Neil Kandalgaonkar wrote: > On 12/30/10 10:24 AM, Platonides wrote: >> Neil Kandalgaonkar wrote: >>> At some point, if we believe our community is our greatest asset, we >>> have to think of Wikipedia as infrastructure not only for creating high >>> quality articles, but also for generating and sustaining a high quality >>> editing community. >>> >>> So we probably need an employee dedicated to this. (I think? Arguments?) >> >> He would be quite busy (and polyglot!) to keep an eye over the community >> of +800 projects. > > Why is this a requirement?
The point is, there's no "one community" to "watch". Most people think in enwiki, for being the biggest project, and most probably the base project of those people. But one must not forget that there are many WMF projects out there. It doesn't end in enwp. They have similar problems, but cannot be generalised either. There's a risk of contracting someone as an injerence on the project (seems the role for a facilitator, but I'd only place people that were already in the community -the otrs folks seem a good fishing pool-, if doing such thing). Plus, there's the view on how it may be perceived (WMF trying to impose its views over the community, WMF really having power on the project and thus being liable...). > If you think about the sum total of user-hours spent on Wikipedia, the > vast majority of them are spent in just three or four interface flows. What are you thinking about? Things such as talk page messages. There are shortcuts for those interfaces. Several gadgets/scripts provide a tab for adding a template to a page + leave a predefined message to the author talk page. That's good in a sense as the users *get* messages (eg. when listing images for deletion), they are also quite full and translated (relevant just for commons). But it also means that it's a generic message, so not as appropiate for everyone. We can make the flow faster, but we lose precision. > But you're right; they can't be everywhere, so maybe there should be a > guidelines page on design principles. We have WP:CIVILITY, do we have > similar guidelines for software developers, on how to make it easy for > the community to be civil? I'm lost here. Are you calling uncivil the developer community for this thread? You mean that WP:CIVILITY should be enforced by mediawiki? Developers should be more helopful when dealing bug reports? What do you mean? > Frankly I don't think I'm qualified to do this. I know of a few people > are brilliant at this, and who do this sort of thing for a living, but > they are consultants. Fostering community on the web is generally > considered a sort of black art... does anybody know of any less > mystified way of dealing with the problem? _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
