On Tuesday, April 9, 2013, Denny Vrandečić wrote:
Technical changes on the Wikimedia projects can be
hairy. We are currently
having a discussion about the Wikidata deployment to the Wikipedias, and
there have been many examples in the past of deployments that raised
discussions.
One of my statements in this discussion is that the a priori discussion of
such features is highly undemocratic. What I mean with that is that design
and deployment decisions are often made by a very small group, which are in
the best case a part of the affected community, but, in many cases, even
external to the affected community. So the decisions are made by a group
that does not represent or is constituted by the community - which I mean
with undemocratic.
This has repeatedly raised criticism. And I think that criticism is often
unfair. Additionally, it is usually true (which makes is not anymore fair,
though).
I thought that in order to discuss these design decisions with the
community before hand, telling them on their respective village pump is
sufficient. Not so it seems. No single channel would find acceptance to
communicate with the community. This, obviously means, that it is not
actionable to communicate with the community.
What about setting up a community selected body of representatives to
discuss such issues beforehand? At first, it sounds like a good idea - but
the issue is, it makes the process only more complicated without at all
resolving the underlying issues. Does anyone really think that such a body
would stop the criticism before or after the deployment of the change in
question? Yeah, right. Doesn't change a thing.
So, what do I want to achieve with this Mail? Merely to ask some community
members to be a bit more constructive in their comments. Claiming that the
product managers and designers have no idea of the Wikimedia communities
and the use of wikis is often neither help- nor truthful.
What would be even better would be to come up with processes or mechanisms
to avoid these issues in the future. I would be very glad if the people who
are often critically accompanying such changes would help in building
effective channels for their discussion.
Any thoughts?
One system that I find a lot of potential value in is the Wikitech
Ambassadors mailing list. I hope that mailing list grows and can be the
place where we make announcements that should be communicated widely.
For Wikidata in particular, one tool I think you guys haven't yet used
and should consider for after Phase II is launched on enwiki is a watchlist
notice. This is very effective for reaching active editors about a new
feature. We've used it for Editor Engagement Experiments and for mobile
features announcements.
Another tool that we should consider in the near future is the upcoming
notifications system for Web and email. This is potentially a powerful
system. Having things like the Kurier (sp?) and Signpost delivered via
notification will only make them more effective. And we might consider
doing occasional (e.g. quarterly) email announcements about major features
like Wikidata and VisualEditor.
--
Project director Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. +49-30-219 158 26-0 |
http://wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org <javascript:;>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l