subject:"\[Wikimedia\-l\] Re\: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare"

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-28 Thread Mike Peel

Voting is open! See
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Proposals

(and amazingly the bug from 2007 is currently leading the votes!
Although I'm not sure it will stay there for much longer - please have a
look at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Miscellaneous/Check_if_a_page_exists_without_populating_WhatLinksHere
if you want to finally see this fixed!)

Thanks,
Mike

On 14/1/22 19:28:00, Mike Peel wrote:
Not sure if the opening of the Wishlist has been announced here yet? But
it seems to be open for proposals until the 23rd.

Which means I get to propose fixing a simple technical question for the
fifth time in the wishlist: does this page exist?

Seriously.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Miscellaneous/Check_if_a_page_exists_without_populating_WhatLinksHere

Thanks,
Mike

On 5/1/22 16:10:37, Natalia Rodriguez wrote:

Hey all,
Nice to meet many of you for the first time! Thanks for your feedback
and for raising larger concerns around resource allocation at the
Foundation. These concerns are extremely valid-- especially the ones
around allocating resources for less supported platforms such as
Commons and broken infrastructure. The wishlist process will begin
next week with the proposal phase starting Jan 10.

In the email thread, I identified some open questions about the
Wishlist process so I am answering them here.

*
Can we vote/focus on the maintenance of tools rather than new tools?
o
Yes. The wishes that we work on do not have to be associated
with a new tool. In the past we’ve taken on projects that were
maintenance related. For example, in the last year, we took on
improvement projects for Wikisource Export and Wikisource OCR
tools, among other initiatives. We also maintain and fix all the
tools we’ve built in the past.Check out the fresh documentation
about what qualifies as a proposal here.

o
Gnangarra, your points about the issues with bulk uploads in
Commons would make a sound proposal-- a proposal does not have
to be a new tool in the least. The part about uploading large
files is out of scope for our team though (see link above about
our areas of focus, the issue is infrastructural
and too large for what
we can take on). I still believe there is value in suggesting
it, though.
o
We have Talk to Us

hours

on January 19-- where the entire team will be available for a
video call to help folks who want to write proposals and polish
them so that they may get selected.

*
What if what we want fixed is larger than what the Community Tech
team can accomplish?
o
This year, we will be talking directly with leadership about
larger wishes that we can't fulfill ourselves. To make this
possible, we will no longer be formally 'Archiving' ideas. One
improvement we are implementing from conversations with all of
you at past Talk to Us Hours and other places, is that we will
place projects that are too large for us into a new category
called “Larger Suggestions'' because we still want people to be
able to voice those needs. We plan to share this with the
Foundation's leadership during the WMF's annual planning, which
takes place in the spring.
o
This being said, if you have an idea that may be too large for
us to take on, I would also encourage you to come to Talk to Us
Hours (link above) and see if we can help you workshop the
proposal into something we can help with. If we can’t then I
would still highly encourage you to propose, by all means!
Chances are if you think it’s an important problem, many other
members do as well.
o
Finally, the wishlist isn't just for Community Tech. Volunteer
developers and other Wikimedia Foundation teams have taken on
wishes from the wishlist. For this reason, there is a chance
that a wish may not be appropriate for our team, but it can be
addressed by someone else.

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-27 Thread F. Xavier Dengra i Grau via Wikimedia-l

Hi / Bon dia,

I cannot agree more with the words of Gnangarra in his last email. And that's 
exactly what I meant in the specific proposal of fixing issues in Commons that 
moving all these key requests from their natural scope undermines the 
recognition of the Wishlist (as an equal, useful, and caring system towards 
Wikimedians and their real accumulated needs).

For me, its initial conception was really appropriate and I do not doubt at all 
of the good aim and organization (despite its limited capacity) of the 
Community Teach. However, even if still participating edition after edition, 
the results from last years and the new way of "moving some ideas (the most 
uncomfy, difficult, large... but needed) under the carpet" -where most voters 
won't find them contextualised in their right topics, as contrasted with other 
small gadget proposals of the same wiki environment- is kind of the end of this 
process. Overall, so difficult to go to our Village Pumps and pretend to 
convince other colleagues to vote to get some new peanuts when the background 
is like it is.

I only hope that all this load of messages brings some extra thoughts or 
worries to the ones that must take action high in the WMF, so that the 
Community Tech, that has explicity repeated here its problems and its capacity, 
isn't left behind (alone) with all our concerns and legit complaints. As other 
people have said previously, there's plenty (scandalous) of money to tackle the 
basics.

Best regards,

Xavier Dengra

‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
El dijous, 27 de gener 2022 a les 7:43 AM, Gnangarra  va 
escriure:

> of course the Community tech team cant fix 900 existing issues, nor can it 
> make a new team. The whole point about the wishlist is to focus on tools the 
> community needs. The current reality is that instead of making new tools the 
> Community really needs the tools made during previous wishlsts being fixed, 
> upgraded, or if necessary the plug gets pulled on them.
>
> One of the inherent problems with the wishlist is that the limited resources 
> keep getting thrown at making new gadgets, but it never looks back at what 
> its created. Many of the gadgets that get created are to work around an 
> existing problem rather than fixing the underlying problem.
>
> Moving an issue from being listed as Commons related, to Larger Suggestions 
> is removing it from where the audience can see it, a close look many of the 
> other "wishes" on the commons list could be granted by way of fixing small 
> parts of the larger problems.
>
> Wishlist as in its current form has an equity issue, a wish for Wikisource 
> compared to a wish for Wikipedia is never going to garner the same amount of 
> support. There is a significant size difference between the two, and with 
> that there is a lack of understanding of how much impact a tool will have. 
> Commons gains some in being multilingual yet loses out against a 
> Wikipedia wish because of the same imbalance. An added bonus that upgrading 
> the multimedia capacity on Commons means we need all the other projects being 
> able to incorporate those gains, voila its too hard, its too big, its outside 
> of scope. If your wish is for a tool to help a language other than the top 10 
> forget the wishlist altogether.
>
> We end up with it haven taken 6 months to create the virtual Wikimania 2021, 
> its now six months after Wikimania 2021 yet we still havent been able to 
> upload all sessions to Commons because of underlying issues problems with the 
> video uploading process. We didnt even have streaming capacity to actually 
> present directly through Commons we had to use Youtube and continue to hold 
> all the videos on Youtube even though everything is freely licensed. All 
> because the wishlist process if flawed it looks only at the small ideas, the 
> easy ideas, current needs there is no reason why the Community team cant take 
> on a large idea and work collaboratively like the whole community does. There 
> is nothing stopping the volunteers and Community tech team from applying for 
> funding through a rapid grant to work on something larger or something that 
> addresses the lack of equity being created by the Wishlist.
>
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 04:39, MusikAnimal  wrote:
>
>>> Perhaps we can also have community discussion and !voting on the larger 
>>> suggestions, to help Wikimedia at large to prioritize (or reflect on why 
>>> tackling a popular set of challenges is hard to focus on). This seems like 
>>> a useful enough list to want to come out with a rough ordering of the 
>>> "larger" list as well as the traditional ordering of smaller wishes.
>>
>> That's exactly what it is for. See the lead at 
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Larger_suggestions
>>  . The wish about Commons maintenance was never "removed", it was moved to 
>> Larger suggestions, because as Szymon explained better than I did, we 
>> (Community Tech) cannot provide

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-26 Thread Gnangarra

of course the Community tech team cant fix 900 existing issues, nor can it
make a new team.  The whole point about the wishlist is to focus on tools
the community needs.  The current reality is that instead of making new
tools the Community really needs the tools made during previous wishlsts
being fixed, upgraded, or if necessary the plug gets pulled on them.

One of the inherent problems with the wishlist is that the limited
resources keep getting thrown at making new gadgets, but it never looks
back at what its created. Many of the gadgets that get created are to work
around an existing problem rather than fixing the underlying problem.

Moving an issue from being listed as Commons related, to Larger Suggestions
is removing it from where the audience can see it, a close look many of the
other "wishes" on the commons list could be granted by way of fixing small
parts of the larger problems.

Wishlist as in its current form has an equity issue, a wish for Wikisource
compared to a wish for Wikipedia is never going to garner the same amount
of support. There is a significant size difference between the two, and
with that there is a lack of understanding of how much impact a tool will
have.  Commons gains some in being multilingual yet loses out
against a Wikipedia wish because of the same imbalance. An added bonus that
upgrading the multimedia capacity on Commons means we need all the other
projects being able to incorporate those gains, voila its too hard, its too
big, its outside of scope.  If your wish is for a tool to help a language
other than the top 10 forget the wishlist altogether.

We end up with it haven taken 6 months to create the virtual Wikimania
2021, its now six months after Wikimania 2021 yet we still havent been able
to upload all sessions to Commons because of underlying issues problems
with the video uploading process. We didnt even have streaming capacity to
actually present directly through Commons we had to use Youtube and
continue to hold all the videos on Youtube even though everything is freely
licensed. All because the wishlist process if flawed it looks only at the
small ideas, the easy ideas, current needs there is no reason why the
Community team cant take on a large idea and work collaboratively like the
whole community does.  There is nothing stopping the volunteers and
Community tech team from applying for funding through a rapid grant to work
on something larger or something that addresses the lack of equity being
created by the Wishlist.

On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 at 04:39, MusikAnimal  wrote:

> > Perhaps we can also have community discussion and !voting on the larger
> suggestions, to help Wikimedia at large to prioritize (or reflect on why
> tackling a popular set of challenges is hard to focus on).  This seems like
> a useful enough list to want to come out with a rough ordering of the
> "larger" list as well as the traditional ordering of smaller wishes.
>
> That's exactly what it is for. See the lead at
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Larger_suggestions
> . The wish about Commons maintenance was never "removed", it was *moved*
> to Larger suggestions, because as Szymon explained better than I did, we
> (Community Tech) cannot provide indefinite support for Commons and tackle
> 900+ bugs. Moving it to Larger suggestions recognizes the proposal is an
> important problem that deserves broader attention. Apologies this wasn't
> clear.
>
> ~ MA
>
> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 2:31 PM Samuel Klein  wrote:
>
>> Perhaps we can also have community discussion and !voting on the larger
>> suggestions, to help Wikimedia at large to prioritize (or reflect on why
>> tackling a popular set of challenges is hard to focus on).  This seems like
>> a useful enough list to want to come out with a rough ordering of the
>> "larger" list as well as the traditional ordering of smaller wishes.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 6:51 AM Gnangarra  wrote:
>>
>>> Kaya
>>>
>>> As was said we should put forward wishes to the list even if they can't
>>> be fulfilled by the team, by removing the issue from the wishlist you have
>>> taken away the communities ability to express that they wish the issues to
>>> be addressed.
>>>
>>> Calling it out of scope and removing it is exactly what we were told was
>>> not going happen this year. I'll go back to my original response the
>>> Wishlist is broken and doesnt serve the communities needs
>>>
>>> On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 at 15:12, Szymon Grabarczuk <
>>> sgrabarc...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>>>
 Dear Gnangarra and everyone who feels misinformed,

 Please take into account my reply published on the same page, a few
 diffs later:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Larger_suggestions/General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets=next=22669903

 In a nutshell, the voting results are instructions for the Community
 Tech team. Since our team can't hire another

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-26 Thread MusikAnimal

> Perhaps we can also have community discussion and !voting on the larger
suggestions, to help Wikimedia at large to prioritize (or reflect on why
tackling a popular set of challenges is hard to focus on).  This seems like
a useful enough list to want to come out with a rough ordering of the
"larger" list as well as the traditional ordering of smaller wishes.

That's exactly what it is for. See the lead at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Larger_suggestions
. The wish about Commons maintenance was never "removed", it was *moved* to
Larger suggestions, because as Szymon explained better than I did, we
(Community Tech) cannot provide indefinite support for Commons and tackle
900+ bugs. Moving it to Larger suggestions recognizes the proposal is an
important problem that deserves broader attention. Apologies this wasn't
clear.

~ MA

On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 2:31 PM Samuel Klein  wrote:

> Perhaps we can also have community discussion and !voting on the larger
> suggestions, to help Wikimedia at large to prioritize (or reflect on why
> tackling a popular set of challenges is hard to focus on).  This seems like
> a useful enough list to want to come out with a rough ordering of the
> "larger" list as well as the traditional ordering of smaller wishes.
>
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 6:51 AM Gnangarra  wrote:
>
>> Kaya
>>
>> As was said we should put forward wishes to the list even if they can't
>> be fulfilled by the team, by removing the issue from the wishlist you have
>> taken away the communities ability to express that they wish the issues to
>> be addressed.
>>
>> Calling it out of scope and removing it is exactly what we were told was
>> not going happen this year. I'll go back to my original response the
>> Wishlist is broken and doesnt serve the communities needs
>>
>> On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 at 15:12, Szymon Grabarczuk <
>> sgrabarc...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Gnangarra and everyone who feels misinformed,
>>>
>>> Please take into account my reply published on the same page, a few
>>> diffs later:
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Larger_suggestions/General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets=next=22669903
>>>
>>> In a nutshell, the voting results are instructions for the Community
>>> Tech team. Since our team can't hire another team, such wishes,
>>> unfortunately, can't be voted upon. Instead, these become "larger
>>> suggestions" which will be shared with the leadership of the Product
>>> department at the Wikimedia Foundation.
>>>
>>> I invite you to discuss the details on the Survey talk page:
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_Wishlist_Survey
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Szymon Grabarczuk (he/him)
>>>
>>> Community Relations Specialist
>>>
>>> Wikimedia Foundation
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 7:18 AM Gnangarra  wrote:
>>>
 so much for all the assurances here
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Multimedia_and_Commons/General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets=next=22663179
  Out of scope for our team, which I hope is obvious

 On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 at 12:26, Gnangarra  wrote:

> Commons issues raised in
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Multimedia_and_Commons#General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets
>
> On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 at 05:16, Bodhisattwa Mandal <
> bodhisattwa.rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Maybe, the Community Tech team should start picking up long standing
>> issues first which are being proposed repetitively almost every year but 
>> do
>> not get adequate votes to receive their attention.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 15, 2022, 00:59 Mike Peel  wrote:
>>
>>> Not sure if the opening of the Wishlist has been announced here yet?
>>> But
>>> it seems to be open for proposals until the 23rd.
>>>
>>> Which means I get to propose fixing a simple technical question for
>>> the
>>> fifth time in the wishlist: does this page exist?
>>>
>>> Seriously.
>>>
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Miscellaneous/Check_if_a_page_exists_without_populating_WhatLinksHere
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> On 5/1/22 16:10:37, Natalia Rodriguez wrote:
>>> > Hey all,
>>> > Nice to meet many of you for the first time! Thanks for your
>>> feedback
>>> > and for raising larger concerns around resource allocation at the
>>> > Foundation. These concerns are extremely valid-- especially the
>>> ones
>>> > around allocating resources for less supported platforms such as
>>> Commons
>>> > and broken infrastructure. The wishlist process will begin next
>>> week
>>> > with the proposal phase starting Jan 10.
>>> >
>>> > In the email thread, I identified some open questions about the
>>> Wishlist
>>> >

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-26 Thread Samuel Klein

Perhaps we can also have community discussion and !voting on the larger
suggestions, to help Wikimedia at large to prioritize (or reflect on why
tackling a popular set of challenges is hard to focus on).  This seems like
a useful enough list to want to come out with a rough ordering of the
"larger" list as well as the traditional ordering of smaller wishes.

On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 6:51 AM Gnangarra  wrote:

> Kaya
>
> As was said we should put forward wishes to the list even if they can't be
> fulfilled by the team, by removing the issue from the wishlist you have
> taken away the communities ability to express that they wish the issues to
> be addressed.
>
> Calling it out of scope and removing it is exactly what we were told was
> not going happen this year. I'll go back to my original response the
> Wishlist is broken and doesnt serve the communities needs
>
> On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 at 15:12, Szymon Grabarczuk 
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Gnangarra and everyone who feels misinformed,
>>
>> Please take into account my reply published on the same page, a few diffs
>> later:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Larger_suggestions/General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets=next=22669903
>>
>> In a nutshell, the voting results are instructions for the Community Tech
>> team. Since our team can't hire another team, such wishes, unfortunately,
>> can't be voted upon. Instead, these become "larger suggestions" which will
>> be shared with the leadership of the Product department at the Wikimedia
>> Foundation.
>>
>> I invite you to discuss the details on the Survey talk page:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_Wishlist_Survey
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Szymon Grabarczuk (he/him)
>>
>> Community Relations Specialist
>>
>> Wikimedia Foundation
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 7:18 AM Gnangarra  wrote:
>>
>>> so much for all the assurances here
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Multimedia_and_Commons/General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets=next=22663179
>>>  Out of scope for our team, which I hope is obvious
>>>
>>> On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 at 12:26, Gnangarra  wrote:
>>>
 Commons issues raised in
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Multimedia_and_Commons#General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets

 On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 at 05:16, Bodhisattwa Mandal <
 bodhisattwa.rg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Maybe, the Community Tech team should start picking up long standing
> issues first which are being proposed repetitively almost every year but 
> do
> not get adequate votes to receive their attention.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 15, 2022, 00:59 Mike Peel  wrote:
>
>> Not sure if the opening of the Wishlist has been announced here yet?
>> But
>> it seems to be open for proposals until the 23rd.
>>
>> Which means I get to propose fixing a simple technical question for
>> the
>> fifth time in the wishlist: does this page exist?
>>
>> Seriously.
>>
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Miscellaneous/Check_if_a_page_exists_without_populating_WhatLinksHere
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mike
>>
>> On 5/1/22 16:10:37, Natalia Rodriguez wrote:
>> > Hey all,
>> > Nice to meet many of you for the first time! Thanks for your
>> feedback
>> > and for raising larger concerns around resource allocation at the
>> > Foundation. These concerns are extremely valid-- especially the
>> ones
>> > around allocating resources for less supported platforms such as
>> Commons
>> > and broken infrastructure. The wishlist process will begin next
>> week
>> > with the proposal phase starting Jan 10.
>> >
>> > In the email thread, I identified some open questions about the
>> Wishlist
>> > process so I am answering them here.
>> >
>> >   *
>> > Can we vote/focus on the maintenance of tools rather than new
>> tools?
>> >   o
>> > Yes. The wishes that we work on do not have to be associated
>> > with a new tool. In the past we’ve taken on projects that
>> were
>> > maintenance related. For example, in the last year, we took
>> on
>> > improvement projects for Wikisource Export and Wikisource
>> OCR
>> > tools, among other initiatives. We also maintain and fix
>> all the
>> > tools we’ve built in the past.Check out the fresh
>> documentation
>> > about what qualifies as a proposal here.
>> > <
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/FAQ#How_to_create_a_good_proposal
>> ?>
>> >   o
>> > Gnangarra, your points about the issues with bulk uploads in
>> > Commons would make a sound proposal-- a proposal does not
>> have
>> >

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-25 Thread Gnangarra

Kaya

As was said we should put forward wishes to the list even if they can't be
fulfilled by the team, by removing the issue from the wishlist you have
taken away the communities ability to express that they wish the issues to
be addressed.

Calling it out of scope and removing it is exactly what we were told was
not going happen this year. I'll go back to my original response the
Wishlist is broken and doesnt serve the communities needs

On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 at 15:12, Szymon Grabarczuk 
wrote:

> Dear Gnangarra and everyone who feels misinformed,
>
> Please take into account my reply published on the same page, a few diffs
> later:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Larger_suggestions/General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets=next=22669903
>
> In a nutshell, the voting results are instructions for the Community Tech
> team. Since our team can't hire another team, such wishes, unfortunately,
> can't be voted upon. Instead, these become "larger suggestions" which will
> be shared with the leadership of the Product department at the Wikimedia
> Foundation.
>
> I invite you to discuss the details on the Survey talk page:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_Wishlist_Survey
>
> Best,
>
> Szymon Grabarczuk (he/him)
>
> Community Relations Specialist
>
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 7:18 AM Gnangarra  wrote:
>
>> so much for all the assurances here
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Multimedia_and_Commons/General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets=next=22663179
>>  Out of scope for our team, which I hope is obvious
>>
>> On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 at 12:26, Gnangarra  wrote:
>>
>>> Commons issues raised in
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Multimedia_and_Commons#General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets
>>>
>>> On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 at 05:16, Bodhisattwa Mandal <
>>> bodhisattwa.rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Maybe, the Community Tech team should start picking up long standing
 issues first which are being proposed repetitively almost every year but do
 not get adequate votes to receive their attention.



 On Sat, Jan 15, 2022, 00:59 Mike Peel  wrote:

> Not sure if the opening of the Wishlist has been announced here yet?
> But
> it seems to be open for proposals until the 23rd.
>
> Which means I get to propose fixing a simple technical question for
> the
> fifth time in the wishlist: does this page exist?
>
> Seriously.
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Miscellaneous/Check_if_a_page_exists_without_populating_WhatLinksHere
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
> On 5/1/22 16:10:37, Natalia Rodriguez wrote:
> > Hey all,
> > Nice to meet many of you for the first time! Thanks for your
> feedback
> > and for raising larger concerns around resource allocation at the
> > Foundation. These concerns are extremely valid-- especially the ones
> > around allocating resources for less supported platforms such as
> Commons
> > and broken infrastructure. The wishlist process will begin next week
> > with the proposal phase starting Jan 10.
> >
> > In the email thread, I identified some open questions about the
> Wishlist
> > process so I am answering them here.
> >
> >   *
> > Can we vote/focus on the maintenance of tools rather than new
> tools?
> >   o
> > Yes. The wishes that we work on do not have to be associated
> > with a new tool. In the past we’ve taken on projects that
> were
> > maintenance related. For example, in the last year, we took
> on
> > improvement projects for Wikisource Export and Wikisource OCR
> > tools, among other initiatives. We also maintain and fix all
> the
> > tools we’ve built in the past.Check out the fresh
> documentation
> > about what qualifies as a proposal here.
> > <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/FAQ#How_to_create_a_good_proposal
> ?>
> >   o
> > Gnangarra, your points about the issues with bulk uploads in
> > Commons would make a sound proposal-- a proposal does not
> have
> > to be a new tool in the least. The part about uploading large
> > files is out of scope for our team though (see link above
> about
> > our areas of focus, the issue is infrastructural
> > and too large for
> what
> > we can take on). I still believe there is value in suggesting
> > it, though.
> >   o
> > We have Talk to Us
> > <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/Updates/Talk_to_Us

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-25 Thread Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga

So, let's face it... this is no a wishlist. This is a rigged process. Why 
should we be using our time for something that won't be done?

From: Szymon Grabarczuk 
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2022 8:11 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us 
and prepare

Dear Gnangarra and everyone who feels misinformed,

Please take into account my reply published on the same page, a few diffs 
later: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Larger_suggestions/General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets=next=22669903

In a nutshell, the voting results are instructions for the Community Tech team. 
Since our team can't hire another team, such wishes, unfortunately, can't be 
voted upon. Instead, these become "larger suggestions" which will be shared 
with the leadership of the Product department at the Wikimedia Foundation.

I invite you to discuss the details on the Survey talk page: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_Wishlist_Survey

Best,

[https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/t1GetqH3N05ZDv75_-Q6W0YEm4ofn22ZQVNUIoPTIa-ruOTtteTbCweEL9so7ibpyWciFTgOyeDjTRDNr7bhQtxRjFucqJcb7cFnXUqpcqkBsTGqxZRdpmCCzx5xnCYOks-0sAej]

Szymon Grabarczuk (he/him)

Community Relations Specialist

Wikimedia Foundation

On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 7:18 AM Gnangarra 
mailto:gnanga...@gmail.com>> wrote:
so much for all the assurances here 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Multimedia_and_Commons/General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets=next=22663179
 Out of scope for our team, which I hope is obvious

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 at 12:26, Gnangarra 
mailto:gnanga...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Commons issues raised in 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Multimedia_and_Commons#General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets

On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 at 05:16, Bodhisattwa Mandal 
mailto:bodhisattwa.rg...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Maybe, the Community Tech team should start picking up long standing issues 
first which are being proposed repetitively almost every year but do not get 
adequate votes to receive their attention.

On Sat, Jan 15, 2022, 00:59 Mike Peel 
mailto:em...@mikepeel.net>> wrote:
Not sure if the opening of the Wishlist has been announced here yet? But
it seems to be open for proposals until the 23rd.

Which means I get to propose fixing a simple technical question for the
fifth time in the wishlist: does this page exist?

Seriously.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Miscellaneous/Check_if_a_page_exists_without_populating_WhatLinksHere

Thanks,
Mike

On 5/1/22 16:10:37, Natalia Rodriguez wrote:
> Hey all,
> Nice to meet many of you for the first time! Thanks for your feedback
> and for raising larger concerns around resource allocation at the
> Foundation. These concerns are extremely valid-- especially the ones
> around allocating resources for less supported platforms such as Commons
> and broken infrastructure. The wishlist process will begin next week
> with the proposal phase starting Jan 10.
>
> In the email thread, I identified some open questions about the Wishlist
> process so I am answering them here.
>
>   *
> Can we vote/focus on the maintenance of tools rather than new tools?
>   o
> Yes. The wishes that we work on do not have to be associated
> with a new tool. In the past we’ve taken on projects that were
> maintenance related. For example, in the last year, we took on
> improvement projects for Wikisource Export and Wikisource OCR
> tools, among other initiatives. We also maintain and fix all the
> tools we’ve built in the past.Check out the fresh documentation
> about what qualifies as a proposal here.
> 
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/FAQ#How_to_create_a_good_proposal?>
>   o
> Gnangarra, your points about the issues with bulk uploads in
> Commons would make a sound proposal-- a proposal does not have
> to be a new tool in the least. The part about uploading large
> files is out of scope for our team though (see link above about
> our areas of focus, the issue is infrastructural
> <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T86436>and too large for what
> we can take on). I still believe there is value in suggesting
> it, though.
>   o
> We have Talk to Us
> 
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/Updates/Talk_to_Us>hours
> on January 19-- where the entire team will be available for a
> video call to help folks who want to write proposals and polish
> them so that they may get selected

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-24 Thread Szymon Grabarczuk

Dear Gnangarra and everyone who feels misinformed,

Please take into account my reply published on the same page, a few diffs
later:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Larger_suggestions/General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets=next=22669903

In a nutshell, the voting results are instructions for the Community Tech
team. Since our team can't hire another team, such wishes, unfortunately,
can't be voted upon. Instead, these become "larger suggestions" which will
be shared with the leadership of the Product department at the Wikimedia
Foundation.

I invite you to discuss the details on the Survey talk page:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_Wishlist_Survey

Best,

Szymon Grabarczuk (he/him)

Community Relations Specialist

Wikimedia Foundation


On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 7:18 AM Gnangarra  wrote:

> so much for all the assurances here
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Multimedia_and_Commons/General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets=next=22663179
>  Out of scope for our team, which I hope is obvious
>
> On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 at 12:26, Gnangarra  wrote:
>
>> Commons issues raised in
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Multimedia_and_Commons#General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets
>>
>> On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 at 05:16, Bodhisattwa Mandal <
>> bodhisattwa.rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe, the Community Tech team should start picking up long standing
>>> issues first which are being proposed repetitively almost every year but do
>>> not get adequate votes to receive their attention.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 15, 2022, 00:59 Mike Peel  wrote:
>>>
 Not sure if the opening of the Wishlist has been announced here yet?
 But
 it seems to be open for proposals until the 23rd.

 Which means I get to propose fixing a simple technical question for the
 fifth time in the wishlist: does this page exist?

 Seriously.

 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Miscellaneous/Check_if_a_page_exists_without_populating_WhatLinksHere

 Thanks,
 Mike

 On 5/1/22 16:10:37, Natalia Rodriguez wrote:
 > Hey all,
 > Nice to meet many of you for the first time! Thanks for your feedback
 > and for raising larger concerns around resource allocation at the
 > Foundation. These concerns are extremely valid-- especially the ones
 > around allocating resources for less supported platforms such as
 Commons
 > and broken infrastructure. The wishlist process will begin next week
 > with the proposal phase starting Jan 10.
 >
 > In the email thread, I identified some open questions about the
 Wishlist
 > process so I am answering them here.
 >
 >   *
 > Can we vote/focus on the maintenance of tools rather than new
 tools?
 >   o
 > Yes. The wishes that we work on do not have to be associated
 > with a new tool. In the past we’ve taken on projects that were
 > maintenance related. For example, in the last year, we took on
 > improvement projects for Wikisource Export and Wikisource OCR
 > tools, among other initiatives. We also maintain and fix all
 the
 > tools we’ve built in the past.Check out the fresh
 documentation
 > about what qualifies as a proposal here.
 > <
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/FAQ#How_to_create_a_good_proposal
 ?>
 >   o
 > Gnangarra, your points about the issues with bulk uploads in
 > Commons would make a sound proposal-- a proposal does not have
 > to be a new tool in the least. The part about uploading large
 > files is out of scope for our team though (see link above
 about
 > our areas of focus, the issue is infrastructural
 > and too large for
 what
 > we can take on). I still believe there is value in suggesting
 > it, though.
 >   o
 > We have Talk to Us
 > <
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/Updates/Talk_to_Us
 >hours
 > on January 19-- where the entire team will be available for a
 > video call to help folks who want to write proposals and
 polish
 > them so that they may get selected.
 >
 >
 >   *
 > What if what we want fixed is larger than what the Community Tech
 > team can accomplish?
 >   o
 > This year, we will be talking directly with leadership about
 > larger wishes that we can't fulfill ourselves. To make this
 > possible, we will no longer be formally 'Archiving' ideas. One
 > improvement we are implementing from

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-24 Thread Gnangarra

so much for all the assurances here
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Multimedia_and_Commons/General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets=next=22663179
 Out of scope for our team, which I hope is obvious

On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 at 12:26, Gnangarra  wrote:

> Commons issues raised in
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Multimedia_and_Commons#General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets
>
> On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 at 05:16, Bodhisattwa Mandal <
> bodhisattwa.rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Maybe, the Community Tech team should start picking up long standing
>> issues first which are being proposed repetitively almost every year but do
>> not get adequate votes to receive their attention.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 15, 2022, 00:59 Mike Peel  wrote:
>>
>>> Not sure if the opening of the Wishlist has been announced here yet? But
>>> it seems to be open for proposals until the 23rd.
>>>
>>> Which means I get to propose fixing a simple technical question for the
>>> fifth time in the wishlist: does this page exist?
>>>
>>> Seriously.
>>>
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Miscellaneous/Check_if_a_page_exists_without_populating_WhatLinksHere
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Mike
>>>
>>> On 5/1/22 16:10:37, Natalia Rodriguez wrote:
>>> > Hey all,
>>> > Nice to meet many of you for the first time! Thanks for your feedback
>>> > and for raising larger concerns around resource allocation at the
>>> > Foundation. These concerns are extremely valid-- especially the ones
>>> > around allocating resources for less supported platforms such as
>>> Commons
>>> > and broken infrastructure. The wishlist process will begin next week
>>> > with the proposal phase starting Jan 10.
>>> >
>>> > In the email thread, I identified some open questions about the
>>> Wishlist
>>> > process so I am answering them here.
>>> >
>>> >   *
>>> > Can we vote/focus on the maintenance of tools rather than new
>>> tools?
>>> >   o
>>> > Yes. The wishes that we work on do not have to be associated
>>> > with a new tool. In the past we’ve taken on projects that were
>>> > maintenance related. For example, in the last year, we took on
>>> > improvement projects for Wikisource Export and Wikisource OCR
>>> > tools, among other initiatives. We also maintain and fix all
>>> the
>>> > tools we’ve built in the past.Check out the fresh documentation
>>> > about what qualifies as a proposal here.
>>> > <
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/FAQ#How_to_create_a_good_proposal
>>> ?>
>>> >   o
>>> > Gnangarra, your points about the issues with bulk uploads in
>>> > Commons would make a sound proposal-- a proposal does not have
>>> > to be a new tool in the least. The part about uploading large
>>> > files is out of scope for our team though (see link above about
>>> > our areas of focus, the issue is infrastructural
>>> > and too large for
>>> what
>>> > we can take on). I still believe there is value in suggesting
>>> > it, though.
>>> >   o
>>> > We have Talk to Us
>>> > <
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/Updates/Talk_to_Us
>>> >hours
>>> > on January 19-- where the entire team will be available for a
>>> > video call to help folks who want to write proposals and polish
>>> > them so that they may get selected.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >   *
>>> > What if what we want fixed is larger than what the Community Tech
>>> > team can accomplish?
>>> >   o
>>> > This year, we will be talking directly with leadership about
>>> > larger wishes that we can't fulfill ourselves. To make this
>>> > possible, we will no longer be formally 'Archiving' ideas. One
>>> > improvement we are implementing from conversations with all of
>>> > you at past Talk to Us Hours and other places, is that we will
>>> > place projects that are too large for us into a new category
>>> > called “Larger Suggestions'' because we still want people to be
>>> > able to voice those needs. We plan to share this with the
>>> > Foundation's leadership during the WMF's annual planning, which
>>> > takes place in the spring.
>>> >   o
>>> > This being said, if you have an idea that may be too large for
>>> > us to take on, I would also encourage you to come to Talk to Us
>>> > Hours (link above) and see if we can help you workshop the
>>> > proposal into something we can help with. If we can’t then I
>>> > would still highly encourage you to propose, by all means!
>>> > Chances are if you think it’s an important problem, many other
>>> > members do as well.
>>> >   o
>>> > Finally,

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-22 Thread Gnangarra

Commons issues raised in
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Multimedia_and_Commons#General_maintenance,_outstanding_phabricator_tickets

On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 at 05:16, Bodhisattwa Mandal <
bodhisattwa.rg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Maybe, the Community Tech team should start picking up long standing
> issues first which are being proposed repetitively almost every year but do
> not get adequate votes to receive their attention.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 15, 2022, 00:59 Mike Peel  wrote:
>
>> Not sure if the opening of the Wishlist has been announced here yet? But
>> it seems to be open for proposals until the 23rd.
>>
>> Which means I get to propose fixing a simple technical question for the
>> fifth time in the wishlist: does this page exist?
>>
>> Seriously.
>>
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Miscellaneous/Check_if_a_page_exists_without_populating_WhatLinksHere
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mike
>>
>> On 5/1/22 16:10:37, Natalia Rodriguez wrote:
>> > Hey all,
>> > Nice to meet many of you for the first time! Thanks for your feedback
>> > and for raising larger concerns around resource allocation at the
>> > Foundation. These concerns are extremely valid-- especially the ones
>> > around allocating resources for less supported platforms such as
>> Commons
>> > and broken infrastructure. The wishlist process will begin next week
>> > with the proposal phase starting Jan 10.
>> >
>> > In the email thread, I identified some open questions about the
>> Wishlist
>> > process so I am answering them here.
>> >
>> >   *
>> > Can we vote/focus on the maintenance of tools rather than new tools?
>> >   o
>> > Yes. The wishes that we work on do not have to be associated
>> > with a new tool. In the past we’ve taken on projects that were
>> > maintenance related. For example, in the last year, we took on
>> > improvement projects for Wikisource Export and Wikisource OCR
>> > tools, among other initiatives. We also maintain and fix all the
>> > tools we’ve built in the past.Check out the fresh documentation
>> > about what qualifies as a proposal here.
>> > <
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/FAQ#How_to_create_a_good_proposal
>> ?>
>> >   o
>> > Gnangarra, your points about the issues with bulk uploads in
>> > Commons would make a sound proposal-- a proposal does not have
>> > to be a new tool in the least. The part about uploading large
>> > files is out of scope for our team though (see link above about
>> > our areas of focus, the issue is infrastructural
>> > and too large for
>> what
>> > we can take on). I still believe there is value in suggesting
>> > it, though.
>> >   o
>> > We have Talk to Us
>> > <
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/Updates/Talk_to_Us
>> >hours
>> > on January 19-- where the entire team will be available for a
>> > video call to help folks who want to write proposals and polish
>> > them so that they may get selected.
>> >
>> >
>> >   *
>> > What if what we want fixed is larger than what the Community Tech
>> > team can accomplish?
>> >   o
>> > This year, we will be talking directly with leadership about
>> > larger wishes that we can't fulfill ourselves. To make this
>> > possible, we will no longer be formally 'Archiving' ideas. One
>> > improvement we are implementing from conversations with all of
>> > you at past Talk to Us Hours and other places, is that we will
>> > place projects that are too large for us into a new category
>> > called “Larger Suggestions'' because we still want people to be
>> > able to voice those needs. We plan to share this with the
>> > Foundation's leadership during the WMF's annual planning, which
>> > takes place in the spring.
>> >   o
>> > This being said, if you have an idea that may be too large for
>> > us to take on, I would also encourage you to come to Talk to Us
>> > Hours (link above) and see if we can help you workshop the
>> > proposal into something we can help with. If we can’t then I
>> > would still highly encourage you to propose, by all means!
>> > Chances are if you think it’s an important problem, many other
>> > members do as well.
>> >   o
>> > Finally, the wishlist isn't just for Community Tech. Volunteer
>> > developers and other Wikimedia Foundation teams have taken on
>> > wishes from the wishlist. For this reason, there is a chance
>> > that a wish may not be appropriate for our team, but it can be
>> > addressed by someone else.
>> >
>> >
>> >   *
>> > Why isn’t the WMF fixing what we feel are  be the most urgently
>> >

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-14 Thread Bodhisattwa Mandal

Maybe, the Community Tech team should start picking up long standing issues
first which are being proposed repetitively almost every year but do not
get adequate votes to receive their attention.



On Sat, Jan 15, 2022, 00:59 Mike Peel  wrote:

> Not sure if the opening of the Wishlist has been announced here yet? But
> it seems to be open for proposals until the 23rd.
>
> Which means I get to propose fixing a simple technical question for the
> fifth time in the wishlist: does this page exist?
>
> Seriously.
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Miscellaneous/Check_if_a_page_exists_without_populating_WhatLinksHere
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
> On 5/1/22 16:10:37, Natalia Rodriguez wrote:
> > Hey all,
> > Nice to meet many of you for the first time! Thanks for your feedback
> > and for raising larger concerns around resource allocation at the
> > Foundation. These concerns are extremely valid-- especially the ones
> > around allocating resources for less supported platforms such as Commons
> > and broken infrastructure. The wishlist process will begin next week
> > with the proposal phase starting Jan 10.
> >
> > In the email thread, I identified some open questions about the Wishlist
> > process so I am answering them here.
> >
> >   *
> > Can we vote/focus on the maintenance of tools rather than new tools?
> >   o
> > Yes. The wishes that we work on do not have to be associated
> > with a new tool. In the past we’ve taken on projects that were
> > maintenance related. For example, in the last year, we took on
> > improvement projects for Wikisource Export and Wikisource OCR
> > tools, among other initiatives. We also maintain and fix all the
> > tools we’ve built in the past.Check out the fresh documentation
> > about what qualifies as a proposal here.
> > <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/FAQ#How_to_create_a_good_proposal
> ?>
> >   o
> > Gnangarra, your points about the issues with bulk uploads in
> > Commons would make a sound proposal-- a proposal does not have
> > to be a new tool in the least. The part about uploading large
> > files is out of scope for our team though (see link above about
> > our areas of focus, the issue is infrastructural
> > and too large for what
> > we can take on). I still believe there is value in suggesting
> > it, though.
> >   o
> > We have Talk to Us
> > <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/Updates/Talk_to_Us
> >hours
> > on January 19-- where the entire team will be available for a
> > video call to help folks who want to write proposals and polish
> > them so that they may get selected.
> >
> >
> >   *
> > What if what we want fixed is larger than what the Community Tech
> > team can accomplish?
> >   o
> > This year, we will be talking directly with leadership about
> > larger wishes that we can't fulfill ourselves. To make this
> > possible, we will no longer be formally 'Archiving' ideas. One
> > improvement we are implementing from conversations with all of
> > you at past Talk to Us Hours and other places, is that we will
> > place projects that are too large for us into a new category
> > called “Larger Suggestions'' because we still want people to be
> > able to voice those needs. We plan to share this with the
> > Foundation's leadership during the WMF's annual planning, which
> > takes place in the spring.
> >   o
> > This being said, if you have an idea that may be too large for
> > us to take on, I would also encourage you to come to Talk to Us
> > Hours (link above) and see if we can help you workshop the
> > proposal into something we can help with. If we can’t then I
> > would still highly encourage you to propose, by all means!
> > Chances are if you think it’s an important problem, many other
> > members do as well.
> >   o
> > Finally, the wishlist isn't just for Community Tech. Volunteer
> > developers and other Wikimedia Foundation teams have taken on
> > wishes from the wishlist. For this reason, there is a chance
> > that a wish may not be appropriate for our team, but it can be
> > addressed by someone else.
> >
> >
> >   *
> > Why isn’t the WMF fixing what we feel are  be the most urgently
> > needed fixes in functionality?
> >   o
> > This is a larger question that gets answered at the board and
> > C-leadership levels. There are also some relatively new teams at
> > the Foundation, such as Architecture and Platform Engineering,
> > that aim to improve the technical infrastructure overall in the
> >

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-14 Thread Mike Peel

Not sure if the opening of the Wishlist has been announced here yet? But
it seems to be open for proposals until the 23rd.

Which means I get to propose fixing a simple technical question for the
fifth time in the wishlist: does this page exist?

Seriously.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022/Miscellaneous/Check_if_a_page_exists_without_populating_WhatLinksHere

Thanks,
Mike

On 5/1/22 16:10:37, Natalia Rodriguez wrote:

Hey all,
Nice to meet many of you for the first time! Thanks for your feedback
and for raising larger concerns around resource allocation at the
Foundation. These concerns are extremely valid-- especially the ones
around allocating resources for less supported platforms such as Commons
and broken infrastructure. The wishlist process will begin next week
with the proposal phase starting Jan 10.

In the email thread, I identified some open questions about the Wishlist
process so I am answering them here.

hours
on January 19-- where the entire team will be available for a
video call to help folks who want to write proposals and polish
them so that they may get selected.

*
Why isn’t the WMF fixing what we feel are be the most urgently
needed fixes in functionality?
o
This is a larger question that gets answered at the board and
C-leadership levels. There are also some relatively new teams at
the Foundation, such as Architecture and Platform Engineering,
that aim to improve the technical infrastructure overall in the
years to come. However, every team can help with the answer and
Community Tech can help with communication of technical needs.
This “Larger Suggestions” collection of wishes I mentioned in
the previous answer will not be a silver bullet that fixes all
of the problems, but I believe in the power of incremental steps
to steer us in that direction.

*
How can we communicate the urgency of the fixes that we need?
o
I don’t believe there is any lack of documentation of concerns
about functionality that

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-06 Thread geni

On Thu, 6 Jan 2022 at 23:12, Uwe Herzke  wrote:
>
> This should be '''The''' Community wishlist, one for the whole bunch of devs 
> that are supposed to be working for us editors.
> Ther is up to now no option to make any wishes to all those myriads of devs, 
> whose workforce is wasted on such useless and unwanted pet-projects like FLOW

Flow or more general userfriendly talk pages has been something people
wanted since 2004. The problem the foundation ran into is that post
2004 talk pages camed to be used for more than just debate.

 >or ReBrand

Doesn't take dev time. I may disagree with it but its not a dev timesink.

> or whatever, instead of doing the main thing they are supposed to do: Held 
> the editors get the projects working and maintaining the software.

Eh readers matter. Thats why all the work that goes into mobile. The
conflict between the ideal mediawiki for editors vs the ideal one for
readers is an ongoing issue.

> They survey should lead to a bucket list of items, that need to be fixed 
> before any new pet-project by any new C-level non-editor gets any ressources 
> allocated.

The problem is deciding the difference between a "pet-project" and
things that are needed but the editing community hasn't noticed.

-- 
geni
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/4A5PLTQV73YMB5OWH44OPNIEMDFVFJST/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-06 Thread Uwe Herzke

This should be '''The''' Community wishlist, one for the whole bunch of devs 
that are supposed to be working for us editors.
Ther is up to now no option to make any wishes to all those myriads of devs, 
whose workforce is wasted on such useless and unwanted pet-projects like FLOW 
or ReBrand or whatever, instead of doing the main thing they are supposed to 
do: Held the editors get the projects working and maintaining the software. 

If there is just a tiny group if devs, who are allowed to listen to wishes of 
the community, they are of course overwhelmed, regardless of how busy and nice 
they are. They survey should lead to a bucket list of items, that need to be 
fixed before any new pet-project by any new C-level non-editor gets any 
ressources allocated.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/2PWUJB7THOONKUEQV6HT7KSNPKXUHENQ/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-05 Thread Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga

Thanks, Natalia, for the answers.

The problem is deeper than previously thought, and asking volunteers to use 
their time proposing things that no one knows if will fall in the "too big" or 
in the "dismissed" categories is a bad practice. It creates tension and anger. 
And, the worst thing, it promotes scarcity. In previous years I have asked for 
some very obvious things, and most of them has been dismissed directly, without 
an option to be even discussed or voted. This year I will only ask for one 
thing: 50 wishes. If it is dismissed, next year I will ask for 100 wishes.

Sincerely,
Galder

From: Natalia Rodriguez 
Sent: Wednesday, January 5, 2022 5:10 PM
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us 
and prepare

Hey all,
Nice to meet many of you for the first time! Thanks for your feedback and for 
raising larger concerns around resource allocation at the Foundation. These 
concerns are extremely valid-- especially the ones around allocating resources 
for less supported platforms such as Commons and broken infrastructure. The 
wishlist process will begin next week with the proposal phase starting Jan 10.

In the email thread, I identified some open questions about the Wishlist 
process so I am answering them here.


  *
Can we vote/focus on the maintenance of tools rather than new tools?
 *
Yes. The wishes that we work on do not have to be associated with a new tool. 
In the past we’ve taken on projects that were maintenance related. For example, 
in the last year, we took on improvement projects for Wikisource Export and 
Wikisource OCR tools, among other initiatives. We also maintain and fix all the 
tools we’ve built in the past. Check out the fresh documentation about what 
qualifies as a proposal 
here.<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/FAQ#How_to_create_a_good_proposal?>
 *
Gnangarra, your points about the issues with bulk uploads in Commons would make 
a sound proposal-- a proposal does not have to be a new tool in the least. The 
part about uploading large files is out of scope for our team though (see link 
above about our areas of focus, the issue is 
infrastructural<https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T86436> and too large for 
what we can take on). I still believe there is value in suggesting it, though.
 *
We have Talk to 
Us<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/Updates/Talk_to_Us>
 hours on January 19-- where the entire team will be available for a video call 
to help folks who want to write proposals and polish them so that they may get 
selected.


  *
What if what we want fixed is larger than what the Community Tech team can 
accomplish?
 *
This year, we will be talking directly with leadership about larger wishes that 
we can't fulfill ourselves. To make this possible, we will no longer be 
formally 'Archiving' ideas. One improvement we are implementing from 
conversations with all of you at past Talk to Us Hours and other places, is 
that we will place projects that are too large for us into a new category 
called “Larger Suggestions'' because we still want people to be able to voice 
those needs. We plan to share this with the Foundation's leadership during the 
WMF's annual planning, which takes place in the spring.
 *
This being said, if you have an idea that may be too large for us to take on, I 
would also encourage you to come to Talk to Us Hours (link above) and see if we 
can help you workshop the proposal into something we can help with. If we can’t 
then I would still highly encourage you to propose, by all means! Chances are 
if you think it’s an important problem, many other members do as well.
 *
Finally, the wishlist isn't just for Community Tech. Volunteer developers and 
other Wikimedia Foundation teams have taken on wishes from the wishlist. For 
this reason, there is a chance that a wish may not be appropriate for our team, 
but it can be addressed by someone else.


  *
Why isn’t the WMF fixing what we feel are  be the most urgently needed fixes in 
functionality?
 *
This is a larger question that gets answered at the board and C-leadership 
levels. There are also some relatively new teams at the Foundation, such as 
Architecture and Platform Engineering, that aim to improve the technical 
infrastructure overall in the years to come. However, every team can help with 
the answer and Community Tech can help with communication of technical needs. 
This “Larger Suggestions” collection of wishes I mentioned in the previous 
answer will not be a silver bullet that fixes all of the problems, but I 
believe in the power of incremental steps to steer us in that direction.


  *
How can we communicate the urgency of the fixes that we need?
 *
I don’t believe there is any lack of documentation of concerns about 
functionality that is broken. Folks

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-05 Thread Gnangarra

Kaya Natalia

Thank you for the in depth response and clarification of changes to the
wishlist process, as well as how the tech team works.  We do appreciate
knowing that larger issues can be listed and will actually go somewhere
rather than being dismissed as too large.  One thing I'd hope to see is the
tech team to have a specialist contact for each project so that project
specific issues can be highlighted to someone who can translate between
contributors who dont have the tech knowledge or language to assist issues
being clearly reported.

Boodarwun
Gnangarra

On Thu, 6 Jan 2022 at 01:43, Natalia Rodriguez 
wrote:

> Hey all,
> Nice to meet many of you for the first time! Thanks for your feedback and
> for raising larger concerns around resource allocation at the Foundation.
> These concerns are extremely valid-- especially the ones around allocating
> resources for less supported platforms such as Commons and broken
> infrastructure. The wishlist process will begin next week with the proposal
> phase starting Jan 10.
>
> In the email thread, I identified some open questions about the Wishlist
> process so I am answering them here.
>
>
>- Can we vote/focus on the maintenance of tools rather than new tools?
>- Yes. The wishes that we work on do not have to be associated with a
>   new tool. In the past we’ve taken on projects that were maintenance
>   related. For example, in the last year, we took on improvement projects 
> for
>   Wikisource Export and Wikisource OCR tools, among other initiatives. We
>   also maintain and fix all the tools we’ve built in the past. Check
>   out the fresh documentation about what qualifies as a proposal here.
>   
> 
>   - Gnangarra, your points about the issues with bulk uploads in
>   Commons would make a sound proposal-- a proposal does not have to be a 
> new
>   tool in the least. The part about uploading large files is out of scope 
> for
>   our team though (see link above about our areas of focus, the issue is
>   infrastructural  and too
>   large for what we can take on). I still believe there is value in
>   suggesting it, though.
>   - We have Talk to Us
>   
> 
>   hours on January 19-- where the entire team will be available for a 
> video
>   call to help folks who want to write proposals and polish them so that 
> they
>   may get selected.
>
>
>
>- What if what we want fixed is larger than what the Community Tech
>team can accomplish?
>- This year, we will be talking directly with leadership about larger
>   wishes that we can't fulfill ourselves. To make this possible, we will 
> no
>   longer be formally 'Archiving' ideas. One improvement we are 
> implementing
>   from conversations with all of you at past Talk to Us Hours and other
>   places, is that we will place projects that are too large for us into a 
> new
>   category called “Larger Suggestions'' because we still want people to be
>   able to voice those needs. We plan to share this with the Foundation's
>   leadership during the WMF's annual planning, which takes place in the
>   spring.
>   - This being said, if you have an idea that may be too large for us
>   to take on, I would also encourage you to come to Talk to Us Hours (link
>   above) and see if we can help you workshop the proposal into something 
> we
>   can help with. If we can’t then I would still highly encourage you to
>   propose, by all means! Chances are if you think it’s an important 
> problem,
>   many other members do as well.
>   - Finally, the wishlist isn't just for Community Tech. Volunteer
>   developers and other Wikimedia Foundation teams have taken on wishes 
> from
>   the wishlist. For this reason, there is a chance that a wish may not be
>   appropriate for our team, but it can be addressed by someone else.
>
>
>
>- Why isn’t the WMF fixing what we feel are  be the most urgently
>needed fixes in functionality?
>- This is a larger question that gets answered at the board and
>   C-leadership levels. There are also some relatively new teams at the
>   Foundation, such as Architecture and Platform Engineering, that aim to
>   improve the technical infrastructure overall in the years to come. 
> However,
>   every team can help with the answer and Community Tech can help with
>   communication of technical needs. This “Larger Suggestions” collection 
> of
>   wishes I mentioned in the previous answer will not be a silver bullet 
> that
>   fixes all of the problems, but I believe in the power of incremental 
> steps
>   to steer us in that direction.
>
>
>
>- How can we communicate the

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-05 Thread Natalia Rodriguez

Hey all, 
Nice to meet many of you for the first time! Thanks for your feedback 
and for raising larger concerns around resource allocation at the Foundation. 
These concerns are extremely valid-- especially the ones around allocating 
resources for less supported platforms such as Commons and broken 
infrastructure. The wishlist process will begin next week with the proposal 
phase starting Jan 10.

In the email thread, I identified some open questions about the Wishlist 
process so I am answering them here. 

Can we vote/focus on the maintenance of tools rather than new tools?
Yes. The wishes that we work on do not have to be associated with a new tool. 
In the past we’ve taken on projects that were maintenance related. For example, 
in the last year, we took on improvement projects for Wikisource Export and 
Wikisource OCR tools, among other initiatives. We also maintain and fix all the 
tools we’ve built in the past. Check out the fresh documentation about what 
qualifies as a proposal here. 

Gnangarra, your points about the issues with bulk uploads in Commons would make 
a sound proposal-- a proposal does not have to be a new tool in the least. The 
part about uploading large files is out of scope for our team though (see link 
above about our areas of focus, the issue is infrastructural 
 and too large for what we can take 
on). I still believe there is value in suggesting it, though.
We have Talk to Us 
 
hours on January 19-- where the entire team will be available for a video call 
to help folks who want to write proposals and polish them so that they may get 
selected. 

What if what we want fixed is larger than what the Community Tech team can 
accomplish?
This year, we will be talking directly with leadership about larger wishes that 
we can't fulfill ourselves. To make this possible, we will no longer be 
formally 'Archiving' ideas. One improvement we are implementing from 
conversations with all of you at past Talk to Us Hours and other places, is 
that we will place projects that are too large for us into a new category 
called “Larger Suggestions'' because we still want people to be able to voice 
those needs. We plan to share this with the Foundation's leadership during the 
WMF's annual planning, which takes place in the spring.
This being said, if you have an idea that may be too large for us to take on, I 
would also encourage you to come to Talk to Us Hours (link above) and see if we 
can help you workshop the proposal into something we can help with. If we can’t 
then I would still highly encourage you to propose, by all means! Chances are 
if you think it’s an important problem, many other members do as well. 
Finally, the wishlist isn't just for Community Tech. Volunteer developers and 
other Wikimedia Foundation teams have taken on wishes from the wishlist. For 
this reason, there is a chance that a wish may not be appropriate for our team, 
but it can be addressed by someone else.

Why isn’t the WMF fixing what we feel are  be the most urgently needed fixes in 
functionality?
This is a larger question that gets answered at the board and C-leadership 
levels. There are also some relatively new teams at the Foundation, such as 
Architecture and Platform Engineering, that aim to improve the technical 
infrastructure overall in the years to come. However, every team can help with 
the answer and Community Tech can help with communication of technical needs. 
This “Larger Suggestions” collection of wishes I mentioned in the previous 
answer will not be a silver bullet that fixes all of the problems, but I 
believe in the power of incremental steps to steer us in that direction.

How can we communicate the urgency of the fixes that we need?
I don’t believe there is any lack of documentation of concerns about 
functionality that is broken. Folks are right to point out that it’s about 
synthesizing what is most urgently broken, the maintenance that is really 
necessary, and surfacing it to leadership. We, the Community Tech team, had a 
lot of hard conversations about how to handle this because we never want to 
mislead anyone into thinking we are going to work on ideas that are too large 
for our team. However, we all collectively came to the conclusion that we 
should still be the team that gives people the space to voice what they need 
from a technical perspective. 
The wishlist itself can communicate urgency. If you submit a detailed wish (the 
more details, the better!), and if the wish receives a high number of votes, we 
definitively know as a team that it's urgent and high-priority. From there, we 
have the information we need to take next steps. This may involve taking on the 
wish ourselves or communicating the wish to leadership.
Does the Community Tech

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-03 Thread Andreas Kolbe

Hi Antoine,

I believe you have to distinguish between the roughly 300+ WMF employees
and the roughly 200+ people like yourself who work for the WMF as
contractors. (You are identified as a contractor on the Staff and
contractors page.)

The Form 990 figures I quoted were for the number of actual employees, and
their associated salary costs. This does not include contractors. It
explains why the number of employees reported in the Form 990 is generally
lower than the number of people listed or referred to on the Staff and
Contractors page.

Contractors are covered in a different part of the Form 990: Part IX,
column (A), lines 11 a–g ("Fees for services (non-employees)"). In the
audited financial statements, these costs become "Professional service
expenses", the reported 2020/2021 total being $12.1 million, up from $11.7
million for 2019/2020. Assuming there are currently 200 or more
contractors, contractors are thus paid at most around $60,000 on average.

Employees, on the other hand, earn far more: the WMF reported that 165
employees (well over half) were on salaries of more than $100,000 in 2019.
In 2015, that number had been 79, less than half that. (This info is found
in Part VII, line 2 of the Form 990.)

The fact that salaried employees are paid more on average than contractors
is partly (but not solely) due to many contractors living outside the US,
where living costs are generally cheaper. Another reason why salary costs
for employees work out at such a much higher average is that they enjoy
substantial benefits, which are included in the total salary costs reported
in a Form 990.

The salary costs that an organisation like the Internet Archive, the EFF or
the Wikimedia Foundation reports in the Form 990 include, in addition to
actual salaries and wages, pension plans, other employee benefits and
payroll taxes – the figures in Part IX, column (A), lines 5–10.

The Internet Archive, for example, reported salary costs of $10,924,995 for
169 employees, for an average of $65,000 per head. Of these $10,924,995,
pension plans, benefits and taxes together amounted to $1.4 million (there
was no pension plan), or about 13% of total salary costs. Payroll taxes
were 0.7 million, or half of that.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation reported salary costs of $12,407,966 for
102 employees, for an average of $122,000 per head. Of these $12,407,966,
pension plans, benefits and taxes together amounted to 1.85 million, or
about 15% of salary costs. Payroll taxes were $0.7 million, or 38% of that.

The Wikimedia Foundation reported salary costs of $55,634,913 for 291
employees, for an average of $191,000 per head. Of these $55,634,913,
pension plans, benefits and taxes together amounted to $10.3 million (the
biggest single item being "other employee benefits", at $6.6 million), or
about 18.5% of total salary costs. Payroll taxes were $2.5 million, or 24%
of that. So in the case of the WMF, more than three-quarters of the
additional amount is not tax, but really does benefit the employee, be it
through a pension scheme or some other kind of benefit.

As for updating the Staff and Contractors page, I think that at least the
list of employees (as opposed to contractors) should always be up to date
and complete. This should not be difficult for the administration to
accomplish.

Do you know how many employees there currently are?

Best,
Andreas

On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 9:28 AM Antoine Musso  wrote:

> On 30/12/2021 15:36, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> [...]
>
> WMF salary costs have increased further since 2019. The 2020/21 financial
> statements[5] released earlier this month gave a "Salaries and wages"
> figure of $67,857,676, an increase of 22% over the year prior.
>
> Assuming a total of around 300 employees for that year, based on the
> number of employees shown in this April 2021 archive of the Staff and
> Contractors page,[6] I estimate the annual cost per WMF employee is now
> around $225K (I'm happy to be corrected on this if any of my figures or
> assumptions should turn out to be mistaken).
>
> Contractors (176 listed on the current WMF staff and contractors page[7])
> are somewhat cheaper, of course.
> [...]
> [5]
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Wikimedia_Foundation_FY2020-2021_Audit_Report.pdf=5
> [6] https://archive.today/rFGMv
> [7] https://wikimediafoundation.org/role/staff-contractors/
>
> Hello Andreas,
>
> The Staff and Contractors page ( https://archive.today/rFGMv ) states
> there is more than 450 persons. That page is no more updated in a timely
> fashion and some employees are explicitly not listed on that page for a
> variety of reasons. I think we can just not keep up updating all our
> employees lists and that page is lagging a bit.
>
> As I get it from internal lists, the foundation is nearing 600 employees
> and contractors (and we have five people starting today).
>
> The form 990 has employee count based on the calendar year (291 from
> January 1st 2019 to December 30th

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-03 Thread Antoine Musso


On 30/12/2021 15:36, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
[...]
WMF salary costs have increased further since 2019. The 2020/21 
financial statements[5] released earlier this month gave a "Salaries 
and wages" figure of $67,857,676, an increase of 22% over the year prior.


Assuming a total of around 300 employees for that year, based on the 
number of employees shown in this April 2021 archive of the Staff and 
Contractors page,[6] I estimate the annual cost per WMF employee is 
now around $225K (I'm happy to be corrected on this if any of my 
figures or assumptions should turn out to be mistaken).


Contractors (176 listed on the current WMF staff and contractors 
page[7]) are somewhat cheaper, of course.

[...]
[5] 
https://foundation.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Wikimedia_Foundation_FY2020-2021_Audit_Report.pdf=5 


[6] https://archive.today/rFGMv 
[7] https://wikimediafoundation.org/role/staff-contractors/ 



Hello Andreas,

The Staff and Contractors page ( https://archive.today/rFGMv 
 ) states there is more than 450 persons. 
That page is no more updated in a timely fashion and some employees are 
explicitly not listed on that page for a variety of reasons. I think we 
can just not keep up updating all our employees lists and that page is 
lagging a bit.


As I get it from internal lists, the foundation is nearing 600 employees 
and contractors (and we have five people starting today).


The form 990 has employee count based on the calendar year (291 from 
January 1st 2019 to December 30th 2019) while the expenses would be 
reported based on the fiscal year (July 1st 2019 to June 30 2020). If we 
got a few dozens of people hired in the first part of 2020 they are not 
shown in the head count but do reflect in the expense line yet. Finance 
and or HR at the foundation would be able to address your question.


I am entirely sure we are not making $190k per year on average nor 
$225k, those would be the total compensation / cost for the c levels or 
of the very top compensated persons (they are listed in the form 990 and 
also listed at 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_salaries 
 .


/Antoine "hashar" Musso//
//Wikimedia Release Engineering/



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/LIS7OW7HFDEC5J7A4RBYCNU6HBVSJIUA/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-02 Thread Gnangarra

thank you Geni

> HandBrake can transcode dirrect to WebM these days.
>

On Mon, 3 Jan 2022 at 13:40, geni  wrote:

> On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 at 06:13, Gnangarra  wrote:
> > We found work arounds mostly by paying for 3rd commercial software to do
> the conversion to webm then hoping uploadwizard would work.
>
>
> HandBrake can transcode dirrect to WebM these days.
>
> --
> geni
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/RP3VDKM47XSRZDXVGJ3XELD7GTIY5CE6/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>


-- 
GN.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/3435I34WUEEYIWQDEPYAHJEEMMMRRX5R/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-02 Thread geni

On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 at 06:13, Gnangarra  wrote:
> We found work arounds mostly by paying for 3rd commercial software to do the 
> conversion to webm then hoping uploadwizard would work.


HandBrake can transcode dirrect to WebM these days.

-- 
geni
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/RP3VDKM47XSRZDXVGJ3XELD7GTIY5CE6/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2022-01-01 Thread Inductiveload

On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 at 11:52,  wrote:
> This year, we (that is, the WMF using movement funds) spent a huge amount of 
> money ($4.5 million) just directly donating to external knowledge equity 
> funds.

>From https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_Equity_Fund:

> Many of the barriers that prevent people from accessing and contributing to 
> free knowledge are rooted in systems of racial oppression.

What about many of the barriers to contributing thrown up by broken or
defective systems? This disproportionately affects people without the
technical skills to circumvent the issues and/or implement fixes
and/or gain political capital to agitate for a fix from the "system".
Considering the well-documented inequalities both on racial and gender
grounds in STEM subjects and computing in particular, these technical
defects strike harder at the already-disadvantaged groups.

Combine this with the adversarial system of actually getting things
done by having to fight, grab and compete for the scant resources
thrown down, combined with the need to advocate for your issue just-so
to get what you want (which again disadvantages "system-outsiders")
and again this is disadvantageous to the already-disadvantaged.

Even if we just ignore race or gender, also consider that deficient
technical platforms are also a brutal filter against _anyone_ without
a STEM background: also people the knowledge equity stuff is supposed
to help. The WMF has contrived a system that almost seems perfectly
designed to filter out many of the disadvantaged or vulnerable groups
they profess to want to help by failing to actually provide support
for them to make their contributions in the first place. A few bright
pictures and fluffy press releases and slinging money around on
wishy-washy initiatives surely keeps everyone looking busy, fills some
nice FTE positions and gets Twitter cachet. However, a bug's a bug and
a missing feature is a missing feature.

A simple example: there's not even a "blessed" way to ask for
technical help: you get ignored at COM:VPT, ignored at Mediawiki.org's
dead manual pages, find out that the Discord isn't even official,
bounce around several random IRC channels (once you figure out IRC in
the first place, let's not pretend most people in the world have even
heard of it) looking for one that can help you, eventually off to
Phabricator, ignored again if your issue isn't written up '"just so"
to align with the priorities of some "team" that isn't actually
documented anywhere and then...you give up.

Another example closer to my home wiki: the smaller Wikisources are
very disadvantaged by technical limitations which the big Wikisources
work around on an ad-hoc basis using local users' skills. Many
features that the big ones have would be _more_ useful for the smaller
ones. A good example here is the OCR, which for years worked only at a
handful of big Wikisources until CommTech integrated the OCR tool this
year into the Wikisource extension. But the big wikis didn't really
need the OCR as much (though they still needed it), because upstream
OCR is usually better in English or French, than, say, Marathi. I had
a wish to "upstream" more local features to the core extensions so all
can benefit. But it's taken so long to get anything done, that I am
out of time and have to go to a day-job soon, so it's not going to
happen. Who has the luxury of tens or hundreds of hours spare to learn
PHP from scratch to fix an issue, submit, resubmit, rebase and massage
patches? Guess what: not the knowledge-equity-disadvantaged.

Perhaps instead of a firehose of money at fighting the "far enemy" of
racial/social/etc. injustice, a more directed attitude of fixing the
platforms and making it attractive and/or even possible for these
groups to contribute in the first place is in order. Some of it's not
even hard, certainly not $4,500,000-hard. It doesn't matter, in wiki
terms (and those are terms that donors believe their money is to be
used) how well you train a group of Jordanian journalists if when they
come to upload their video, the upload fails, does it? Or PattyPan, or
whatever tool has been created to address the lack of "native" tools
is broken _again_.

Even if the "magic money tree" doesn't extend to more than one
engineering or technical staff member, just a single FTE rotating a
day per week though the projects, dedicated to helping others
contribute, linking up issues with teams and driving things forward
when they stall out (rather than just waiting for the would-be
contributor to give up and abandon it all) would be a huge force
multiplier. Allegedly, there are _already_ Developer Advocates, but
whatever it is they do does not seem to actually involve advocating
for the ability of would-be contributors to actually contribute.

The most frustrating thing is that this could all work well: Mediawiki
is a solid piece of engineering, running on a solid operational
foundation. There is CI, code review, relatively clean code, a

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2021-12-30 Thread Gnangarra

>
> Core challenges like Commons stability + capacity deserve their own
> thread! I believe the wishlist is traditionally for something else.

There is nowhere else to raise these issue, especially for people like me
who are photographers not a software and tech person. I know the
phabricator exists and comment there occasionally but again things get
close because its too hard.

Tools are great, new tools can sometimes improve other times they generate
more issues.

I get it I'd rather get together with a bunch of photographers, talk gear,
test gear, and look to outdo each other with the best shots.  Wishlist, the
Hack-a-thons serve this need for the tech community. we get to offer up
some ideas on what could make things easier for us.  The wish list also the
one time of the year where everyone is listen to needs.

The list of issues on Commons are staggering and Commons feeds into every
other project, it was created to support media uploads.  As part of COT for
2021 I was also involved in uploading of all the session recordings, and I
answered many questions about why was it taking so long, will captions be
added all I could say was Commons wasnt letting us upload large files,
Video2Commons, and VideoConverter kept falling over we couldnt get answers.
We found work arounds mostly by paying for 3rd commercial software to do
the conversion to webm then hoping uploadwizard would work. We even tried
to find server side uploading support but despite instructions on how that
isnt supported.

I see no need to create new tools when the underlying systems are failing,
its clear indication that we as community have lost our way.  The wishlist
get what little funding the WMF is willing to spend on tech.  As some who
has participated in the wishlist over the years, tried to get funding to
fix items like QRpedia,  the thing I see is that this isnt working the tech
teams arent keeping up with the core functions of projects so forget about
extra toys.  Every other aspect of the community has had reviews been first
being paused, the whole community has been consulted, and then its been
realigned to suit future needs.   Its all for nothing if we dont drill down
to the core of the tech that the whole thing relies upon,  if that means we
need to spend on extra people then the cost is justifiable because every
dollar of the hundred million stashed away in future funds is worthless if
the systems keeps failing or like commons appears to have reached
completely collapses.

We dont need wishes, or votes to decide whats important when theres no way
to contribute.

On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 at 23:50, Samuel Klein  wrote:

> Szymon: neat, thanks.  How do past suggestions carry over?
>
> We should definitely make more use of community-curated priority lists
> (annotated with how separable / hard they are; where they sit on the 'new
> solution <--> pay off tech debt' spectrum).  And see if we can support a
> broader range of technical hubs + community groups tackling some of them.
>
> Core challenges like Commons stability + capacity deserve their own
> thread! I believe the wishlist is traditionally for something else.
>
> NBB: An interesting idea (below).  It would be good for us to develop
> patterns w/ more shared creative leeway for experimenting with a collective
> call to action around major initiatives.  Mozilla has some approaches to
> this. Including bounties, grants, outreach campaigns to recruit new
> contributors, awards for essential tools, workshops to train people in
> related toolchains so they can help move the space forward.
>
> S.
>
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 6:52 AM  wrote:
>
>> This is a proposal that would need to be included in next year's funding
>> plan. It also would involve an obligation for the other teams within the
>> Foundation.
>>
>> **Part 1: Funding redistribution and Big Ticket team**
>> I propose that we stand-up a 2nd community wishlist team... to handle the
>> "Big Ticket" items, beyond the capacities of the current team.
>> **Part 2: blocked item obligations**
>>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/IQA4RVIYVDBDSJYY74VXL6YTOOTFLPJJ/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

-- 
GN.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/HQLERIWVMFMQEPDK6GNXA5SHDQHMRKNJ/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2021-12-30 Thread Samuel Klein

Szymon: neat, thanks.  How do past suggestions carry over?

We should definitely make more use of community-curated priority lists
(annotated with how separable / hard they are; where they sit on the 'new
solution <--> pay off tech debt' spectrum).  And see if we can support a
broader range of technical hubs + community groups tackling some of them.

Core challenges like Commons stability + capacity deserve their own thread!
I believe the wishlist is traditionally for something else.

NBB: An interesting idea (below).  It would be good for us to develop
patterns w/ more shared creative leeway for experimenting with a collective
call to action around major initiatives.  Mozilla has some approaches to
this. Including bounties, grants, outreach campaigns to recruit new
contributors, awards for essential tools, workshops to train people in
related toolchains so they can help move the space forward.

S.

On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 6:52 AM  wrote:

> This is a proposal that would need to be included in next year's funding
> plan. It also would involve an obligation for the other teams within the
> Foundation.
>
> **Part 1: Funding redistribution and Big Ticket team**
> I propose that we stand-up a 2nd community wishlist team... to handle the
> "Big Ticket" items, beyond the capacities of the current team.
> **Part 2: blocked item obligations**
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/IQA4RVIYVDBDSJYY74VXL6YTOOTFLPJJ/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2021-12-30 Thread Andreas Kolbe

Hi Nosebagbear and all,

On Thu, Dec 30, 2021 at 11:52 AM  wrote:

> Going off the average salaries, and the standard non-salary overhead for
> equivalent organisations, it should support a 16-18 person team.
>

This calculation would benefit from some WMF salary data. In its 2019 Form
990[1] (the most recent one available), the WMF reported a "Salaries, other
compensation, employee benefits" figure of $55,634,913 for a total of 291
employees.

This works out at an average of *$191,185.27 per employee*. (The WMF cost
per employee actually increased by 38% in the space of four years.[2])

It's not cheap, especially when compared to, say, the Internet Archive,
also based in San Francisco, which in its 2019 Form 990[3] reported
$10,924,995 for 169 employees, an average of *$64,644.94 per employee* –
about one-third the WMF figure. (The Internet Archive, which has genuinely
struggled to break even in recent years, is actually crucial to Wikipedia,
as it helps prevent link rot, and could really do with donations.)

For the Electronic Frontier Foundation, to give another example of a
non-profit based in San Francisco, the 2019 Form 990 data yield an average
of *$121,646,73 per employee*[4] – less than two-thirds the WMF figure.

WMF salary costs have increased further since 2019. The 2020/21 financial
statements[5] released earlier this month gave a "Salaries and wages"
figure of $67,857,676, an increase of 22% over the year prior.

Assuming a total of around 300 employees for that year, based on the number
of employees shown in this April 2021 archive of the Staff and Contractors
page,[6] I estimate the annual cost per WMF employee is now around $225K
(I'm happy to be corrected on this if any of my figures or assumptions
should turn out to be mistaken).

Contractors (176 listed on the current WMF staff and contractors page[7])
are somewhat cheaper, of course.

Andreas

[1]
https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/200049703/202101319349300105/full
[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_salaries#Salaries,_other_compensation,_employee_benefits_and_number_of_employees_as_reported_in_Form_990
[3]
https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/943242767/202013219349323056/full
[4]
https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/43091431/202121339349303472/full
[5]
https://foundation.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Wikimedia_Foundation_FY2020-2021_Audit_Report.pdf=5
[6] https://archive.today/rFGMv
[7] https://wikimediafoundation.org/role/staff-contractors/

This team's purpose is to handle the "Big Ticket" items, beyond the
> capacities of the current team. It will probably be 1-2 main items a year,
> with the ability to handle small(er) items from the main wishlist if they
> finish slightly early.
>
> The current team could then alternate annually between
> Wikipedia/Wikidata/Commons items and small-project items.
>
> **Part 2: blocked item obligations**
>
> By far and away the two most common reasons for wishlist items being
> declined are "too large a project" (hopefully handled by part 1) and "in
> another team's scope". This aims to handle the 2nd issue with a "co-operate
> or takeup" mandate.
>
> Where another team is "in the way" of a wishlist item, it should be
> obligated to fulfill that item itself within 24 months, or co-operate and
> utilise the Wishlist team's resources to fulfill it while avoiding
> disruption from separate workflows.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/QCZC5X4V5DVQHO2WDOO7HUBEN6KIK2VZ/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/CX2Z6NNTIRYIUCMEAITT7R3TTGO5NXNS/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2021-12-30 Thread nosebagbear

This is a proposal that would need to be included in next year's funding plan.
It also would involve an obligation for the other teams within the Foundation.

**Part 1: Funding redistribution and Big Ticket team**
This year, we (that is, the WMF using movement funds) spent a huge amount of
money ($4.5 million) just directly donating to external knowledge equity funds.

This was done without Community review, or indeed, approval of the concept. A
look through our email archives will show it was hardly a popular use of our
money.

I propose that we stand-up a 2nd community wishlist team. Going off the average
salaries, and the standard non-salary overhead for equivalent organisations, it
should support a 16-18 person team.

This team's purpose is to handle the "Big Ticket" items, beyond the capacities
of the current team. It will probably be 1-2 main items a year, with the
ability to handle small(er) items from the main wishlist if they finish
slightly early.

The current team could then alternate annually between
Wikipedia/Wikidata/Commons items and small-project items.

**Part 2: blocked item obligations**

By far and away the two most common reasons for wishlist items being declined
are "too large a project" (hopefully handled by part 1) and "in another team's
scope". This aims to handle the 2nd issue with a "co-operate or takeup" mandate.

Where another team is "in the way" of a wishlist item, it should be obligated
to fulfill that item itself within 24 months, or co-operate and utilise the
Wishlist team's resources to fulfill it while avoiding disruption from separate
workflows.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/QCZC5X4V5DVQHO2WDOO7HUBEN6KIK2VZ/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2021-12-30 Thread Gnangarra

The wishlist are things the WMF puts resources to including staff time

On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 at 17:46, Peter Southwood 
wrote:

> Is the community wishlist not for for projects run by volunteers?
> Volunteers do what they choose, employees do what they are paid for.
> Keeping the Wikis functional should be the work of employees and the WMF.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Peter
>
>
>
> *From:* Gnangarra [mailto:gnanga...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 29 December 2021 07:37
> *To:* Wikimedia Mailing List
> *Subject:* [Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming.
> Help us and prepare
>
>
>
> Kaya
>
>
> Instead of putting resources into making more tools, how about putting
> more resources into sustainability. For a large part of the last 12 months
> Commons has been unable to upload large files, bulk upload tools falling
> over have been hampering efforts to engage with GLAMs.   Every other aspect
> of the WMF work has been put on hold while reviews into the systems take
> place. I think it's time to put new development on hold or at least limit
> priority and capacity then focus efforts on updating and upgrading existing
> tools. If those tools cant be fixed, rewrite them from scratch
>
>
>
> Gnangarra
>
>
>
> On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 12:08, Szymon Grabarczuk 
> wrote:
>
> The Community Wishlist Survey 2022
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022> starts
> in less than two weeks (Monday 10 January 2022, 18:00 UTC
> <https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20220110T1800>).
> We, the team organizing the Survey, need your help.
>
>- Translate important messages
>
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Translate=agg-Community_Wishlist_Survey=page>
>and/or
>- Promote the Survey
><https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/Help_us>
>among anyone and everyone you know who has an account on wiki. Promote the
>Survey on social media, via instant messaging apps, in other groups and
>chats, in your WikiProject, Wikimedia affiliate - wherever contributors
>with registered accounts may be.
>- You may also start thinking about ideas for technical improvements
>or even writing them down in the CWS sandbox
><https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/Sandbox>.
>
> *Why are we asking?*
>
>- We have improved the documentation
><https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/FAQ>. It's
>friendlier and easier to use. This will mean little if it's only in 
> English.
>- Thousands of volunteers haven't participated in the Survey yet. We'd
>like to improve that, too. Three years ago, 1387 people participated. Last
>year, there were 1773 of them. We hope that in the upcoming edition, there
>will be even more - if you help us with translations. Also, you are better
>than us in contacting Wikimedians outside of wikis. We have prepared some
>images to share. More to come.
>
> *What is the Community Wishlist Survey?*
>
>
>
> It's an annual survey that allows contributors to the Wikimedia projects
> to propose and vote for tools and platform improvements. Long years of
> experience in editing or technical skills are not required.
>
>
>
> Thank you for your time and attention. To those who have participated in
> the Survey - many thanks for your dedication.
>
>
>
> See you in January!
>
>
>
> *Szymon Grabarczuk *(he/him)
>
> Community Relations Specialist
>
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/XL37Y7D6N65ZXU7W43XP5KO5HFTK2CD7/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> GN.
>
> * 2021*
>
> *Celebrating 20 years of Wikipedia*
>
>
>
>
>
> Wikimania: *Error! Filename not specified.**Error! Filename not
> specified.**Error! Filename not specified.**Error! Filename not
> specified.**Error! Filename not specified.*
> https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gnangarra
>
> Noongarpedia: *Error! Filename not specified.**Error! Filename not
> specified.**Error! Filename not specified.**Error! Filename not
> specified.**Error! Filename not specified.**Error! Filename not
> specified.*https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2021-12-30 Thread Peter Southwood

Is the community wishlist not for for projects run by volunteers? Volunteers do 
what they choose, employees do what they are paid for. Keeping the Wikis 
functional should be the work of employees and the WMF. 

Cheers,

Peter

 

From: Gnangarra [mailto:gnanga...@gmail.com] 
Sent: 29 December 2021 07:37
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us 
and prepare

 

Kaya


Instead of putting resources into making more tools, how about putting more 
resources into sustainability. For a large part of the last 12 months Commons 
has been unable to upload large files, bulk upload tools falling over have been 
hampering efforts to engage with GLAMs.   Every other aspect of the WMF work 
has been put on hold while reviews into the systems take place. I think it's 
time to put new development on hold or at least limit priority and capacity 
then focus efforts on updating and upgrading existing tools. If those tools 
cant be fixed, rewrite them from scratch

 

Gnangarra

 

On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 12:08, Szymon Grabarczuk  
wrote:

The Community Wishlist Survey 2022 
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2022>  starts in 
less than two weeks (Monday 10 January 2022, 18:00 UTC 
<https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?iso=20220110T1800> ). 
We, the team organizing the Survey, need your help.

*   Translate important messages 
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Translate=agg-Community_Wishlist_Survey=page>
  and/or
*   Promote the Survey 
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/Help_us>  among 
anyone and everyone you know who has an account on wiki. Promote the Survey on 
social media, via instant messaging apps, in other groups and chats, in your 
WikiProject, Wikimedia affiliate - wherever contributors with registered 
accounts may be.
*   You may also start thinking about ideas for technical improvements or 
even writing them down in the CWS sandbox 
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/Sandbox> .

Why are we asking? 

*   We have improved the documentation 
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey/FAQ> . It's 
friendlier and easier to use. This will mean little if it's only in English.
*   Thousands of volunteers haven't participated in the Survey yet. We'd 
like to improve that, too. Three years ago, 1387 people participated. Last 
year, there were 1773 of them. We hope that in the upcoming edition, there will 
be even more - if you help us with translations. Also, you are better than us 
in contacting Wikimedians outside of wikis. We have prepared some images to 
share. More to come.

What is the Community Wishlist Survey? 

 

It's an annual survey that allows contributors to the Wikimedia projects to 
propose and vote for tools and platform improvements. Long years of experience 
in editing or technical skills are not required. 

 

Thank you for your time and attention. To those who have participated in the 
Survey - many thanks for your dedication.

 

See you in January!

 


  
<https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/t1GetqH3N05ZDv75_-Q6W0YEm4ofn22ZQVNUIoPTIa-ruOTtteTbCweEL9so7ibpyWciFTgOyeDjTRDNr7bhQtxRjFucqJcb7cFnXUqpcqkBsTGqxZRdpmCCzx5xnCYOks-0sAej>
 

Szymon Grabarczuk (he/him)

Community Relations Specialist

Wikimedia Foundation 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/XL37Y7D6N65ZXU7W43XP5KO5HFTK2CD7/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org




 

-- 

GN.

 2021

Celebrating 20 years of Wikipedia

 

 

Wikimania: Error! Filename not specified.Error! Filename not specified.Error! 
Filename not specified.Error! Filename not specified.Error! Filename not 
specified. <https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gnangarra> 
https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gnangarra

Noongarpedia: Error! Filename not specified.Error! Filename not 
specified.Error! Filename not specified.Error! Filename not specified.Error! 
Filename not specified.Error! Filename not specified. 
<https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page> 
https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page
My print shop: Error! Filename not specified.Error! Filename not 
specified.Error! Filename not specified.Error! Filename not specified.Error! 
Filename not specified. <https://www.redbubble.com/people/Gnangarra/shop?asc=u> 
https://www.redbubble.com/people/Gnangarra/shop?asc=u

 

 


 
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient&g

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2021-12-29 Thread Peter Southwood

Fair comment. If you want to keep editors, make sure they have functioning 
tools. Is this not one of the reasons WMF was originally formed?

Cheers,

Peter

From: DerHexer via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org] 
Sent: 29 December 2021 12:11
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: DerHexer
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us 
and prepare

I have to agree with Gnangarra: Why should keeping one of our major projects 
running require a global popularity vote? The way how the various problems on 
Commons are (not!) handled by WMF and others is not acceptable anymore. We 
don't need a poll to detect that! It's not a wish we have, it's a demand we 
make: Get Commons fixed now, as soon as possible! And I don't care who does: 
WMF, WMDE, anybody else.

It's nice to have additional ressources for popular community wishes but clean 
up your own backyard first!

Best,

DerHexer (Top 10 contributor on Commons, Commons administrator, Steward)

Am Mittwoch, 29. Dezember 2021, 10:32:22 MEZ hat Amir Sarabadani 
 Folgendes geschrieben: 

The wishlist survey is defined as:

> The Community Wishlist Survey is an annual survey that allows contributors to 
> the Wikimedia projects to propose and vote for tools and platform improvements

That doesn't necessarily translate into just "new tools". The community can 
wish for better support of multimedia stack and improvements on the multimedia 
platform and If it gets enough votes, I'm hopeful it'll be picked up.

On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 8:02 AM Željko Blaće  wrote:

Nice. This looks much better than before. Previously it felt so many people had 
high hopes for projects that are outside of capacities that are committed to 
this project. I feel this needs to be a super clear fact from the start and not 
ask for the global community to commit XYZ number of hours in the actions of 
promoting, translating, proposing and decision making processes when developers 
can commit far less back to the same community. Otherwise it feels like 
unbalanced work from a more holistic perspective, but this is also 
non-exceptional...no? 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/W2DTMUUD76RCBVPOJ3VGSJKPYL7V6EZF/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

-- 

Amir (he/him)

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines  
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines%20> and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ZSZM4BRNWV3NIQ6RH66QBFFINLKMOIKG/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient>

Virus-free.  
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=emailclient>
 www.avg.com 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/X7GPV3LXCL647SEO6PE7EOBUHG53QB3U/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2021-12-29 Thread Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga

If the Wishlist Survey 2022 goes on, my proposal will be simple: make the first 
50 wishes. We have money. We need it. And we are not doing essential things. 
Also, solving platform issues shouldn't be something to vote on. I don't 
understand why we have to vote to have solutions to even basic infrastructure 
issues.

Best,
Galder

From: Mike Peel 
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2021 7:23 PM
To: DerHexer via Wikimedia-l 
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us 
and prepare

I agree with the issues here, but I don't think that the solution should
be to get rid of the wishlist. Instead, it really should be expanded so
it can handle many more of the wishes, since there are many good ones
that keep getting proposed but just don't get enough votes to be in the
top ten.

Thanks,
Mike

On 29/12/21 10:11:14, DerHexer via Wikimedia-l wrote:
> I have to agree with Gnangarra: Why should keeping one of our major
> projects running require a global popularity vote? The way how the
> various problems on Commons are (not!) handled by WMF and others is not
> acceptable anymore. We don't need a poll to detect that! It's not a wish
> we have, it's a demand we make: Get Commons fixed now, as soon as
> possible! And I don't care who does: WMF, WMDE, anybody else.
>
> It's nice to have additional ressources for popular community wishes
> but clean up your own backyard first!
>
> Best,
> DerHexer (Top 10 contributor on Commons, Commons administrator, Steward)
>
>
> Am Mittwoch, 29. Dezember 2021, 10:32:22 MEZ hat Amir Sarabadani
>  Folgendes geschrieben:
>
>
> The wishlist survey is defined as:
>  > The Community Wishlist Survey is an annual survey that allows
> contributors to the Wikimedia projects to propose and vote for tools and
> platform improvements
>
> That doesn't necessarily translate into just "new tools". The community
> can wish for better support of multimedia stack and improvements on the
> multimedia platform and If it gets enough votes, I'm hopeful it'll be
> picked up.
>
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 8:02 AM Željko Blaće  <mailto:zbl...@mi2.hr>> wrote:
>
> Nice. This looks much better than before. Previously it felt so many
> people had high hopes for projects that are outside of capacities
> that are committed to this project. I feel this needs to be a super
> clear fact from the start and not ask for the global community to
> commit XYZ number of hours in the actions of promoting, translating,
> proposing and decision making processes when developers can commit
> far less back to the same community. Otherwise it feels like
> unbalanced work from a more holistic perspective, but this is also
> non-exceptional...no?
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> <mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines> and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l>
> Public archives at
> 
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/W2DTMUUD76RCBVPOJ3VGSJKPYL7V6EZF/
> 
> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/W2DTMUUD76RCBVPOJ3VGSJKPYL7V6EZF/>
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org>
>
>
>
> --
> Amir (he/him)
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> <mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines >and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l>
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ZSZM4BRNWV3NIQ6RH66QBFFINLKMOIKG/
> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ZSZM4BRNWV3NIQ6RH66QBFFINLKMOIKG/>
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at 
> h

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2021-12-29 Thread Mike Peel

I agree with the issues here, but I don't think that the solution should 
be to get rid of the wishlist. Instead, it really should be expanded so 
it can handle many more of the wishes, since there are many good ones 
that keep getting proposed but just don't get enough votes to be in the 
top ten.


Thanks,
Mike

On 29/12/21 10:11:14, DerHexer via Wikimedia-l wrote:
I have to agree with Gnangarra: Why should keeping one of our major 
projects running require a global popularity vote? The way how the 
various problems on Commons are (not!) handled by WMF and others is not 
acceptable anymore. We don't need a poll to detect that! It's not a wish 
we have, it's a demand we make: Get Commons fixed now, as soon as 
possible! And I don't care who does: WMF, WMDE, anybody else.


It's nice to have additional ressources for popular community wishes 
but clean up your own backyard first!


Best,
DerHexer (Top 10 contributor on Commons, Commons administrator, Steward)


Am Mittwoch, 29. Dezember 2021, 10:32:22 MEZ hat Amir Sarabadani 
 Folgendes geschrieben:



The wishlist survey is defined as:
 > The Community Wishlist Survey is an annual survey that allows 
contributors to the Wikimedia projects to propose and vote for tools and 
platform improvements


That doesn't necessarily translate into just "new tools". The community 
can wish for better support of multimedia stack and improvements on the 
multimedia platform and If it gets enough votes, I'm hopeful it'll be 
picked up.


On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 8:02 AM Željko Blaće > wrote:


Nice. This looks much better than before. Previously it felt so many
people had high hopes for projects that are outside of capacities
that are committed to this project. I feel this needs to be a super
clear fact from the start and not ask for the global community to
commit XYZ number of hours in the actions of promoting, translating,
proposing and decision making processes when developers can commit
far less back to the same community. Otherwise it feels like
unbalanced work from a more holistic perspective, but this is also
non-exceptional...no?
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l

Public archives at

https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/W2DTMUUD76RCBVPOJ3VGSJKPYL7V6EZF/


To unsubscribe send an email to
wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org




--
Amir (he/him)

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 
and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l 

Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ZSZM4BRNWV3NIQ6RH66QBFFINLKMOIKG/ 

To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org 



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/M4ZAVS2VROWFAY2G5SMHEHPKLYLDXMO6/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/T7XSKKQTZWEWWBNMYMZESBU4FSDNRBB4/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2021-12-29 Thread DerHexer via Wikimedia-l

 I have to agree with Gnangarra: Why should keeping one of our major projects 
running require a global popularity vote? The way how the various problems on 
Commons are (not!) handled by WMF and others is not acceptable anymore. We 
don't need a poll to detect that! It's not a wish we have, it's a demand we 
make: Get Commons fixed now, as soon as possible! And I don't care who does: 
WMF, WMDE, anybody else.
It's nice to have additional ressources for popular community wishes but clean 
up your own backyard first!
Best,DerHexer (Top 10 contributor on Commons, Commons administrator, Steward)

Am Mittwoch, 29. Dezember 2021, 10:32:22 MEZ hat Amir Sarabadani 
 Folgendes geschrieben:  
 
 The wishlist survey is defined as:> The Community Wishlist Survey is an annual 
survey that allows contributors to the Wikimedia projects to propose and vote 
for tools and platform improvements
That doesn't necessarily translate into just "new tools". The community can 
wish for better support of multimedia stack and improvements on the multimedia 
platform and If it gets enough votes, I'm hopeful it'll be picked up.

On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 8:02 AM Željko Blaće  wrote:

Nice. This looks much better than before. Previously it felt so many people had 
high hopes for projects that are outside of capacities that are committed to 
this project. I feel this needs to be a super clear fact from the start and not 
ask for the global community to commit XYZ number of hours in the actions of 
promoting, translating, proposing and decision making processes when developers 
can commit far less back to the same community. Otherwise it feels like 
unbalanced work from a more holistic perspective, but this is also 
non-exceptional...no? ___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/W2DTMUUD76RCBVPOJ3VGSJKPYL7V6EZF/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org


-- 
Amir (he/him)

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ZSZM4BRNWV3NIQ6RH66QBFFINLKMOIKG/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org  ___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/M4ZAVS2VROWFAY2G5SMHEHPKLYLDXMO6/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2021-12-29 Thread Gnangarra

The wishlist has reached the end of useful life, I think before we go down
that track again we have to look hard at what purpose it serves and what
other parts of the whole IT/programming area needs to be consider. To do
that put the wish list on hold, clear the backlog of phabricator tickets
and bring what tools we have had created over the last 15 years back to
full serviceability or shut them down and replace them.

In saying that, there may still be a much needed tool so limit what gets
accepted and ask for needs fixing

On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 19:26, Amir Sarabadani  wrote:

> I'm not debating your note. It is very valid that we lack proper support
> for multimedia stack. I myself wrote a detailed rant on how broken it is
> [1] but three notes:
>  - Fixing something like this takes time, you need to assign the budget
> for it (which means it has to be done during the annual planning) and if
> gets approved, you need to start it with the fiscal year (meaning July
> 2022) and then hire (meaning, write JD, do recruitment, interview lots of
> people, get them hired) which can take from several months to years. Once
> they are hired, you need to onboard them and let them learn about our
> technical infrastructure which takes at least two good months. Software
> engineering is not magic, it takes time, blood and sweat. [2]
>  - Making another team focus on multimedia requires changes in planning,
> budget, OKR, etc. etc. Are we sure moving the focus of teams is a good
> idea? Most teams are already focusing on vital parts of wikimedia and
> changing the focus will turn this into a whack-a-mole game where we fix
> multimedia but now we have critical issues in security or performance.
>  - Voting Wishlist survey is a good band-aid in the meantime. To at least
> address the worst parts for now.
>
> I don't understand your point tbh, either you think it's a good idea to
> make requests for improvements in multimedia in the wishlist survey or you
> think it's not. If you think it's not, then it's offtopic to this thread.
>
> [1]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/WMPZHMXSLQJ6GONAVTFLDFFMPNJDVORS/
> [2] There is a classic book in this topic called "The Mythical Man-month"
>
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 11:41 AM Gnangarra  wrote:
>
>> we have to vote for regular maintenance and support for
>> essential functions like uploading files which is the core mission of
>> Wikimedia Commons
>>
>> On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 17:32, Amir Sarabadani 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The wishlist survey is defined as:
>>> > The Community Wishlist Survey is an annual survey that allows
>>> contributors to the Wikimedia projects to propose and vote for tools and
>>> platform improvements
>>>
>>> That doesn't necessarily translate into just "new tools". The community
>>> can wish for better support of multimedia stack and improvements on the
>>> multimedia platform and If it gets enough votes, I'm hopeful it'll be
>>> picked up.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 8:02 AM Željko Blaće  wrote:
>>>
 Nice. This looks much better than before. Previously it felt so many
 people had high hopes for projects that are outside of capacities that are
 committed to this project. I feel this needs to be a super clear fact from
 the start and not ask for the global community to commit XYZ number of
 hours in the actions of promoting, translating, proposing and decision
 making processes when developers can commit far less back to the same
 community. Otherwise it feels like unbalanced work from a more holistic
 perspective, but this is also non-exceptional...no?
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org,
 guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
 Public archives at
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/W2DTMUUD76RCBVPOJ3VGSJKPYL7V6EZF/
 To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Amir (he/him)
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>> Public archives at
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ZSZM4BRNWV3NIQ6RH66QBFFINLKMOIKG/
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> GN.
>> *
>>  2021*
>> *Celebrating 20 years of Wikipedia*
>>
>>
>> Wikimania: https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gnangarra
>> Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page
>> My print shop: https://www.redbubble.com/people/Gnangarra/shop?asc=u
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2021-12-29 Thread Amir Sarabadani

I'm not debating your note. It is very valid that we lack proper support
for multimedia stack. I myself wrote a detailed rant on how broken it is
[1] but three notes:
 - Fixing something like this takes time, you need to assign the budget for
it (which means it has to be done during the annual planning) and if gets
approved, you need to start it with the fiscal year (meaning July 2022) and
then hire (meaning, write JD, do recruitment, interview lots of people, get
them hired) which can take from several months to years. Once they are
hired, you need to onboard them and let them learn about our technical
infrastructure which takes at least two good months. Software engineering
is not magic, it takes time, blood and sweat. [2]
 - Making another team focus on multimedia requires changes in planning,
budget, OKR, etc. etc. Are we sure moving the focus of teams is a good
idea? Most teams are already focusing on vital parts of wikimedia and
changing the focus will turn this into a whack-a-mole game where we fix
multimedia but now we have critical issues in security or performance.
 - Voting Wishlist survey is a good band-aid in the meantime. To at least
address the worst parts for now.

I don't understand your point tbh, either you think it's a good idea to
make requests for improvements in multimedia in the wishlist survey or you
think it's not. If you think it's not, then it's offtopic to this thread.

[1]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/WMPZHMXSLQJ6GONAVTFLDFFMPNJDVORS/
[2] There is a classic book in this topic called "The Mythical Man-month"

On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 11:41 AM Gnangarra  wrote:

> we have to vote for regular maintenance and support for
> essential functions like uploading files which is the core mission of
> Wikimedia Commons
>
> On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 17:32, Amir Sarabadani  wrote:
>
>> The wishlist survey is defined as:
>> > The Community Wishlist Survey is an annual survey that allows
>> contributors to the Wikimedia projects to propose and vote for tools and
>> platform improvements
>>
>> That doesn't necessarily translate into just "new tools". The community
>> can wish for better support of multimedia stack and improvements on the
>> multimedia platform and If it gets enough votes, I'm hopeful it'll be
>> picked up.
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 8:02 AM Željko Blaće  wrote:
>>
>>> Nice. This looks much better than before. Previously it felt so many
>>> people had high hopes for projects that are outside of capacities that are
>>> committed to this project. I feel this needs to be a super clear fact from
>>> the start and not ask for the global community to commit XYZ number of
>>> hours in the actions of promoting, translating, proposing and decision
>>> making processes when developers can commit far less back to the same
>>> community. Otherwise it feels like unbalanced work from a more holistic
>>> perspective, but this is also non-exceptional...no?
>>> ___
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>>> Public archives at
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/W2DTMUUD76RCBVPOJ3VGSJKPYL7V6EZF/
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Amir (he/him)
>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> Public archives at
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ZSZM4BRNWV3NIQ6RH66QBFFINLKMOIKG/
>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
>
>
> --
> GN.
> * 2021*
> *Celebrating 20 years of Wikipedia*
>
>
> Wikimania: https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page
> My print shop: https://www.redbubble.com/people/Gnangarra/shop?asc=u
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/M2NB574Y7NUG5PVVW52NAWZOPYOWH6VI/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org



-- 
Amir (he/him)
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2021-12-29 Thread Gnangarra

we have to vote for regular maintenance and support for essential functions
like uploading files which is the core mission of Wikimedia Commons

On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 17:32, Amir Sarabadani  wrote:

> The wishlist survey is defined as:
> > The Community Wishlist Survey is an annual survey that allows
> contributors to the Wikimedia projects to propose and vote for tools and
> platform improvements
>
> That doesn't necessarily translate into just "new tools". The community
> can wish for better support of multimedia stack and improvements on the
> multimedia platform and If it gets enough votes, I'm hopeful it'll be
> picked up.
>
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 8:02 AM Željko Blaće  wrote:
>
>> Nice. This looks much better than before. Previously it felt so many
>> people had high hopes for projects that are outside of capacities that are
>> committed to this project. I feel this needs to be a super clear fact from
>> the start and not ask for the global community to commit XYZ number of
>> hours in the actions of promoting, translating, proposing and decision
>> making processes when developers can commit far less back to the same
>> community. Otherwise it feels like unbalanced work from a more holistic
>> perspective, but this is also non-exceptional...no?
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> Public archives at
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/W2DTMUUD76RCBVPOJ3VGSJKPYL7V6EZF/
>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
>
>
> --
> Amir (he/him)
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ZSZM4BRNWV3NIQ6RH66QBFFINLKMOIKG/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org



-- 
GN.
* 2021*
*Celebrating 20 years of Wikipedia*


Wikimania: https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page
My print shop: https://www.redbubble.com/people/Gnangarra/shop?asc=u
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/M2NB574Y7NUG5PVVW52NAWZOPYOWH6VI/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2021-12-29 Thread Amir Sarabadani

The wishlist survey is defined as:
> The Community Wishlist Survey is an annual survey that allows
contributors to the Wikimedia projects to propose and vote for tools and
platform improvements

That doesn't necessarily translate into just "new tools". The community can
wish for better support of multimedia stack and improvements on the
multimedia platform and If it gets enough votes, I'm hopeful it'll be
picked up.

On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 8:02 AM Željko Blaće  wrote:

> Nice. This looks much better than before. Previously it felt so many
> people had high hopes for projects that are outside of capacities that are
> committed to this project. I feel this needs to be a super clear fact from
> the start and not ask for the global community to commit XYZ number of
> hours in the actions of promoting, translating, proposing and decision
> making processes when developers can commit far less back to the same
> community. Otherwise it feels like unbalanced work from a more holistic
> perspective, but this is also non-exceptional...no?
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/W2DTMUUD76RCBVPOJ3VGSJKPYL7V6EZF/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org



-- 
Amir (he/him)
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ZSZM4BRNWV3NIQ6RH66QBFFINLKMOIKG/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2021-12-28 Thread Željko Blaće

Nice. This looks much better than before. Previously it felt so many people
had high hopes for projects that are outside of capacities that are
committed to this project. I feel this needs to be a super clear fact from
the start and not ask for the global community to commit XYZ number of
hours in the actions of promoting, translating, proposing and decision
making processes when developers can commit far less back to the same
community. Otherwise it feels like unbalanced work from a more holistic
perspective, but this is also non-exceptional...no?
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/W2DTMUUD76RCBVPOJ3VGSJKPYL7V6EZF/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is coming. Help us and prepare

2021-12-28 Thread Gnangarra

Kaya

Instead of putting resources into making more tools, how about putting more
resources into sustainability. For a large part of the last 12 months
Commons has been unable to upload large files, bulk upload tools falling
over have been hampering efforts to engage with GLAMs.   Every other aspect
of the WMF work has been put on hold while reviews into the systems take
place. I think it's time to put new development on hold or at least limit
priority and capacity then focus efforts on updating and upgrading existing
tools. If those tools cant be fixed, rewrite them from scratch

Gnangarra

On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 at 12:08, Szymon Grabarczuk 
wrote:

> The Community Wishlist Survey 2022
>  starts
> in less than two weeks (Monday 10 January 2022, 18:00 UTC
> ).
> We, the team organizing the Survey, need your help.
>
>- Translate important messages
>
> 
>and/or
>- Promote the Survey
>
>among anyone and everyone you know who has an account on wiki. Promote the
>Survey on social media, via instant messaging apps, in other groups and
>chats, in your WikiProject, Wikimedia affiliate - wherever contributors
>with registered accounts may be.
>- You may also start thinking about ideas for technical improvements
>or even writing them down in the CWS sandbox
>.
>
> *Why are we asking?*
>
>- We have improved the documentation
>. It's
>friendlier and easier to use. This will mean little if it's only in 
> English.
>- Thousands of volunteers haven't participated in the Survey yet. We'd
>like to improve that, too. Three years ago, 1387 people participated. Last
>year, there were 1773 of them. We hope that in the upcoming edition, there
>will be even more - if you help us with translations. Also, you are better
>than us in contacting Wikimedians outside of wikis. We have prepared some
>images to share. More to come.
>
> *What is the Community Wishlist Survey?*
>
> It's an annual survey that allows contributors to the Wikimedia projects
> to propose and vote for tools and platform improvements. Long years of
> experience in editing or technical skills are not required.
>
> Thank you for your time and attention. To those who have participated in
> the Survey - many thanks for your dedication.
>
> See you in January!
>
> Szymon Grabarczuk (he/him)
>
> Community Relations Specialist
>
> Wikimedia Foundation
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/XL37Y7D6N65ZXU7W43XP5KO5HFTK2CD7/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org



-- 
GN.
* 2021*
*Celebrating 20 years of Wikipedia*


Wikimania: https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page
My print shop: https://www.redbubble.com/people/Gnangarra/shop?asc=u
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/6XAJHMRZ2PWSJW7YW3PWYLN5WMKO4UT7/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

38 matches

Mail list logo