Gemeenskapsverbindings/produkondersoeke

This page is a translated version of the page Community Liaisons/Product Surveys and the translation is 82% complete.
See mw:Community Tech team/All Our Ideas for further work, using the results from this survey.
Other languages:
Afrikaans • ‎Deutsch • ‎English • ‎dansk • ‎español • ‎français • ‎polski • ‎العربية • ‎中文

Die Product Roadmap-opname is van plan om 'n liggewig, data-ingeligte manier te bied vir gemeenskappe in die hele Wikimedia-beweging om idees by te dra van die Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) -produk-padkaart.

Die vraag wat ons tans wil beantwoord, is: as die gemeenskappe gesamentlik besluit oor 'n apparaat of 'n instrument wat uitgebrei kan word tot 'n uitbreiding vir gebruik deur alle Wikimedia-ondersteunde projekte, wat sou dit dan wees?

Agtergrond

Met beperkte hulpbronne moet die WMF 'n data-ingeligte benadering neem om prioriteitsfunksies oor die hele wêreld te prioritiseer. Daar was in die verlede veelvuldige lyste en versoeke, waarvan baie in individuele gemeenskappe en projekte vervat is.

Om effektiewe prioriteite vir gemeenskapsfunksies en produkte te prioritiseer, moet ons eers 'n manier kry om versoeke regoor die beweging te versamel. Na die ondersoek van stelsels wat aan sekere kriteria voldoen, het ons besluit om 'n loodsopname met AllOurIdeas met die Engelse en Spaanse taalgemeenskappe op Wikipedia uit te voer, hoewel natuurlik almal wat dit sien welkom is om deel te neem.

Wat sou dit wees:

  • 'n poging om meer gemeenskapsinvloede in die stigting se produkkaarte te bring deur voorgelegde idees te rangskik
  • 'n manier om 'n groter verskeidenheid gebruikers aan te moedig om ons te vertel wat hul behoeftes is
  • 'n manier om data direk by die proses in te sluit

Wat sou dit nie wees nie:

  • vervanging van produkte wat tans ontwikkel word
  • 'n belofte dat al die idees wat voorgelê word, gebou sal word

Al ons idees hulpmiddel opname

Samevatting

Die All Our Ideas Tool Survey was 'n loodsproduk-opname wat in Desember 2014 van stapel gestuur is en wat twee weke duur. Dit is gerig op aktiewe bydraers aan die Engelse en Spaanse Wikipedia-projekte via kennisgewings oor dophoulyste. In die opname word lede van die gemeenskap gevra "Watter hulpmiddel of apparaat wil u hê dat die WMF moet verbeter om bydraes tot die projekte te vergemaklik?" Die resultate kan gesien word by die volgende URL's:

Werk rakende die resultate van die opname word opgespoor by Community Tech-span/Al Our Ideas.

Beplanning

Kwartaal 2-toetsfase

In Desember 2014 het die stigting 'n toets van twee weke aan gebruikers in twee gemeenskappe geloods. Die algemene doelwitte om dit te toets, was om na te gaan:

  • Verseker behoorlike taalondersteuning
  • Kontroleer op die sukses van uitreikgereedskap (kennisgewings, kennisgewings oor dorpspompe, ens.).
  • Vroeë neigings om oor die hele beweging te vergelyk (stem ons gemeenskappe almal vir soortgelyke dinge? Het sommige gemeenskappe baie verskillende behoeftes?)
  • Kyk na die moontlikheid van misbruik of stelselspel

Hierna het ons gekyk of dit 'n nuttige en akkurate manier is om idees in te samel.

Update:

  • Results: The most popular items were all related to automatic formatting of bibliographic citations. This is being developed in mw:Citoid, which will be available in VisualEditor during the coming months, and later (after its stability and scalability has been demonstrated) in the wikitext editor. Dozens of other ideas were considered and received varying levels of support. In general, the more popular and familiar the idea to users of the English Wikipedia, the more support it received.
  • Technical limitations: Significant technical limitations in the system meant that descriptions were limited to 140 characters, without any external links. This meant that users were sometimes presented with choices that they did not recognize and could not easily get more information about.
  • Style: AllOurIdeas uses w:Pairwise comparison, in which voters responses to individual pairs is used to produce a ranked list. By statistically combining the all voters' ranked preferences, it determines the most popular items across the entire population of voters. This is a validated method of research that meets some important principles of voting theory, such as the strong favorite-betrayal criterion (it should never be in your best interest to rank your first choice as anything other than first) and the later-no-harm principle (if you ranked your favorite as highest, then ranking something else as second should not hurt your favorite). Pairwise voting also reduces intentional manipulation of the outcome by canvassing for support of a particular item: Pairs are presented randomly, and the canvassed item might not be an option offered to any given voter.
    However, some participants strongly disliked pairwise comparison. They felt like they never completed the task. The main suggested alternative was showing all ideas in a long list, and asking users to either rank each idea manually, or to vote for and against each idea. These methods are familiar and give voters a definite feeling that they have finished voting. However, they do not scale easily to many dozens or hundreds of items, and they are more susceptible to strategic voting and other forms of gaming.
  • Collecting ideas: AllOurIdeas allows participants to suggest new ideas until the very end. Because the absolute number of votes is irrelevant, even ideas submitted on the last day could have a ranking estimated from just a few votes—indeed, a late-submitted idea could win.
    However, some early participants disliked this, because they personally didn't vote on the ideas that were submitted late. Because commenters were unfamiliar with pairwise comparisons, some of them also worried that having fewer people vote on ideas that were submitted late would reduce the likelihood that these items could win. The main proposed alternative was collecting all ideas in advance and refusing to permit any ideas to be submitted after the deadline. The main drawback is that this rejects the input of people who learned about the vote after the early deadline for submissions, regardless of the quality of their ideas, which is not consistent with some of our communities' cultural values.

Kwartaal 3-opname

As dit effektief is, sal die stigting 'n breë skaal begin om alle gemeenskappe te vra vir idees vir uitbreiding van hulpmiddels of hulpmiddels.

FAQ

Hoeveel keer moet ek klik? Hoe werk dit in die praktyk? Kan ek dit verskeie kere neem om my gunsteling opsie te laat wen?
Klik op soveel as moontlik pare as wat u wil. Daar is geen minimum of maksimum vereiste aantal nie, dus u kan te eniger tyd stop. Daar is verskillende opsies, en soos u toepaslike idees (bestaande apparaat en gereedskap) voorstel, sal hulle by die opsies gevoeg word. U kan meer lees oor AllOurIdeas [1].
Waarom word dit 'n vlieënier genoem?
Dit is 'n toetsopname wat werk met Engelse en Spaanse taalgemeenskappe op Wikipedia. Die bedoeling met hierdie loods is om te sien of die stelsel wat die Stigting toets, soveel moontlik Wikimedia-ondersteunde gemeenskappe sal vergroot.
Wat sal die WMF met sy resultate doen?
Die produkafdeling van die Wikimedia-stigting sal die hoogste rangorde (s) in ag neem by die beplanning van die padkaart in die komende kwartiere. Met behulp van 'n inligting-ingeligte benadering kan die Gemeenskapsbetrokkenheid (Produk) (CE (P)) die besluit met soveel gemeenskappe as moontlik skaal.
Waarom het u Engels en Spaans gekies om hierdie opname uit te voer?
Met die bekendstelling van die loods in twee tale word die moeilikheid van vertalings vir hierdie spesifieke opname getoets. Aangesien die span vir gemeenskapsbetrokkenheid by die WMF geen Spaans-sprekers het nie, en es.wp 'n beduidende groot gemeenskap is, wou ons die uitdaging hê om vertalings met hierdie eksterne stelsel te hanteer voordat ons uitgebrei word na meer gemeenskappe in die derde kwartaal.
Can I suggest a tool/gadget/etc which is not in the list? Are there any limitations?
Please do! Keep in mind that only currently existing gadgets will be added to the list (if you do not know the name of the gadget or tool specifically, try to describe it and the team will re-write it as the name of the tool with a simple explanation). Please try to post a simple description of the tool in non-jargon language so that others may easily understand what it is.

What happens to ideas that do not get entered into the list?

The Community Liaisons are maintaining a list of all tools and their status within the survey, with explanation if needed.

Legal Notification

Your privacy is important to us. Please note that this survey is hosted by AllOurIdeas, a third-party service – please read the AllOurIdeas privacy policy to find out more about their privacy practices. By answering these questions, you permit us to record your responses and agree to donate them to the public domain. This allows us to freely share your answers with others for the purpose of open analysis, research, and study. We will not share publicly your personal information, like your email address, except as permitted by the Wikimedia privacy policy. This commitment assumes you do not incorporate your personal information in response to a question that doesn't ask for it. By answering our questions, you consent to the transfer of your responses to the United States and other places as may be necessary to carry out the objectives of this project and you permit us to record and indefinitely retain your responses for research purposes.

In order to bring your ideas to life, if you submit ideas or proposals to us in this survey, you grant to the Wikimedia Foundation a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable license to any right, title, and interest that you may have in any and all patentable subject matter and derivatives thereof described or conceived of in the survey, including patentable subject matter later derived from the survey.

To go back to the survey, click here.