În mie., 26 aug. 2020 la 13:07, Dan Garry (Deskana) djgwiki@gmail.com a scris:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2020 at 22:26, Strainu strainu10@gmail.com wrote:
The pattern I'm seeing is: team gets a big project (in this case UCoC) -> team hires -> newbie makes good faith edits that are known to cause offense to some members of the community.
This is basically always going to happen when new people are onboarded, or, indeed, as people make mistakes. By my observations, this happens a lot less nowadays than it used to. This is anecdotal on my part, but in the absence of any rigorous study of the frequency with which this occurs, this thread as a whole is anecdotal. That's not to say it's not valuable to discuss it, but it's worth bearing that in mind.
Thanks for the response Dan!
A rigorous study is IMHO impossible, since we're lacking a rigorous definition of the limits between WMF and community.
This pattern can be broken only if the organization has a process to teach newcomers things that seem obvious to old timers ("don't go over community decisions if you can avoid it", "don't change content", "try to talk to people before doing a major change", "not everyone speaks English", "affiliates are not the community" etc.)
My question is: does the WMF has such a process?
When people are onboarded a lot of this is explained to them, and people are encouraged to reach out to those more experienced with the communities. That people get it wrong occasionally is expected.
OK, but how is this done precisely? Are there written docs? Mentors? Is cross-team help common? Or is this kept at the anecdotal level ("oh yeah, you should also keep in mind..." )?
Strainu
Dan _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe