Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Community Insights/2016-17 Report/Audience 2/Goal4

< Community Insights | 2016-17 Report
Community Engagement Insights 2016-17 Report

Across audiences Editors Affiliates Program Leaders Developers
Goal 1 - "Improving new editor engagement"
Goal 2 - "Improving community health"
Goal 3 - "Improving collaboration and communications between the Foundation and communities"
Goal 4 - "Improving collaboration and communications around software development"


Question 214 (Q317)

edit
Which Wikimedia project do you contribute to the most?


Note: this questions was used for routing purposes

Median = 7

1 – Wikimedia Commons (6%)
2 – English Wikipedia (7%)
3 – German Wikipedia (10%)
4 – French Wikipedia (7%)
5 – Spanish Wikipedia (12%)
6 – Japanese Wikipedia (5%)
7 – Russian Wikipedia (11%)
8 – Italian Wikipedia (6%)
9 – Chinese Wikipedia (5%)
10 – Portuguese Wikipedia (3%)
11 – Polish Wikipedia (2%)
12 – Dutch Wikipedia (4%)
13 – Arabic Wikipedia (3%)
14 – Ukrainian Wikipedia (2%)
15 – Persian Wikipedia (1%)
16 – Korean Wikipedia (1%)
17 – Hebrew Wikipedia (1%)


Question 215.01 (RE01)

edit
From your perspective, how important are each of the following when reading Wikimedia projects? - How the page looks on desktop


Median = 5
2% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – 0 Not at all important (0%)
2 – 1 Slightly important (2%)
3 – 2 Fairly important (9%)
4 – 3 Quite important (27%)
5 – 4 Very Important (61%)
97% of sampled editors who responded to this question reported that when reading wikipedia it is fairly, quite or very important how the page looks on desktop.


Question 215.02 (RE01)

edit
From your perspective, how important are each of the following when reading Wikimedia projects? - How the page looks on mobile phones


Median = 4
10% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – 0 Not at all important (8%)
2 – 1 Slightly important (9%)
3 – 2 Fairly important (19%)
4 – 3 Quite important (26%)
5 – 4 Very Important (38%)
83% of sampled editors who responded to this question reported that when reading wikipedia it is fairly, quite or very important how the page looks on mobile phones.


Question 215.03 (RE01)

edit
From your perspective, how important are each of the following when reading Wikimedia projects? - How the page looks on tablets


Median = 4
15% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – 0 Not at all important (11%)
2 – 1 Slightly important (9%)
3 – 2 Fairly important (18%)
4 – 3 Quite important (27%)
5 – 4 Very Important (35%)
80% of sampled editors who responded to this question reported that when reading wikipedia it is fairly, quite or very important how the page looks on tablets. 15% of participants who answered the question selected "no opinion.


Question 215.04 (RE01)

edit
From your perspective, how important are each of the following when reading Wikimedia projects? - How the page looks on apps


Median = 4
22% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – 0 Not at all important (17%)
2 – 1 Slightly important (12%)
3 – 2 Fairly important (17%)
4 – 3 Quite important (22%)
5 – 4 Very Important (32%)
71% of sampled editors who responded to this question reported that when reading wikipedia it is fairly, quite or very important how the page looks on apps. 22% of participants who answered the question selected "no opinion.


Question 215.05 (RE01)

edit
From your perspective, how important are each of the following when reading Wikimedia projects? - How the page loads on slow connection speeds


Median = 4
6% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – 0 Not at all important (4%)
2 – 1 Slightly important (9%)
3 – 2 Fairly important (20%)
4 – 3 Quite important (32%)
5 – 4 Very Important (35%)
87% of sampled editors who responded to this question reported that when reading wikipedia it is fairly, quite, or very important how the page looks on apps.


Question 215.06 (RE01)

edit
From your perspective, how important are each of the following when reading Wikimedia projects? - How the page appears in search engine results


Median = 4
4% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – 0 Not at all important (4%)
2 – 1 Slightly important (7%)
3 – 2 Fairly important (20%)
4 – 3 Quite important (31%)
5 – 4 Very Important (38%)
89% of sampled editors who responded to this question reported that when reading wikipedia it is fairly, quite, or very important how the page appears in search engine results.


Question 215.07 (RE01)

edit
From your perspective, how important are each of the following when reading Wikimedia projects? - How the infobox looks on mobile phones


Mean = 3.52
18% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – 0 Not at all important (10%)
2 – 1 Slightly important (12%)
3 – 2 Fairly important (19%)
4 – 3 Quite important (33%)
5 – 4 Very Important (26%)
78% of sampled editors who responded to this question reported that when reading wikipedia it is fairly, quite, or very important how the infobox looks on mobile phones. 18% of participants who answered the survey selected "No opinion".


Question 215.08 (RE01)

edit
From your perspective, how important are each of the following when reading Wikimedia projects? - How tables look on mobile phones


Mean = 3.54
15% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – 0 Not at all important (10%)
2 – 1 Slightly important (11%)
3 – 2 Fairly important (23%)
4 – 3 Quite important (28%)
5 – 4 Very Important (28%)
79% of sampled editors who responded to this question reported that when reading wikipedia it is fairly, quite or very important how tables look on mobile phones. 15% of participants who answered the question selected "no opinion"


Question 215.09 (RE01)

edit
From your perspective, how important are each of the following when reading Wikimedia projects? - Whether the content is open-licensed


Median = 4
14% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – 0 Not at all important (10%)
2 – 1 Slightly important (9%)
3 – 2 Fairly important (16%)
4 – 3 Quite important (25%)
5 – 4 Very Important (41%)
66% of sampled editors who responded to this question reported that when reading wikipedia it is quite important or very important whether the content is open-licensed.


Question 215.1 (RE01)

edit
From your perspective, how important are each of the following when reading Wikimedia projects? - Whether the embedded media does not use proprietary platforms


Median = 4
29% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – 0 Not at all important (8%)
2 – 1 Slightly important (13%)
3 – 2 Fairly important (22%)
4 – 3 Quite important (28%)
5 – 4 Very Important (29%)
57% of sampled editors who responded to this question reported that when reading wikipedia it is quite important or very important whether the embedded media does not use proprietary platforms.


Question 215.11 (RE01)

edit
From your perspective, how important are each of the following when reading Wikimedia projects? - Whether the content always uses freely-licensed images


Median = 4
15% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – 0 Not at all important (11%)
2 – 1 Slightly important (11%)
3 – 2 Fairly important (18%)
4 – 3 Quite important (28%)
5 – 4 Very Important (32%)
60% of sampled editors who responded to this question reported that when reading wikipedia it is quite important or very important whether the content always uses freely-licensed images.


Question 216.01 (CT01)

edit
Do you feel the Wikimedia Foundation is meeting the technical needs of Wikimedia contributors in the following areas? - Reviewing recent changes


Mean = 3.82
9% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – Not at all (2%)
2 – Slightly (7%)
3 – Moderately (19%)
4 – Mostly (51%)
5 – Completely (21%)
72% of sampled very active editors who participated in the survey feel that the Wikimedia Foundation is mostly or completely meeting the technical needs of reviewing recent changes.


Question 216.02 (CT01)

edit
Do you feel the Wikimedia Foundation is meeting the technical needs of Wikimedia contributors in the following areas? - Reviewing new articles


Mean = 3.73
15% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – Not at all (2%)
2 – Slightly (9%)
3 – Moderately (21%)
4 – Mostly (49%)
5 – Completely (19%)
68% of sampled very active editors who participated in the survey feel that the Wikimedia Foundation is mostly or completely meeting the technical needs of reviewing new articles.


Question 216.03 (CT01)

edit
Do you feel the Wikimedia Foundation is meeting the technical needs of Wikimedia contributors in the following areas? - Identifying and surfacing content problems


Mean = 3.2
18% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – Not at all (5%)
2 – Slightly (22%)
3 – Moderately (31%)
4 – Mostly (32%)
5 – Completely (10%)
42% of sampled very active editors who participated in the survey feel that the Wikimedia Foundation is mostly or completely meeting the technical needs of identifying and surfacing content problems.


Question 216.04 (CT01)

edit
Do you feel the Wikimedia Foundation is meeting the technical needs of Wikimedia contributors in the following areas? - Managing media


Mean = 3.44
23% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – Not at all (3%)
2 – Slightly (14%)
3 – Moderately (31%)
4 – Mostly (40%)
5 – Completely (12%)
52% of sampled very active editors who participated in the survey feel that the Wikimedia Foundation is mostly or completely meeting the technical needs of managing media.


Question 216.05 (CT01)

edit
Do you feel the Wikimedia Foundation is meeting the technical needs of Wikimedia contributors in the following areas? - Working with templates


Mean = 3.31
19% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – Not at all (4%)
2 – Slightly (19%)
3 – Moderately (32%)
4 – Mostly (32%)
5 – Completely (13%)
45% of sampled very active editors who participated in the survey feel that the Wikimedia Foundation is mostly or completely meeting the technical needs of working with templates.


Question 216.06 (CT01)

edit
Do you feel the Wikimedia Foundation is meeting the technical needs of Wikimedia contributors in the following areas? - Categorizing content


Mean = 3.46
16% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – Not at all (4%)
2 – Slightly (14%)
3 – Moderately (30%)
4 – Mostly (36%)
5 – Completely (16%)
52% of sampled very active editors who participated in the survey feel that the Wikimedia Foundation is mostly or completely meeting the technical needs of categorizing content


Question 216.07 (CT01)

edit
Do you feel the Wikimedia Foundation is meeting the technical needs of Wikimedia contributors in the following areas? - Supporting gadgets


Mean = 3.32
41% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – Not at all (5%)
2 – Slightly (17%)
3 – Moderately (32%)
4 – Mostly (35%)
5 – Completely (12%)
47% of sampled very active editors who participated in the survey feel that the Wikimedia Foundation is mostly or completely meeting the technical needs of supporting gadgets.


Question 216.08 (CT01)

edit
Do you feel the Wikimedia Foundation is meeting the technical needs of Wikimedia contributors in the following areas? - Bots and third party tools


Mean = 3.25
41% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – Not at all (8%)
2 – Slightly (15%)
3 – Moderately (34%)
4 – Mostly (30%)
5 – Completely (13%)
43% of sampled very active editors who participated in the survey feel that the Wikimedia Foundation is mostly or completely meeting the technical needs of bots and third party tools.


Question 219 (TC15)

edit
Over the last 12 months, in which of the following ways have you contributed to Wikimedia or Mediawiki software projects? Select all that apply.

Participants could select more than one option

7% did not select an option [?]

1 – Create software related to Wikimedia (21%)
2 – Help test new Wikimedia Foundation products (32%)
3 – Help document Wikimedia Foundation software products (15%)
4 – Submit bugs related to Wikimedia Foundation products through phabricator (44%)
5 – Use Wikimedia projects and products (72%)
6 – Other (specify): (12%)
From survey participants who have participated in developing software, 44% reported submitting bugs, 32% reported testing software, and 72% reported being users of Wikimedia projects.


Question 220 (TC45)

edit
In the last 12 months, have you helped translate anything about new Wikimedia software into different languages?


Median = 0

1 – No (77%)
2 – Yes (23%)
23% of sampled editors who participated in the survey reported having helped translate anything about new Wikimedia software into different languages.


Question 221.01 (TC46)

edit
When you helped to translate, to what extent was it easy or difficult to find the following information? - Availability of new translations


Median = 3
19% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – Very difficult (7%)
2 – Difficult (19%)
3 – Neither difficult nor easy (27%)
4 – Easy (29%)
5 – Very easy (19%)
48% of sampled editors who responded to this question reported that when they translate they find it easy or very easy to find the availability of new translations. 19% of those who answered the question selected "no opinion".


Question 221.02 (TC46)

edit
When you helped to translate, to what extent was it easy or difficult to find the following information? - Translations to update


Median = 4
18% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – Very difficult (4%)
2 – Difficult (23%)
3 – Neither difficult nor easy (23%)
4 – Easy (39%)
5 – Very easy (12%)
51% of sampled editors who responded to this question reported that when they translate they find it easy or very easy to find translations to update. 18% of those who answered the question selected "no opinion".


Question 221.03 (TC46)

edit
When you helped to translate, to what extent was it easy or difficult to find the following information? - Progression status for a translation


Median = 3.5
21% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – Very difficult (4%)
2 – Difficult (14%)
3 – Neither difficult nor easy (32%)
4 – Easy (33%)
5 – Very easy (17%)
50% of sampled editors who responded to this question reported that when they translate they find it easy or very easy to find progression status for a translation. 21% of those who answered the question selected "no opinion".


Question 221.04 (TC46)

edit
When you helped to translate, to what extent was it easy or difficult to find the following information? - Priority of different translations


Median = 3
24% selected "No opinion" [?]

1 – Very difficult (15%)
2 – Difficult (19%)
3 – Neither difficult nor easy (35%)
4 – Easy (21%)
5 – Very easy (10%)
31% of sampled editors who responded to this question reported that when they translate they find it easy or very easy to find the priority of different translations. 24% of those who answered the question selected "no opinion".


Question 222 (TC47)

edit
When you help with translation, which of the following do you lack in order to translate comfortably? (select all that apply)

Participants could select more than one option

18% did not select an option [?]

1 – Definition of terms (46%)
2 – Context for a specific translation (35%)
3 – Use of the product (16%)
4 – Suggested translation (26%)
5 – Other (specify) (15%)
46% of participants selected that they lack definition of terms to translate comfortably.


Question 223 (RE02)

edit
When a team from the Wikimedia Foundation would like feedback about a proposed software feature, where is the best place to reach you?

Participants could select more than one option

1% did not select an option [?]

1 – My Wikimedia project's village pump (24%)
2 – My Wikimedia project user talk page (70%)
3 – Phabricator (4%)
4 – Mailing list (specify) (3%)
5 – Other (specify) (5%)
6 – Nowhere, I don't want to hear about it (4%)
7 – Email this user feature (37%)
70% of survey participants selected they would prefer to be reached on their Wikimedia project user page about giving feedback to changes in software.


Question 224 (TC41)

edit
In which of the following ways do you receive updates and news about WMF software development? (select all that apply)

Participants could select more than one option

3% did not select an option [?]

1 – Meta:Tech/News (21%)
2 – Wikimedia Foundation mailing lists (16%)
3 – Wikimedia news (Signpost/Kurier/RAW) (17%)
4 – Wikimedia Foundation product newsletters (Visual editor/Discovery weekly) (8%)
5 – Community pages/Village pump on wikimedia project (43%)
6 – Wikimedia Blog (11%)
7 – Tech blogs and websites outside of Wikimedia Foundation (18%)
8 – Social networks (16%)
9 – Other (4%)
10 – I don’t receive these updates (30%)
11 – Wikitech mailing list (7%)
12 – Phabricator (8%)
43% of participants selected receiving updates about WMF software on community pages/village pumps, and 30% selected that they do not receive these updates.


Question 225 (TC42)

edit
This question has a known error

The data may need to be filtered based on responses to Question 224

Which of the following channels do you prefer to receive updates and news about WMF software development? (select all that apply)

Participants could select more than one option

2% did not select an option [?]

1 – Meta:Tech/News (20%)
2 – Wikimedia Foundation mailing lists (21%)
3 – Wikimedia news (Signpost/Kurier/RAW) (18%)
4 – Wikimedia Foundation product newsletters (Visual editor/Discovery weekly) (10%)
5 – Community pages/Village pump on wikimedia project (39%)
6 – Wikimedia Blog (11%)
7 – Tech blogs and websites outside of Wikimedia Foundation (6%)
8 – Social networks (17%)
9 – Other (4%)
10 – I don’t receive these updates (25%)
11 – Wikitech mailing list (7%)
12 – Phabricator (5%)
From the survey participants, 39% prefer to receive updates on community pages/village pumps and 25% do not receive these updates.


Question 226 (TC43)

edit
Which are the most important announcements you are interested in hearing about? (select all that apply)

Participants could select more than one option

6% did not select an option [?]

1 – Announcements of new project ideas (61%)
2 – Design reviews (30%)
3 – First prototypes to test (29%)
4 – Beta features (54%)
5 – Deployment plans (37%)
6 – New releases for products (42%)
7 – Products updates (47%)
8 – Testing sessions (24%)
From survey paticipants, 61% selected wanting to hear about announcements of new project ideas and 54% selected wanting to hear about beta features.

Question list

edit
Goal 5 - "Improving collaboration with affiliates related to partnerships"
Goal 6 - "Improving software for contributors"
Goal 7 - "Increasing software awareness and use"
Goal 8 - "Growing the Wikimedia technical community"
Goal 9 - "Improving information sharing for program leaders and affiliates"
Goal 10 - "Developing the capacity of affiliates"
Goal 11 - "Developing the capacity of program leaders"
Goal 12 - "Improving access to research materials by contributors"
Goal 13 - "Improving understanding of movement fundraising and fundraising needs"
Goal 14 - "Increasing awareness of GLAM and Libraries"
Goal 15 - "Increasing knowledge and capacity related to policy issues"
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Community_Insights/2016-17_Report/Audience_2/Goal4&oldid=24905571"