Hi Lodewijk,
Thanks for your feedback about the process. It's been very valuable.
I have a few follow up questions below:
Sure, the team did reach out in the collection phase - after all, without the data such evaluation would be impossible. But after that, the conclusions were drafted and shared with the wide community, rather than with the stakeholders involved to discuss interpretation.
Can you say more about which stakeholders? Do you have ideas how we might include them in the future, for example, through the Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list, or were you thinking in some other way?
Either way, all communication seemed to be aimed to announce the
evaluation, rather than to ask active input on whether the analysis made sense, whether there were misunderstandings, etc. But maybe you have had a lot of follow-up discussions with the people you collected data from on a 1-to-1 level, which would be admirable.
We tried to encourage input and questions through the next steps and in the talk page, but it sounds like this might not have been enough. How do you think we can do this better next time? Anything specific that stands out to you, beyond sharing with stakeholders beforehand?
Thanks so much, Edward
Again, I do appreciate the effort, I don't agree with the approach and process.
Best, Lodewijk _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/GuidelinesWikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe