Recommendations deadlines...

Recommendations deadlines...

Hi, I'm just checking on recommendation deadlines. There's still a fair bit of discussion over some of our Community Health recoms. And I know you have been canvassing for more people to come to the wiki and share their views. However, I thought the deadline for changing recoms had now passed. So can you clarify for me when the recoms ought to be finalised?

Please reply here and I will keep an eye out for it.

Bodnotbod15:16, 22 January 2010

The recommendations as submitted should be essentially stable at this point, other than minor changes. However, it's been our intent that as we brought more eyes, some things could continue to be worked on and tweaked, so that after the Board approves the broad framework, details could continue to be finessed. So if there's a MAJOR alteration to a recommendation, it's too late to get it in the Board packet, but you should absolutely discuss it and document the change somewhere (so that as we move toward implementation, we know that the idea has continued to organically grow and change).

Make sense?

~Philippe (WMF)16:38, 22 January 2010
 

Yep, that's perfectly clear. Thanks Philippe.

Bodnotbod13:07, 25 January 2010
 

I'm not sure I understand this properly. I joined up because I saw an invitation to discuss 'strategy Task Force recommendations' and that was only a couple of days ago. The invitation is still being displayed. I hope I can still contribute, as I have had quite a lot of ideas to put in the pot and none of them are intrinsically prone to expiry. Unless a deadline is artificially induced, I cant see why they would be dated. Is there some reason why suggestions need to be curtailed with a time limit? It just seems like an organization installing a suggestion box, but only for 3 months. I hope I'm wrong here. If there is no need for suggestions, why have I been swatting up, creating a user account, preparing and learning how to participate etc.? If I could have made a suggestion it might have been, for Wikimedia to provide a continuous feedback and development cycle. You never know when a novel and innovative idea is going to come along, if people get to know there is always an open door with a friendly ear behind it. In fact, a suggestion box on Wikipedia at all times wouldn't go astray. In a similar vein, I was going to suggest a short questionnaire as a lead in, rather than a request to join yet another website, create an account, learn some guidelines, setup preferences and a user-page etc. etc. I can't be the only one who tires of this tedious repetition. The questionnaire could collect useful data on the general user (visitor) base. That could have been helpful to decide "...where we should go, and how we should get there." - (from the main page). It may be a problem that the participants which are here now, may not be a typical cross section of the users who need to be groomed, for Wikimedia to enjoy more success (ultimately by striving to meet their needs). The questionnaire could identify key demographic areas of wiki users interest and potential need, formulate some direction for where we (they) want to go and shape how to get there. The real benefit, though and the reason I first intended to suggest the idea, was that it would provide a contact opportunity for visitors to join a mailing list receive updates to selected subject matter, news articles and of course a permanent promotional opportunity to solicit donation & willing helpers. Maybe some people just need to be reminded how cool Wikipedia is and what exiting new changes are afoot.

Micenmen00:01, 30 January 2010

I think there's an over-view of the project that we haven't communicated well. Here's how it's supposed to work: initially we asked for a "dreaming" phase, and asked people to submit proposals as to what they think we could/should do. Those are at Call for proposals. Next, we formed specific task forces drawn from a wide community appeal to deal with very specific aspects of the work that we do as a movement. They were to come out with a series of recommendations (which they've done). From those recommendations, plus the work of our external strategy consultants (Bridgespan), we will begin to write the actual strategic plan. The idea is that the discussions that are going on about the recommendations right now will inform how (or if) we integrate the recommendations and the advice from Bridgespan into a comprehensive plan.

So it's certainly not a waste of time - in fact, the hard work is just beginning.

I think the idea of a questionnaire for use in tailoring future communications is a fascinating one... you might think about listing it at the Call for proposals, in hopes that someone (The Foundation, the chapters, some individual users) pick that up and run with it. :)

~Philippe (WMF)00:05, 30 January 2010
 

Thanks again Philippe. Man that was a quick reply. O_o I got the basic gist of it I think. It has been designed as a specific one off, think - plan - Do process, like a government 'inquiry' <sigh!> I'm sure I saw someone mention making proposals an ongoing thing. I'll check that first. I just feel that if the 'department of divine intervention' at the top, want to get the best results, it needs to be an ongoing feedback - consultation process. I'll put the questionnaire idea out there with a few others and see how it goes. Thanks Again.

Micenmen00:52, 30 January 2010