One concern id have if this approach is scaled up, is what happens to maintenance of these projects after they are done? Not that this isnt a problem with traditional teams too, but with the wishlist approach it seems like it would be all the more problematic, especially for larger projects.
-- Brian On Sunday, October 13, 2019, Amir E. Aharoni <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't know if restricting the wishlist only for other projects is so > terrible. Non-Wikipedia projects have complained for years that they are > not getting enough attention, so perhaps giving them extra love at the > expense of Wikipedia makes sense. > > I would look at a wider problem, though. Over the years that the community > wishlist vote has been working, a lot of excellent projects were completed > by the Community Tech team: global preferences, the pageviews tool, > TemplateWizard, wiki syntax highlighting, edit summary improvements, and > many more. However, several projects that received a very large number of > votes were declined, not because they were undesirable but because they > were too big for this team, which by its nature is oriented at small, > timeboxed projects. That, by itself, is understandable. > > The real trouble is that even though there is demand for these things > (given the vote results), and even though no-one seems to think that the > ideas are invalid or undesirable, they ended up not being done. Some > notable examples: > * Cross-wiki watchlist (#4 in 2015, declined: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Global,_cross- > wiki,_integrated_or_stacked_watchlists#Declined > ) > * Global gadgets (#1 in 2016; I couldn't find the reason for declining) > * Global templates (#3 in 2015; marked as "in development by Parsing team", > but not actually done) > > All of these things are still very much in demand. All of them happen to be > particularly beneficial also to non-Wikipedia projects, but if they will be > proposed for this year's wishlist vote and get a lot of votes, will they > again be declined because they are too big for the Community Tech team or > will they be escalated to another team (or teams) that can execute them? > > If there is no commitment to such escalation from higher management, we'll > stay stuck in a ridiculous situation in which the most needed projects are > also those that cannot be carried out. > > -- > Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי > http://aharoni.wordpress.com > “We're living in pieces, > I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore > > > בתאריך שבת, 5 באוק׳ 2019 ב-2:44 מאת Yuri Astrakhan < > [email protected]>: > > > Ilana, restricting wishlist to non-Wikipedia this year is a very sad > news. > > > > For many years, wishlist survey was the best way for the community to > talk > > back to the foundation, and to try to influence its direction. WMF mostly > > ignored these wishes, yet it was still a place to express, discuss, > > aggregate and vote on what community needed. Big thank-you is due to the > > tiny community tech team that tackled the top 10 items, but that's just > ~3% > > of the foundation's employees. > > > > WMF has been steadily separating itself from the community and loosing > > credibility as a guiding force. Take a look at the last election -- > almost > > every candidate has said "no" to the question if WMF is capable of > > deciding/delivering on the direction [1]. In **every** single > conversation > > I had with the community members, people expressed doubts with the > movement > > strategy project, in some cases even treating it as a joke. > > > > This is a huge problem, and restricting wishlist kills the last effective > > feedback mechanism community had. Now WMF is fully in control of itself, > > with nearly no checks & balances from the people who created it. > > > > I still believe that if WMF makes it a priority to align most of its > > quarterly/yearly goals with the community wishlist (not just top 10 > > positions), we could return to the effective community-governance. > > Otherwise WMF is risking to mirror Red Cross Haiti story [2] -- hundreds > of > > millions of $$ donated, and very few buildings actually built. > > > > With great respect to all the people who made Wikis what they are today, > > --[[User:Yurik]] > > > > [1] > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliate-selected_Board_ > seats/2019/Questions#Do_you_believe_the_Wikimedia_ > Foundation_in_its_present_form_is_the_right_vehicle_for_ > the_delivery_of_the_strategic_direction?_If_so_why,_and_if_ > not,_what_might_replace_it > > ? > > > > [2] > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Red_Cross#Disaster_ > preparedness_and_response > > > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 5:18 PM Ilana Fried <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hello, everyone! > > > > > > My name is Ilana, and I'm the product manager for the Community Tech > > team. > > > We’re excited to share an update on the Community Tech 2020 Wishlist > > Survey > > > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2020>. This > > > will > > > be our fifth annual Community Wishlist Survey, and for this year, we’ve > > > decided to take a different approach. In the past, we've invited people > > to > > > write proposals for any features or fixes that they'd like to see, and > > the > > > Community Tech team has addressed the top ten wishes with the most > > support > > > votes. This year, we're just going to focus on the *non-Wikipedia > content > > > projects* (i.e. Wikibooks, Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Commons, Wikisource, > > > Wikiversity, Wikispecies, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, and Wikinews), and > we're > > > only going to address the top five wishes from this survey. This is a > big > > > departure from the typical process. In the following year (2021), we’ll > > > probably return to the traditional structure. > > > > > > So, why this change? We’ve been following the same format for years — > > and, > > > generally, it has lots of benefits. We build great tools, provide > useful > > > improvements, and have an impact on diverse communities. However, the > > > nature of the format tends to prioritize the largest project > (Wikipedia). > > > This makes it harder to serve smaller projects, and many of their > wishes > > > never make it onto the wishlist. As a community-focused team, we want > to > > > support *all* projects. Thus, for 2020, we want to shine a light on > > > non-Wikipedia projects. > > > > > > Furthermore, we’ll be accepting five wishes. Over the years, we’ve > taken > > on > > > larger wishes (like Global Preferences > > > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Tech/Global_preferences> or > > Who > > > Wrote That > > > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Tech/Who_Wrote_That_tool>), > > > which are awesome projects. At the same time, they tend to be lengthy > > > endeavors, requiring extra time for research and development. When we > > > looked at the 2019 wishlist, there were still many unresolved wishes. > > > Meanwhile, we wanted to make room for the new 2020 wishes. For this > > reason, > > > we’ve decided to take on a shortened list, so we can address as many > > wishes > > > (new and remaining 2019 wishes > > > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_ > Survey_2019/Results > > >) > > > as possible. > > > > > > Overall, we look forward to this year’s survey. We worked with lots of > > > folks (engineering, product management, and others) to think about how > we > > > could support underserved projects, all while preserving the dynamic > and > > > open nature of the wishlist. *Please let us know your thoughts > > > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_Wishlist_Survey_2020>* > > > related > > > to this change. In addition, we’ll begin thinking about the guidelines > > for > > > this new process, so *we want your feedback > > > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_Wishlist_Survey_2020>* > > (on > > > what sorts of processes/rules we may want to consider). Thank you, and > > > we’re very curious to see the wishes in November! > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Ilana Fried > > > > > > Product Manager, Community Tech > > > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Tech> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikitech-l mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikitech-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
