> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Retrospective_2009-2012
I left some comments on talk. Two small things that struck me are the usage of HDI (first time for WMF?) and the fact that some recommendation(s) mirror best practices for chapters and can be useful for everyone.
Samuel Klein, 15/03/2013 05:02:
After reading this more thoroughly: I am deeply impressed. This sort of review should be carried out for all major ongoing projects. For instance, it could be useful to have a similar retrospective on major technical features that have been implemented or formally requested by large Wikimedia wikis over the past 4 years -- and those that have been developed by the WMF and either implemented or not (depending on how they were received). I realized recently that many developers believe their work's implementation, and what it is possible for them to accomplish, is governed by whether the community likes it or not. Meanwhile many community members feel they have no control over what features are developed or prioritized. An independent review could help demystify that cycle.
I've no idea what such a review could consist of, but maybe it's one more reason to try? (We don't know what we're losing by not doing it.)
Nemo _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
