[Wikimedia-l] Changes at WMF

2017-02-13 Thread Wes Moran
Hello everyone,

After a great deal of consideration, I have decided that I need to take a
different path for my life and I am moving on from the Wikimedia
Foundation.  I have struggled with this decision as I have great admiration
for the mission and the people here. I have great appreciation for how we
worked together over the past two years, and great pride in what we have
accomplished. The wide range of experiences have been amazing, and it feels
like many more years than just two.

I am looking at a departure date of Feb 28th. Until that time, I will be
supporting the Product teams through the first draft of Annual Planning.
Katherine Maher, Victoria Coleman and I will work together with people
across the Product and Technology departments, to develop a transition plan
that is in the best interest of the teams I support, the Foundation, and
our movement.

Toby Negrin, currently the Head of Reading, will take over as acting
leadership for Product on 2/28. He has been working closely with me on many
of the key programs and initiatives our department has been planning. He
and the rest of Product leadership will continue with our Annual Planning
efforts and conclude the 2016-17 goals and programs.

It has been such a deep honor to work with the folks in Technology and
Product. I started here with Discovery, and have a special respect for what
that team has accomplished as it evolved. The opportunity to lead Product,
work with chapters like Wikimedia Deutschland, engage with the communities,
and collaborate at the C-level was exciting and humbling. I was happy to
work with the Product teams as they evolved into audiences and ultimately a
Product organization focused on users and their needs. A testament to their
excellent work is summarized in our 2016 Product summary

[1]. Working with the folks in Technology to find our CTO was exciting,
challenging, and illuminating. It was a wonderful and unexpected path that
would not have been possible without the great support of that team. There
are so many partnerships both with teams and individuals across this
organization and other organizations that I had the chance to engage and
work together with.

I have a great deal of respect and confidence in all of you to propel us
through the Movement, Foundation and team strategies and goals in the next
two years. Similarly I am proud of the stands we take and voices we lend as
we all work to protect and project freedom, and the public availability of
the sum of all knowledge. I hope to help support that as a volunteer in
whatever way I can.

Thank you,

Wes


Vice President of Product, Wikimedia Foundation

[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Product/2016_Product_Summary
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [discovery] Interactive Team putting work on pause

2017-01-24 Thread Wes Moran
ad of proactive. Evasive instead of
> transparent. Now volunteers need to spend time to figure out what is
> happening here ? This has cost me over 3 hours today. I would have liked
to
> have spent that time differently.
> 2: It shouldn't matter that Katie is on holidays, I'd assume/hope someone
> takes over her duties while she is away (Likely Dan himself and/or Wes
> Moran). Providing information on topics like this shouldn't have to wait
> until someone returns from a (likely well deserved) holiday.
> 3: Why do I have to write this email ? It's really not that hard: Make a
> decision, explain it.
>
> DJ
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Exciting update about development of structured data on Commons

2017-01-10 Thread Wes Moran
Hello Rogol,

Thanks for the question.  The Annual Plan we follow and share with the
community for review before we begin our work is available on Meta [1]. We
update specific plans on a quarterly basis on our goals pages [2] as they
may evolve over the year. We also provide a number of links for the
specific teams on our Product page and welcome participation, discussion or
connection through those pathways and directly with the feature teams [3].

Specifically the Wikidata, Community Tech, Editing and Discovery teams have
specific objectives and goals in this years annual plan.

Hope this answers your question and certainly engage in the ongoing
discussion around the work on the Commons page [4].

Thanks,
Wes

Wes Moran
Vice President of Product
Wikimedia Foundation


[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2016-2017/Final#Product
[2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/2016-17_Goals
[3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Product
[4] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/Overview


On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Rogol Domedonfors <domedonf...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thanks to both Lydia and Denny for these further replies.  I assume that
> the WMF has a clear stable and unified view of where it is taking its
> various products and the dependencies, which is what I understand by the
> phrase product roadmap.  "A single document" would be nice, but whatever it
> is, I am asking for it to be shared with the community.
>
> "Rogol"
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:12 PM, Denny Vrandečić <vrande...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Rogol,
> >
> > that is why I pointed you to the links in that document, which go all the
> > way back to 2004 discussions of such a project, and further discussions
> > over the years. These pretty much establish for me that this item has
> been
> > a topic for commons for more than a decade now. But it seems I am
> > misunderstanding you, and you are not looking for a documentation of the
> > shared understanding of the roadmap for Commons and other Wikimedia
> > products, but for a singular Foundation-written document that fixes the
> > Wikimedia product roadmap over several years instead?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Denny
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:00 AM Rogol Domedonfors <
> domedonf...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Denny
> > >
> > > Thank you but the link you provide appears to be to be "Our high-level
> > > roadmap for developing the project", namely the Structured Data in
> > Commons
> > > project.  Since Lisa wrote "Structured Data on Commons was in our
> product
> > > roadmap" I was referring to the product roadmap on which the Structured
> > > Data in Commons project is included -- that is, I was asking for a
> > pointer
> > > to the roadmap for "features both on the Wikidata development roadmap,
> > and
> > > in other products supported by the Wikimedia Foundation" referred to in
> > Wes
> > > Moran's initial post on this topic:
> > >
> > > But I appreciate the speed of your reply.
> > >
> > > "Rogol"
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Denny Vrandečić <vrande...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Rogol,
> > > >
> > > > this was the link previously provided on this project:
> > > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/Overview
> > > > including
> > > > links to previous documents.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Denny
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:32 AM Rogol Domedonfors <
> > domedonf...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Lisa
> > > > >
> > > > > You say that "Structured Data on Commons was in our product
> roadmap,
> > so
> > > > > this grant is not diverting our attention.  The grant simply
> enables
> > us
> > > > to
> > > > > accelerate the work we were planning to do".  Please would you
> > publish,
> > > > or
> > > > > point to, a version of that product roadmap that can inform the
> > > > community's
> > > > > participation in such planning exercises as the 2017 Wikimedia
> > Movement
> > > > > Strategy and other more tactical product planning processes.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks in adva

[Wikimedia-l] Exciting update about development of structured data on Commons

2017-01-09 Thread Wes Moran
Hello Wikimedia community,

It’s our delight to inform you that we received a US$3,015,000 grant from
the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_P._Sloan_Foundation> [1] to expedite
development of structured data on Commons. The grant will be given over the
course of three years, and will allow us to develop a team, in
collaboration with the Wikidata team at Wikimedia Deutschland, that can
focus on integrating the structured data features of Wikidata into
describing the media files on Commons.

This work will allow us to expedite features both on the Wikidata
development roadmap, and in other products supported by the Wikimedia
Foundation. The grant also provides funding to ensure that movement
stakeholders, like Wiki Loves Monuments and GLAM-Wiki program leaders, and
external partners who contribute heavily to Commons, such as GLAMs, can be
involved in the development.

We have drafted a high level overview of the grant and its scope, available
on Commons
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/Sloan_Grant>
[2]. A blog post about the grant is also available on the Wikimedia blog
<https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/01/09/sloan-foundation-structured-data>
[3].

We are currently in the process of identifying the technical lead for the
project. If you have questions, Alex Stinson, the Foundation’s GLAM-Wiki
strategist, will be leading the community engagement and communications for
the project until we hire a community liaison as part of the grant. Stay
tuned for more details about the project in the coming months.

We’re excited to be able to support this project, and look forward to your
participation in its development.

Thank you,

Wes Moran and Maggie Dennis

*Wes Moran, Vice President of Product*
*Maggie Dennis, Interim Chief of Community Engagement *
*Wikimedia Foundation*

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_P._Sloan_Foundation
[2] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data/Sloan_Grant
[3] https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/01/09/sloan-foundation-structured-data
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

[Wikimedia-l] Knight Foundation grant for search and discovery

2016-01-06 Thread Wes Moran
Hello everyone,

I’m happy to announce that the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation has
awarded an exploratory grant of $250,000 to the Wikimedia Foundation’s
Discovery department [1], in order to conduct research and prototyping to
improve how people discover and engage with information on Wikipedia and
Wikimedia projects.

The Discovery team has begun six months of research and prototyping, with
the goal of building better experiences to help people discover knowledge.
You can learn more about the team’s work here
<http://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/12/23/search-and-discovery-on-wikipedia/>.

Our deliverables include:


   - User testing and research on current user flows to understand the
   search and discovery experience
   - Creation and maintenance of a dashboard of core metrics to use in
   product development
   - Research on search relevancy and the possibility of integrating open
   data sources
   - Open discussion with the Wikimedia community of volunteer editors
   - Creation of sample prototypes to showcase discovery possibilities

The need to improve our search experience has long been recognized across
the Wikimedia projects.  We need better ways to help everyone discover the
most relevant, reliable information on Wikipedia and its sister projects. For
example, while people can search within one project (like Wikipedia or
Wikimedia Commons), they can’t easily search across the different projects.
Some people still receive zero results if they search and do not include
the right words in a search. There are open data sources that have the
potential to improve how people find information, and that should be
explored.

We look forward to discussing these projects with communities and anyone
with an interest. You can collaborate with the Discovery department in the
following ways:

   - Subscribe <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/discovery> to
   the Discovery team’s public mailing list
   - Read about these projects and others at the MediaWiki Discovery
   <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Discovery> page
   - Reach out to the Discovery team on their IRC channel:
   #wikimedia-discovery on Freenode <https://freenode.net/>.

A press release and blog post will follow shortly, and more information in
the form of an FAQ has been posted here [2].

Wes Moran, VP of Product

User: WMoran_(WMF)

[1]: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Discovery
[2]: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Discovery/KnightFAQ
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wmfall] Community Wishlist Survey: Top 10 wishes!

2015-12-16 Thread Wes Moran
Great work and a nice process.

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Danny Horn  wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm happy to announce that the Community Tech team's Community Wishlist
> Survey has concluded, and we're able to announce the top 10 wishes!
>
> 634 people participated in the survey, where they proposed, discussed and
> voted on 107 ideas. There was a two-week period in November to submit and
> endorse proposals, followed by two weeks of voting. The top 10 proposals
> with the most support votes now become the Community Tech team's backlog of
> projects to evaluate and address.
>
> And here's the top 10:
>
> #1. Migrate dead links to the Wayback Machine  (111 support votes)
> #2. Improved diff compare screen  (104)
> #3. Central global repository for templates, gadgets and Lua modules  (87)
> #4. Cross-wiki watchlist  (84)
> #4. Numerical sorting in categories  (84)
> #6. Allow categories in Commons in all languages  (78)
> #7. Pageview Stats tool  (70)
> #8. Global cross-wiki user talk page  (66)
> #9. Improve the "copy and paste detection" bot  (63)
> #10. Add a user watchlist  (62)
>
> You can see the whole list here, with links to all the proposals and
> Phabricator tickets:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2015_Community_Wishlist_Survey/Results
>
> So what happens now?
>
> Over the next couple weeks, Community Tech will do a preliminary
> assessment on the top 10, and start figuring out what's involved. We need
> to have a clear definition of the problem and proposed solution, and begin
> to understand the technical, design and community challenges for each one.
>
> Some wishes in the top 10 seem relatively straightforward, and we'll be
> able to dig in and start working on them in the new year. Some wishes are
> going to need a lot of investigation and discussion with other developers,
> product teams, designers and community members. There may be some that are
> just too big or too hard to do at all.
>
> Our analysis will look at the following factors:
>
> * SUPPORT: Overall support for the proposal, including the discussions on
> the survey page. This will take the neutral and oppose votes into account.
> Some of these ideas also have a rich history of discussions on-wiki and in
> bug tickets. For some wishes, we'll need more community discussion to help
> define the problem and agree on proposed solutions.
>
> * FEASIBILITY: How much work is involved, including existing blockers and
> dependencies.
>
> * IMPACT: Evaluating how many projects and contributors will benefit,
> whether it's a long-lasting solution or a temporary fix, and the
> improvement in contributors' overall productivity and happiness.
>
> * RISK: Potential drawbacks, conflicts with other developers' work, and
> negative effects on any group of contributors.
>
> Our plan for 2016 is to complete as many of the top 10 wishes as we can.
> For the wishes in the top 10 that we can't complete, we're responsible for
> investigating them fully and reporting back on the analysis.
>
> So there's going to be a series of checkpoints through the year, where
> we'll present the current status of the top 10 wishes. The first will be at
> the Wikimedia Developer Summit in the first week of January. We're planning
> to talk about the preliminary assessment there, and then share it more
> widely.
>
> If you're eager to follow the whole process as we go along, we'll be
> documenting and keeping notes in two places:
>
> On Meta: 2015 Community Wishlist Survey/Top 10:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2015_Community_Wishlist_Survey/Top_10
>
> On Phabricator: Community Wishlist Survey board:
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/tag/community-wishlist-survey/
>
> Finally: What about the other 97 proposals?
>
> There were a lot of good and important proposals that didn't happen to get
> quite as many support votes, and I'm sure everybody has at least one that
> they were rooting for. Again, the whole list is here:
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2015_Community_Wishlist_Survey/Results
>
> We're going to talk with the other Wikimedia product teams, to see if they
> can take on some of the ideas the the community has expressed interest in.
> We're also going to work with the Developer Relations team to see if some
> of these could be taken on by volunteer developers.
>
> It's also possible that Community Tech could take on a small-scale,
> well-defined proposal below the top 10, if it doesn't interfere with our
> commitments to the top 10 wishes.
>
> So there's lots of work to be done, and hooray, we have a whole year to do
> it. If this process turns out to be a success, then we plan to do another
> survey at the end of 2016, to give more people a chance to participate, and
> bring more great ideas.
>
> For everybody who proposed, endorsed, discussed, debated and voted in the
> survey, as well as everyone who said nice things to us recently: thank you
> very much for coming out and supporting live feature development. We're
>