Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2018-20/Transition/2020/02
Nomination and selection results
editFinal selection
editThanks everyone for your interest and nominations. Based on votes and selection criteria, we are happy to announce the Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy Transition Design Group.
Movement Strategy Transition Design Group
- WikiArabia: Anass Sedrati
- CEE: Yaroslav Blanter
- ESEAP: Biyanto Rebin
- WikiFranca: Bachounda
- Iberocoop: ProtoplasmaKid
- WikiIndaba: Kayuyussuf
- North America: Shanluan
- South Asia: Wikilover90
- Phase 2 writers: Marc Miquel-Ribé
- Affiliate Executive Directors: Anna Torres (Wikimedia Argentina), Jenny Ebermann (Wikimedia Switzerland), John Andersson (Wikimedia Sweden)
- Affiliate Chairpersons: Philip Kopetzky (Wikimedia Österreich)
- Wikimedia Foundation: TBD
The Design Group is tasked with creating an open and inclusive transition process where the entire Wikimedia movement can take part in implementing the 2030 movement strategy recommendations. Transition will take place online from September to November and the Design Group will create these events taking into consideration different dynamics for participation, such as time zones, languages, translation requirement, and access to technology. The design group will be supported by a small support team.
The Design Group discussions will be open and on-wiki. All interested individuals are encouraged to participate in the discussions as reviewers, and later in the actual transition events. If you were nominated or have already expressed your interest, we will reach out to you regarding participation as a reviewer.
Please let us know if you would like to participate in the design discussions as a reviewer. MPourzaki (WMF) (talk) 17:34, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, I would like to be a reviewer. Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 14:14, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you so much Ad Huikeshoven, noted. MPourzaki (WMF) (talk) 18:54, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Working session #1 summary
editIn its first working session (out of a total of 5), on 9 July 2020, the selected Design Group brainstormed some of the “immediate concerns and considerations” that are to be addressed in the Transition events design throughout the next five weeks. The group clustered their initial ideas into the groupings below. Community feedback and suggested changes or additions to this list are welcome --Abbad (WMF) (talk) 12:32, 10 July 2020 (UTC).
List of considerations
editBelow is a list of considerations for the Transition events design, with some examples of the discussion points that came up during the working session:
Theme | Concerns and considerations |
---|---|
Inclusivity | Diversity and inclusion
|
Engaging online communities
| |
Language gap / diversity
| |
Bandwidth / connectivity
| |
Technology gap
| |
Governance | Feasibility
|
Ownership
| |
Legitimacy
| |
Accountability
| |
Contextualization | Surveys / research
|
Community needs assessment
| |
Feedback loops
| |
Scoping and priorities for Design
| |
Other | Expectation management
|
Communication
| |
Results
| |
Create space for the Design rather than designing the plan
| |
Start experimenting with implementation in an iterative manner
| |
Empowering communities and stakeholders
|
- @MPourzaki (WMF): This list already has more questions/considerations than the number of people in the Design team including support. In the Working Group phase hundreds of 'scoping questions' were formulated, and not a single specific question got an answer. I would like to hold all members on the Design team accountable for progress. Please put your name after at least one question/consideration above, for which you will take responsibility to come up with answer or a proposal how to find an answer or address this consideration. One week from now I will strike through each question or consideration without a name added to it, so everyone knows no one is working on providing an answer or a proposal. Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 14:22, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
- Hoi Ad, to be clear, I do not think anybody right now is working on any of these questions/considerations (there was an idea to look at the involvement issue, which might or might not have followed up). I do not expect much to happen until Thursday. I myself have only read these questions today, they were a result of some brainstorming, not a conclusion of any group-wide discussion. I think the question at this point is that if there is something badly missing (which can very well be the case), it should be added, preferably before Thursday.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:57, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
- I liked the phrase "People should understand what we are doing", that is important. And I missed some more topics related to the recommendation "Identify Topics for Impact", that is for me the most important recommendation, that is an old problem, it was always difficult to evaluate how much impact our actions made in the Wikimedia projects and on the people that read and contribute on the projects. There is a phrase from Peter Drucker that I like that says "nothing is quite so useless as doing with great efficiency what should not be done at all", sometimes we work hard in things that will bring none or almost no impact, that applies to everything, from the articles the editors give priority to edit to the WMF and affiliates actions to improve the community, evaluate the impact is hard but we need to ensure that we are doing everything we can to get better on that. Danilo.mac talk 23:01, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks Danilo.mac. This is really useful. 'Identify Topics for Impact' was misunderstood by some. I am glad you grasp why it was proposed by communities and why it's so important for our learning and development. MPourzaki (WMF) (talk) 13:50, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Ad, great to hear from you. Ymblanter is right. Last week was a first brainstorming session and not a definitive task assignment. I'm sure a majority of these issues will be addressed in upcoming discussions and in the iterations of the online events. After all, this is why the Design Group has convened, to think of ways to make the process more inclusive and overcome various participation barriers. Some of these ideas can be further grouped as we develop further over the next 4-5 sessions. For example, outreach, assessments, surveys, feedback loops and expectation management can fall under communication, which is emerging as a key stream of work. Explicit responsibilities as you propose would come a little later when we realize the plan for the events. At this stage, if you feel anything is missing from the discussions, please let us know. MPourzaki (WMF) (talk) 13:50, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
- @MPourzaki (WMF) thanks for the reply, as wel as @Ymblanter. I wish the group have done an in depth round of introductions to each other, and have shared their intentions to participate in this process, and stress more want they do want to achieve positively and constructively, rather than things they want to avoid (risks), or formulate negatively, questioning the preferred outcome. And yes, I would welcome an inventory of stakeholders, their interests and their needs, which preferably include an analysis of the external environment. Ad Huikeshoven (talk) 15:27, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Comments on session #3 summary
edit- The listed 8 events, are those country codes or language codes? SP isn't a valid code in either system. I assume CH and SP are supposed to be Chinese (zh) and Spanish (es), is that correct? PT is listed twice, so I can't tell what the missing one is.
- Japan, the country with the second-largest Wikimedia presence, has no local affiliate, and is often completely unrepresented at these things. Assuming Japanese is not the unmentioned 8th language with an event planned, I'd recommend adding it, as it has a quite considerably larger community than Arabic, Chinese, or Portuguese.
- On the technical barrier and levels of engagement: Keep in mind that many (most?) Wikimedians will not involve themselves at all in off-wiki communication. I would recommend keeping some open wiki pages (not just discussion pages) to develop ideas, completely open for editing and ideally in multiple languages (without pages being necessarily straight translations of each other).
- On simultaneous translation: That would be excellent, but I don't think it's generally within our capabilities.
--Yair rand (talk) 05:02, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Yair rand: Thanks for the focused reading! I've fixed the languages per your notes. I'll check with the Design Group regarding Japanese: however, since these are the minutes of a discussion rather than a written document, the 8 languages could be a typo during note-taking.
- Those are great suggestions. I have already communicated them to the Design Group (as with other feedback on Meta), hopefully for integration in the event plan draft that is to be shared soon.
- I agree that simultaneous translation is probably beides the capacity of these events. For now, we know that translation is a major ask, meaning it needs to be accounted for in the budget as much as possible; but it's the amount of this budget (to be confirmed) that will actually determine how much translation can take place.
- --Abbad (WMF) (talk) 11:20, 5 August 2020 (UTC).