is not "an autonomous association of people who voluntarily cooperate for their mutual social, economic, and cultural benefit."
A cooperative ("coop") or co-operative ("co-op") is "the near opportunity to participate alongside other people in day to day matters."
This is so because the cooperative as an association the aim of which is to give cultural and economic benefit is confusing to understand to someone who is 35 years or younger and who does not have a law degree. Although this last claim is not entierly true there is some support for making modification to the first sentence in the article within, optimistically.
(Obeligz (talk) 20:25, 24 January 2015 (UTC)(
Sources - Cooperative article at Wikipedia