- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Currently, a new iteration of discussions is taking place.
- Most likely, new comments will not be taken into account by Working Group members in their work of developing the Recommendations. You are free however to continue discussing in the spirit of "discussing about Wikipedia is a work in progress". :)
The scenario has bettered over the last couple of years but we need to improve a lot on these aspects. Winged Blades of Godric (talk) 13:21, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
Sceptical, but cautious supportEdit
> Create an evangelism / knowledge dissemination team that is tasked with ensuring that core community members understand the factual basis of ongoing projects and strategic decisions and lead time. The team would make sure that the background information necessary for understanding and evaluating product strategy is available, easily accessible to the average reader, and disseminated to the communities.
I support this to the extent that it forces engineering decisions to be made based on actual hard facts and requires communication of the rationale behind them. ACPERM is one example of a data-driven positive change that really should have come about several years sooner. However, this could just as easily be business as usual i.e. the WMF dumping their clueless, out of touch, ill-conceived and/or incorrect justification for their top-down decisions and completely ignoring any dissenting feedback. The choice of words to describe this proposal ("evangelism") suggests that the latter is very much more likely. MER-C (talk) 16:21, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
- If anyone else is wondering: ACPERM → en:Wikipedia:Autoconfirmed article creation trial/Request for comment on permanent implementation. --Jean-Fred (talk) 22:33, 11 August 2019 (UTC))
From Catalan SalonEdit
It already exists but it doesn't works. If it doesn't works, then new ideas should be tried (...)