> 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 < >> [email protected]> 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&diff=next&oldid=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 <[email protected]> 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&diff=next&oldid=22663179 >>>> Out of scope for our team, which I hope is obvious >>>> >>>> On Sun, 23 Jan 2022 at 12:26, Gnangarra <[email protected]> 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 < >>>>> [email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > * >>>>>>> > 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 >>>>>>> > 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 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. >>>>>>> > o >>>>>>> > 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 team work in isolation? >>>>>>> > o >>>>>>> > No, we constantly collaborate with other teams at the >>>>>>> Foundation >>>>>>> > and most importantly, with all of you. This year our goal >>>>>>> is to >>>>>>> > share the top wishes with other product managers who are >>>>>>> > responsible for products related to the categories in the >>>>>>> > wishlist. This way, they may incorporate relevant wishes >>>>>>> into >>>>>>> > their team's roadmap, or they will at least consider >>>>>>> community >>>>>>> > requests as they plan upcoming work. We always check to >>>>>>> see if >>>>>>> > other teams are already working on solutions related to >>>>>>> what is >>>>>>> > asked inside of the Wishlist. We plan to do more and are >>>>>>> > energized that the conversation is already beginning to >>>>>>> happen >>>>>>> > in this thread. >>>>>>> > * >>>>>>> > Why is the Community Tech team so small? Why can't more people >>>>>>> be >>>>>>> > hired, or why can't a second Community Tech team be formed? >>>>>>> > o >>>>>>> > As a team, we deeply believe in our work, and we hope to >>>>>>> keep >>>>>>> > growing. We know how important it is to work directly with >>>>>>> > community members and fulfill community requests. If you >>>>>>> want >>>>>>> > our team to grow, one of the best ways you can champion us >>>>>>> is to >>>>>>> > participate in the wishlist. As participation rates grow >>>>>>> (and >>>>>>> > they have!), the more effectively we can advocate for our >>>>>>> team >>>>>>> > and its resources. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > P.S. We are still welcoming help to promote the survey and to >>>>>>> translate >>>>>>> > the updated documentation. Thanks for reading. >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > Best, >>>>>>> > Natalia Rodriguez >>>>>>> > Senior Product Manager, Community Tech >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], >>>>>>> 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/[email protected]/message/WRXDIQSGZ63UGFRU5AUOOGXLYUZMEKGM/ >>>>>>> > To unsubscribe send an email to >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], >>>>>>> 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/[email protected]/message/EQHUSZLMXARJT5Z5ZGWJRY7JVIQOC26A/ >>>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], >>>>>> 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/[email protected]/message/A6S2SYYHJ76BMULZGBAPER3DG2K4RCSM/ >>>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> GN. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> GN. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], >>>> 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/[email protected]/message/IDDMTN7IH4FUSPLG655446OPQFPLJQ5M/ >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], 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/[email protected]/message/VLAIBIAMR3V3UNOEKYEOADJHHTUZYYIQ/ >>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] >> >> >> >> -- >> GN. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], 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/[email protected]/message/UDG6DKUA3SIFCDMJ7XH6CH5OVSVNHXPH/ >> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] > > > > -- > Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266 > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], 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/[email protected]/message/MVBAD6IFVKIVPVCAIDPCGRWYSPVWVBV3/ > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], 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/[email protected]/message/ZUNSL5STXD5IQHWQV57COHWITIAY6VDL/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
