Talk:Community Wishlist Survey 2016

2016

I object to this and this reversion on the grounds that the Foundation should not preempt community suggestions by removing community work because of arbitrary scheduling.

Please see Talk:Community Wishlist Survey 2015#2016. EllenCT (talk) 00:09, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Translation bugs

<div style="font-weight:bold;font-size:125%;text-align:center">Proposals phase, Nov 7–20</div>

and

<div style="text-align:center">Submit proposals for features and changes that you want the [[Community Tech]] team to work on,<br/>or comment on other proposals, and help to make them better! ([[#What happens during the proposal phase?|learn more]])

are not marked for translation, they was missed between T:142 and T:143.

Also, the category shows no items in languages other then Englsih. For example, the Chinese page still shows no participants and proposals in the page.

So I am swinging my wand to ask @DannyH (WMF): and @Johan (WMF): help me making those no bug wishes come true. :P

--Liang(WMTW) (talk) 00:08, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Ping doesn't actually ping unless you sign your post in the same edit. Like this: @DannyH (WMF) and Johan (WMF):. — Gestrid (talk) 01:00, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

I've fixed the first 2, but I'm not sure how to fix the category translation problems. Ping @MusikAnimal (WMF): who set up the backend for this. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 01:28, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Thank you @Gestrid and Quiddity (WMF): for the quick fix! I hope the counter bug can be solved soon :D --Liang(WMTW) (talk) 06:25, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

That bot was put together by MusikAnimal (WMF), who won't be around today. We might have to wait for him to come back tomorrow. Sorry for the irritating bug! -- DannyH (WMF) (talk) 17:17, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

We're looking into this. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 19:26, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Hey! I'm back :) The names of the categories themselves you should be able to translate easily, I think. They are shown on the parent wishlist page using the syntax {{:WM:WISHLIST2016/Category button|Name of category}}. The one other thing however is translating the word "proposal(s)". That lives in the template, Community Wishlist Survey 2016/Category button. We'll need to translate just the part that uses {{PLURAL}}, towards the end of the template code. I'm not well versed in how to do translations in wikitext, so will leave it to Johan (WMF) and others if that's OK, but let me know if there's anything you need from me :) Thanks! MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 21:34, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Translating the {{PLURAL}} using the Translate extension added a language bar to every category and pretty much broke the page when I tested it. Continuing to investigate this. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 02:12, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

@Johan (WMF) and MusikAnimal (WMF):That's so nice, now it's even clearer for Chinese users. I don't have a technology background, can someone explain to me what it is "moderation tools" so I can translate this better? Is it for mitigate conflicts, or it is more for facilitation purpose? And also new bugs report -- after the translation of categories, the counter of projects seems broke, and also the new Chinese categories cannot link back to the original pages of English ones so the counter is not working well either. I tried to use my weak wiki mark up skill to fix it but it broke even in a larger scale, oops so I change them back! --Liang(WMTW) (talk) 03:07, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

@Johan (WMF) and MusikAnimal (WMF):Thank you, I found the category buttons are functioning properly now! Maybe the last bug I found now is this one in the end of the zh page - I cannot translate the following sentence and the counter inside is not working either -

So far: [[Community Wishlist Survey 2016/zh/Total proposals]] proposals, [[Community Wishlist Survey 2016/zh/Total editors]] editors

--Liang(WMTW) (talk) 03:19, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, the problem was that when translated, they would direct you to a page with the name of the translation instead. I've updated all the links and they should work now. Sorry for the inconvenience. Looking at the counter at the bottom too. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 03:25, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Yeah I don't get it. {{ROOTPAGENAME}} was the trick we used at Community Wishlist Survey 2016/Category button so that it grabs only "Community Wishlist Survey 2016" and not "Community Wishlist Survey 2016/lang", but that doesn't work for the counter at the bottom – even if I use the direct path of Community Wishlist Survey 2016/Total editors. It still shows Community Wishlist Survey 2016/fr/Total editors (for French, same for other languages). We could create redirects but surely there's a way for force the correct path? MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 03:34, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure what happened, but this seems to be working now (I used an absolute path). Still need to figure out to properly translate it, along with the PLURAL use in Community Wishlist Survey 2016/Category button. We are seeking help from an expert via email MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 16:45, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

These should all be fixed now! :D MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 20:14, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

No voting yet

Hi, just to make one thing clear: We're not counting votes yet. That phase will start on November 28.

The reason for this is that the proposals are discussed and might be changed when people comment on them, so you'd risk ending up voting for something that then morphed into something else. And we'd really want to avoid the Community Tech team deciding what had changed enough or hadn't to count the votes, because we might end up misrepresenting what you wanted. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 19:26, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Navigation among pages

I've been wandering through the 2016 Wishlist consultation pages this morning and I noticed that as the pages are set up now, a user can navigate from the main Wishlist consultation page to the various subpages to read proposals, but once on one of the subpages, there is no way other than the "back" button to navigate back to the main page and/or other categories. The category subpages don't currently have actual categories (in the mediawiki sense) that would allow navigation among them, either.

I'd like to suggest something to ease user navigation of these pages a bit: wrapping the "categories" navigation boxes at the top of the main page into a template which would then be added to all the category subpages (i.e. here) as well. The main page version takes up a fair amount of screen real estate, but you could condense it a bit and slip it into Category Header template that already appears on all the subpages, or you could perhaps create a simple one-liner navbox (do we have any navboxes that work on mobile?) and slap it on the bottom of the pages.

I'd have gone ahead and streamlined the navigation myself, but I wanted to check that it wouldn't be somehow disrupting the page structures Community Tech set up. If my suggestion is workable and a spare set of hands would be helpful, though, I'd be happy to help make the changes :) Fluffernutter (talk) 16:25, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

@Fluffernutter: The "Community Wishlist Survey 2016" heading on each category page links back to the main survey page. Is this insufficient, or maybe we could make it more clear that it is a link? There are 15 categories, so I can't envision a clean way to browse categories while viewing a particular category page. As you say, it would take up a lot of real estate, even if they were plain links. We could however have "Previous category" and "Next category" links, with cute little arrows. How does that sound? MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 18:43, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

@MusikAnimal (WMF): Yeah, I think a "previous"/"next" should do it. A full set of choices would be slicker, but you're right that it's hard to picture how to cram that all in, and prev/next arrows at least let readers move among pages. Thanks for the quick response Fluffernutter (talk) 22:07, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

I know some WikiProjects on English Wikipedia have tabs at the top. Would that work here? Just include the category names at the top in tabs, and don't include within the tabs how many proposals they each have. — Gestrid (talk) 22:15, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes but there are 15 categories, so this isn't going to look great unless you have a high-resolution screen. I will talk with the team about the prev/next buttons and hopefully get that out soon! Thanks MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 22:48, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Oh, a prev/next button is a really good idea. Fluffernutter, thanks for posting. -- DannyH (WMF) (talk) 23:21, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

We now have prev/next buttons! Also there's Category:Community Wishlist Survey 2016. Thanks again for the recommendation :) MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 00:05, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Notification

I get lots of notifications from lots of projects at the top of my watchlist; indeed, some of them appear on every page I visit, no matter the project. So why didn't I hear anything about this survey?

You need to publicize this far and wide, in every venue possible, to really reach the whole community. I stumbled across a small post about it on a village pump I don't normally hang out at. Please don't rely on serendipity or word of mouth; address us directly. Gorthian (talk) 22:58, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

There's going to be a CentralNotice banner at the top of the page coming up soon, for contributors that have more than 1,000 edits. We're definitely trying to spread the word as much as we can -- do you have any suggestions for where we should go? Thanks, -- DannyH (WMF) (talk) 23:18, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Many editors (including myself) find CentralNotices kind of annoying and have them turned off through various means. — Gestrid (talk) 00:24, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Yes, for that very reason I thought we could instead show a watchlist notice on enwiki, where there is a popular gadget to hide central notices. It's a little too late for that I think, since the central notice was targeted for all wikis, and we probably shouldn't go overboard with a watchlist and central notice. We also made mention of the survey in the last issue of the The Signpost. I can do a little more advertising myself on enwiki, but feel free to spread the word by any means! Thanks MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 00:36, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Gorthian, as DannyH (WMF) pointed out, that's coming!

We know that some editors dislike the CentralNotice banners, and we don't want anyone to miss this because of it, but ... well, if people are on the wikis to edit the encyclopedia/dictionary/travel guide/etc and feel CentralNotice banners asking them to take part in some movement-wide thing – vote on the Board of Trustees, take part in this international cooperation, comment on Wikimedia Foundation strategy, whatever it is – aren't relevant, at some point we've got to ask ourselves if our response should be to turn up the noise. (Some disable them because they dislike banners, of course, but some because they want to focus on what they're doing on their wiki – especially since these processes tend to be mainly in English, even when we really try to make them multilingual.) On the other hand, we think this process is important, and for those of us who work on it it's of course a matter of pride the more people who take part. (: So we're trying to find the balance between reaching as many editors as possible without being too annoying. This is not saying nothing can't be done better, just explaining how we've reasoned.

For transparency, what we've been using or working on so far:

On-wiki

• CentralNotice banner (upcoming – our main way of reaching out)
• Newsletters:
  • The Signpost
  • Tech News (~75 community pages, 580 individual subscribers)
  • Wikipedia:Kurier
• Meta Main Page
• Village Pumps: Posting on our home wikis if no one else has, asking others we know to do the same, and encouraging the communities to spread it on their wikis (thanks for English Wikipedia, Gestrid)

Off-wiki

• Mailing lists (included: asking everyone to spread the word)
  • wikimedia-l
  • wikitech-l
  • wikitech-ambassadors-l
  • Various regional mailing lists
• Wikimedia Blog (about a project done for last year's wishlist and a notice about the upcoming wishlist survey)
• Twitter (not that we consider it a core way to reach out to Wikimedia editors, but you know, in addition to everything else)
• Various Facebook groups where Wikimedia editors discuss
• Some Wikimedia IRC channels

We'll do a new round of announcements when it's time to vote. Are there other ways we should be spreading the word we're missing? /Johan (WMF) (talk) 01:16, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
I don't know anything about the different ways of communicating on-wiki; probably Central Notices was what I was thinking of. I always check out the banners or notices, and just dismiss those I don't care about. But shouldn't we have gotten notices beforehand? You're three days into the proposal process already. And I encourage you to turn up the noise! Send out a notice at every stage! Send notices to talk pages! Let us inundate you with proposals! :-) Gorthian (talk) 01:43, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

The problem with that, Gorthian, is that people will just stop listening at some point if they turn up the noise too much, much like a lot of people do with (at least) US election ads. (I'm not sure about other countries.) However, I do agree that one talk page notice for some editors may be appropriate. That is, if someone was to send out a mass-message, exclude newer editors (based on user creation date, not edit count, since many editors edit a lot in their first few days or weeks of creating an account) and blocked editors. Just include the schedule within the notice. — Gestrid (talk) 02:26, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

By the way, you're welcome, Johan (WMF). I do feel this is important, as this is something that could make or break some great ideas for English Wikipedia (which is arguably the most important Wikimedia project). — Gestrid (talk) 02:40, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

I think we're unlikely to post on every established editor's talk page: In my experience, people tend to consider that too spammy. Anecdote: Last year, some editors were messaged to see if they would like to comment on new development for a feature they had previously commented on – targeted specifically to users who one could have suspected would be more interested than the average editor. On my home wiki, this led to one disgruntled admin blocking the MediaWiki message delivery bot that delivers updates, newsletters etc. And that was just a few, targeted editors.

We're considering pinging those who participated in the process last year, though. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 07:54, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

The CentralNotice banner is in rotation now (together with a couple of other CN banners). /Johan (WMF) (talk) 14:52, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

I think there are enough push marketing strategy for now, Signpost, mailing-list has very high importance in my opinion. By the way, in Chinese Wikimedia community, we are using facebook posts and telegram/irc chat to spread this campaign. I can see wikisource community is also using its wikisource-l mailing list to pitch its community. I think this campaign can be better promoted if there are enough word-of-mouth. In that case, we would have proper target group rather then the contributors that don't want to be bothered. --Liang(WMTW) (talk) 05:26, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Of course, we really want different communities to have equal chance to get the information. But hopefully he CentralNotice banner in combination with everything else will help with that. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 09:19, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Everyone who participated last year but haven't this year (or hadn't when the list was generated, at least) has now been pinged on their Meta talk pages, which we hope is more on the helpful than intrusive side of communication. (: /Johan (WMF) (talk) 13:22, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

in my experience a targeting like that is rarely considered intrusive (never in my case, and I target lots of people, usually less than 1% dislike it). I was scrolling this text to the bottom to suggest it, so I also think it's a good idea. I also think that some people just spend more to time opposing it than just ignoring it because they kinda like to do that, and they would do with something else. if you have to choose, you usually prefer to be criticized for informing than for not doing it. Someone criticizes you in any case...--Alexmar983 (talk) 15:36, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

I agree, this is the first I've hear about the survey, and it's already too late to submit a proposal. --Lasunncty (talk) 05:38, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

New user interface for Sindhi Wikipedia & Wiktionary

Hi, I am Mehtab Ahmed from Sindhi Wikipedia an active Wikipedian there. Our Wikipedia possesses an old wiki interface, many option like "sandbox", "featured content", " contents" etc. are missing there, can I submit a wish for providing us with new interface.--مھتاب احمد (talk) 19:32, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

مھتاب احمد: This is not really the right place for it, partly because other users are more likely to vote for things that would affect not just Sindhi Wikipedia and Wiktionary, partly because it's up to you – exactly what links are included is not something that requires developers to develop anything. Does your community need help with fixing this? /Johan (WMF) (talk) 05:34, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

That is, have you brought it up with your community (if you have dicsussions – I know you don't have that many active users)? /Johan (WMF) (talk) 05:39, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

User:Johan (WMF):Yes, we don't have many active users but we need to attract people. That's why we have discussed these things in our community, but we are unable to fix anything due to lack of technical knowledge. If you can help us kindly guide us. Thank you. Regards.--مھتاب احمد (talk) 06:20, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Sure, I (or someone else) will be in touch; this is probably not the best place for this discussion. (: /Johan (WMF) (talk) 09:20, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Community Wishlist Survey 2016/Categories/Commons

Moved from Talk:Community Wishlist Survey 2016/Categories/Commons MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 17:55, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

A lot of abbreviations which make this and other pages difficult to read by people not familiar with the subject... GLAM, WLM etc... Paul Hermans (talk) 14:58, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Paul Hermans, thanks for posting -- I added links to clarify the acronyms on Community Wishlist Survey 2016/Categories/Commons. I hope this helps. -- DannyH (WMF) (talk) 20:52, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Maybe we should make sure all acronyms are explained before the proposals are voted on? /Johan (WMF) (talk) 13:24, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Not a proposal but an idea

Moved from Talk:Community Wishlist Survey 2016/Categories/Editing MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 17:55, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

I do not know what is the right place to write this but I am sure my saying will reach those who can take decision. I found that there is lot of abuse going on at regional language Wikipedia. As the abusive words are not in English, it is difficult to prove that it is abuse. Many good editors turn away from regional languages because they feel abused. I would request some kind of tool / mechanism which will ensure that proper action is taken whenever abuse occurs on regional language WP. Thanks for reading. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 06:03, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

I've seen al lot of good editors leave the Dutch version in my 13 years here on wikipedia. I've been moderating for a few years as well but the excessive tolerance shown to those who are not interested in contributing with the right spirit chased me away as well for a period of time. Respect towards others comes first, more than knowledge. Paul Hermans (talk) 08:53, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Abhijeet Safai: Is this because you lack administrators and thus have to turn to others (e.g. stewards) who don't speak the local language, or do is it that you perceive that your local community doesn't take abuse seriously enough? /Johan (WMF) (talk) 13:30, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

I think the reasons are many. You have pointed out rightly two reasons. Admins are less and current admins do not have experience of editing in EN WP. They get influenced by opinion leaders in the community who speak logically most of the times but can become illogical too as we all humans become at some point of time. Then ego game starts when anything is objected against seniors. I guess Indian culture is also responsible for this point of attitude where we are taught that giving respect to elders is more important than learning to ask right questions. Asking questions is itself seen as a rudeness here sometimes. And yes, as you have said, taking abuse seriously is not the practice. Understanding that this is abuse, is itself lacking many a times. There are people like me who can at least have courage to say it out, but there are others who will never say a word. They will just see the abuse and will go away silently. Because talking about abuse may also attract further abuse when the community is very small. They even do not allow discussions on talk pages in English. So it is very difficult to convey the point. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 13:06, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

we could suggest a proposal for leadership development about civility engagement and enforcement. Slowking4 (talk) 13:25, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Bad design

What genius decided to split Commons and multimedia into separate categories? --Piotrus (talk) 08:30, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Multimedia is not equivalent to Commons. Looking at current proposals, for example "Support for video on iOS devices" is in Multimedia and wouldn't fit under Commons, and for example "Tool for mass downloading" is under Commons and wouldn't fit under Multimedia. Matma Rex (talk) 17:17, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

whatever, like categories on commons, the divide and conquer here does not matter in the slightest. i'm sure that the people who care about multimedia could care less about commons and vice versa. Slowking4 (talk) 03:08, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

I honestly can't tell what you're trying to say, but it sounds like you support my point? Matma Rex (talk) 12:18, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Humble proposals for the sections of next year

Many topic in the "miscellaneous section" are about user accounts. For example avatar-like images, SUL management, security features. There is also a "Link main account with bot accounts in notifications" in Bot and gadgets... I guess now that we have the SUL and it is constantly evolving every year, this could become a section on its own? In the end we are done by users, so it is strange that what is linked to this aspect is hosted in a miscellaneous section, without its own "dignity". Is there a reason because of that?

Also I think that the "sysops and stewards" section should become something about "users flags" more in general. Sysops tasks are devolved on many platform to other flag levels, and there is a constant push for new types of flag management.--Alexmar983 (talk) 13:44, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

Alexmar983: I don't think one should try to read too much into how we've categorized things – we've just picked som areas we guessed would get a lot of proposals, and also done some tweaking during the proposal phase, thinking that if we saw some emerging patterns we'd get new categories. I've added your suggestion to a list of things to think about next year. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 15:34, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Johan (WMF) don't worry, I haven't read too much at all into that. The number of proposal about user account's management is there. When I saw something related to that for the 4th time, it just popped in my mind. I don't believe a perfect separation is possible, but if it comes following the flow... good luck for next year.--Alexmar983 (talk) 15:56, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

"Work queues", "inventory pages", or "to-do" displays for each WikiProject and entire communities

As I and User:TheDJ [1] mentioned in 2015, as I was inspired by the mention of http://www.wikihow.com/Special:CommunityDashboard in the talk at the 2012 Wikimania, I would like to see a gadget/page like this created. Has anyone been working on this, or does anyone know if this has already been proposed for 2016? Thanks. Biosthmors (talk) 17:19, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

I think this could be useful. Particularly if the work queue and/or inventory pages display articles that have been automatically identified as being within the project's scope and in need of particular improvements—and we now have several services available that do exactly that (think SuggestBot or ORES). Jtmorgan (talk) 18:31, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

@Biosthmors: You might be interested in my suggestions for WikiProject tasks at w:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_X/Archive_2#Improving_WikiProject_participation starting at "So for instance I think that Wikipedia:Community portal#Todo ..." (ctrl+f for it). --Fixuture (talk) 13:25, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Update

To let everyone get an understanding of how the process is going: This week have been/are trying to get the proposals in order. If we think it necessary but haven't done so earlier, we're asking people to add more detail. We're merging some proposals where people have suggested the same thing or splitting up some, so that people can vote on the specific development so they can vote for the actual things they want to see. (Also: Speaking from experience last year, when a proposal is too big and not specific enough, there's a risk the Community Tech team will do some development and consider it done, but then some people might have voted for it because of hopes that were never fulfilled. It's better if we have a common understanding from the very beginning.) In some cases we're archiving proposals. The most common reason for this is that they aren't really requesting technical development, but is mainly a policy change that should be decided by the Wikimedia communities. The Community Tech team can't decide on community policy, and a technical wishlist is probably not a satisfying process – often the proposer should probably look at Requests for comment instead. It could also be there's nothing we can do, and it feels dishonest to let people vote on proposals that we can't fix. We're also trying to comment (or get others to comment) on tickets if there are technical difficulties involved that the community should be aware of that could be limiting factors.

On Monday, we're going to start the voting phase. Then we'll do our best to get the word out to make sure people can come and vote. Your help will be most appreciated. (: /Johan (WMF) (talk) 14:41, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

@Johan (WMF) and DannyH (WMF): Why was the Wikisource app proposal archived? It didn't seem to go push for any policy change. NMaia (talk) 02:06, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi NMaia. This is the reason that was given at the time: "Certainly it is a terrific idea to get more people reading Wikisource on mobile, but a Wikisource-specific app is too big a project for Community Tech and as @Jberkel says above, there are already many ways of reading epubs on mobile and that perhaps we can instead target making our content more accessible to these people. Sorry to have to archive this proposal." We simply wouldn't be able to do both the app and address other wishes as well. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 02:10, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Voting phase has started

You can now vote on proposals. (: We'll get the word out on the wikis in the coming days. The voting ends on December 12. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 18:24, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Our main way of getting the word out will yet again be a CentralNotice banner. The current plan is to have the CN banner up on Wednesday. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 19:19, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

Is it appropriate for the proposer of a proposal to also vote on it, or is support automatically assumed? --Tryptofish (talk) 00:10, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Support is automatically assumed, so every proposal will get a +1 from the proposer. You can also feel free to post a support vote on your own; it can help to get the ball rolling and encourage other people to support it. :) -- DannyH (WMF) (talk) 00:30, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

I can't vote a proposal just now (3rd from the top) as no "edit" enabled, why? DPdH (talk) 10:04, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi DPdH, which category is this and what's the name of the proposal? I 've glanced at all the categories can't find any that hasn't the right level of headings and thus edit buttons. If you have problems with a specific proposal, you could click "edit" for the entire page it's on (the entire category). /Johan (WMF) (talk) 13:45, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

It's possible you were looking at an older version of the page, in which case MediaWiki doesn't display section edit links. Matma Rex (talk) 14:22, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I think was an older version, now can edit. DPdH (talk) 01:51, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Translatability

So normally we use the nifty Translate extension, which is very helpful if you're a translator. However, some were concerned about translate tags everywhere when a lot of people who don't normally edit multilingual wikis are invited to take part of the process, and it generally works better when pages are not constantly edited. There's now a link to a subpage from each proposal for translations, if people feel they'd like to make them available for more Wikimedians who might not understand English very well. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 03:48, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

As I said one year ago, I expect little utility to come from this reiteration of the survey in an English-only manner. Translatability should have been the number 1 design concern. Nemo 11:33, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Leaderboard

Inspire campaigns have a leaderboard. If possible, could this be done here? It's very difficult to see out of so many proposals on many pages which are succeeding. BethNaught (talk) 13:42, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure that's a good idea. Each proposal should have equal exposure. They even have a bot that rotates the proposals every few hours so they get equal exposure. — Gestrid (talk) 18:31, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Agreed with Gestrid. I want voters to carefully review the proposals rather than get caught up in a horse race. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 18:51, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

I also agree with the two editors above that this would be unhelpful. It's a discussion, not a tournament. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:45, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

It will only encourage herd mentality and behavior. 4nn1l2 (talk) 14:57, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Having been on the receiving end as an underdog for most of my wiki-life, I was surprised to see this sentiment expressed. I was looking for a way to find the less popular wishlists, so I could support those that I believe are are deserving. I know I am supposed to sift through all the material, but I am only a volunteer and my time is limited. Ottawahitech (talk) 16:39, 10 December 2016 (UTC)please ping me

Necessary to be logged in

Clarifying one thing: You need to be logged in (to a not newly created account) to be able to support a proposal. This is, as usual, to diminish the risk of people voting several times for one proposal etc. You can of course comment or raise concerns editing as an IP user. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 21:53, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Should proposers be allowed to vote on their own suggestions?

I think not and hence votes of proposers should probably be removed from the voting sections. --Fixuture (talk) 22:34, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

We'll assume everyone who's proposing something is actually for it as well, so it won't matter when we count the votes. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 23:04, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

I was uncertain about this, and asked about it above, at #Voting phase has started. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:43, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Ten

I'd like to ask about how rigid the number 10 is, as in the top 10 proposals. I want to acknowledge upfront that I do indeed appreciate that there is only so much workload that developers can take on, and also that I am aware of the plan to also implement proposals from smaller groups. But there are an awful lot of proposals that are getting a lot of support this year, and 10 seems to me to be an arbitrary number. I expect that there will be more than 10 proposals where (1) there is a lot of support, (2) the overall discussion indicates that the consensus is that it is a good idea, (3) the proposal aligns well with broader priorities, and (4) the proposal would not be too difficult to implement technically. So I would like to encourage the implementation of more than 10 proposals, perhaps with those ranked below the top 10 prioritized below the top 10. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:52, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

It's mainly an issue of time. The Community Tech team doesn't really dare promise to look at more than the top ten because there's a fair risk we'd let you down. Some tasks will take shorter time, but some popular tasks are very complicated. However, this list will be used at hackathons and other Wikimedia events where we encourage other developers to work at it as well, so not being top ten doesn't automatically mean it'll be ignored. See the status column at Community Wishlist Survey 2015/Results for example. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 00:06, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, it was helpful for me to see how status is being handled. I got the impression from the description of the process that it was more of a hard line than that. (It can be discouraging for editors to feel that they "just missed" being approved.) --Tryptofish (talk) 00:47, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

It's definitely not like all wishes below the top ten will be ignored. (: If something is popular and something the Wikimedia communities want, that's good to know for all developers – Community Tech, volunteer developers, other WMF teams, Wikimedia affiliates etc. Ending up in place #17 can help too. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 00:56, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Voting closes on December 12

Voting will close on December 12 23:59 UTC. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 19:46, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Affirmative action

I have seen some comments in the discussion of the proposals and in the voting that oppose certain proposals because "this already exists on the English Wikipedia" or because they don't "benefit larger projects". I think that we should emphasize support for items that benefit those that need more help, not to try to solve first world problems. In my opinion, we should strive for inclusion of all cultures in Wikipedia, and facilitate contributions from those cultures and areas of the world that are less represented in Wikipedia, and less covered by its content. We don't need to make life easier for contributors to enwiki, it seems to be doing pretty well already, we need to help other Wikipedias so knowledge about other societies and cultures can be added and preserved, even if it is not done in English. If we can make all the wonderful things that are already available in enwiki available to smaller wikis, that would be a very valuable thing, even if it doesn't benefit directly enwiki or the other large Wikipedias. Greetings, Aracali (talk) 05:38, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Since I'm involved in the process and will be working on whatever the communities ask us to work on, I'm not personally going to tell anyone what principles I think they should apply when they decide what to support or not. This is for everyone else to discuss here. (: But to clarify the Community Tech perspective, so everyone's aware of it: As the survey main page points out, we're only counting the supporting votes, since we're using this to create a prioritized backlog rather than make a yes/no decision. Four supporting votes and one opposing will count as four votes for, not three. For us, when we'll look at the list once voting is done, the main function of the opposing votes is as warning: "This is a bad idea because it'll affect ..." – either to tell us we need to make really sure there's actually community support for something, or to investigate potential problems it could cause. Anyone is free to oppose something because they think it's unimportant, but it's an argument in the discussion, not something that'll matter to the Community Tech team if it ends up having enough supporters anyway.

(Also: "After the voting phase, when we have the prioritized backlog, we plan to allocate 75% of our wishlist work to the top 10 wishes, and 25% to proposals important to smaller groups.") /Johan (WMF) (talk) 06:01, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Johan's answer is great, but I would add a few thoughts. 1) there are a number of proposals that say something like "make this thing on enwiki work on other wikis" -- some of these are collecting healthy support. 2) many proposals with enwiki in mind (after all, it has a huge relative editor base) are generic enough to help all wikis. For example, anything that improves watchlists and recent changes patrol for enwiki could help the same on all wikis. 3) the two (apparently) most popular proposals involve supporting non-Latin languages. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 11:23, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

yes, i'm sure that WMF can take a larger view of improving existing processes and tools, and spreading them broadly; i would not expect the english-centric voting to change that much. they did the foreign language support for wikisources, although we did get "cookie block", an item of interest to certain admins only. Slowking4 (talk) 13:09, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

It actually warms my heart that those two "Non-Latin" proposals are gathering so much support. What I am trying to say is that there should be a bias towards helping those that need more help. The fact that this survey is being done in English is already a handicap for people from other cultures, especially those with languages very different from English. I do not like somebody saying "I don't want to see smaller projects send so many support voters that they crowd worthy proposals that benefit larger projects," since to me it sounds like implying some kind of nefarious vote rigging from the "minorities", with enwiki votes more worthy than those coming from smaller projects. It is just the wrong priority. We should strive to make Wikipedia more accessible to everybody, and avoid polishing the cannonball for enwiki – or for the more advanced editors – in detriment of leveling the playing field for everybody. Greetings, Aracali (talk) 14:56, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

I think I know who you are quoting, but it seems to me that parochial interests expressed this blatantly are few and far between, thank goodness. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 17:42, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm guessing that this complaint is being directed at me. I wasn't polishing the cannonball, and I wasn't expressing blatant parochial interests, nor do I appreciate being described that way, thank you very much. I was commenting with a full understanding of the vote analysis process as described quite well by Johan just above. I was commenting with the understanding that what I said would not count as a vote, but would serve as an advisory comment. And my comment, if anyone actually bothered to read it, said that I support implementing the proposal for the projects that it affects. But I was noting how the get-out-the-vote efforts from the non-Latin language projects were actually quite strong, without any need for "affirmative action", and in fact appear very much to be stronger than the get-out-the-vote from enwiki. So I was offering advice to the developers to consider just what I said: not crowding other proposals out of the top ten (particularly when there is already a 25% set-aside). Please get past the red icon at the beginning of my vote, that I chose to make sure my comment would be noticed, and consider what I actually said. Peace. --Tryptofish (talk) 01:19, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

From the Community Tech side, we're excited to see wishes bubbling up that we wouldn't have predicted. That's what the wishlist is about, encouraging people to advocate for the things they want and need. I was initially surprised by the non-Latin edit summary proposal getting so much support, and then I realized: Russian WP is the fourth largest in terms of very active editors, and if you can't write a decent edit summary, that's something that would bother you every time you edit. As an English speaker, I never would have known that was a problem, but for folks who speak Russian, it's a problem that comes up every day. Considering the size of the task, it'll probably end up being high impact, compared to the relatively small cost.

In general, we decided to only count support votes, so that people wouldn't feel the need to downvote other proposals. I'm glad we have people commenting with opposes and neutrals, because it helps to show all sides of a question, but actual voter suppression doesn't work here. :) There's a few more days left, so if anybody's nervous about whether your favorite proposal will make it into the top ten -- you've got the weekend to convince people that proposal is worthwhile. Good luck! -- DannyH (WMF) (talk) 01:44, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Translations

@MusikAnimal (WMF): the recent changes in the 2016 survey page, about the closing of the voting phase, do not appear in the translation pages, so they cannot be translated. Could you please look into this? Thanks, Aracali (talk) 15:02, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

@Aracali: The page has now been marked for translation. Sorry about that! MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 17:02, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

A suggestion for the next Community Wishlist Survey

For the next Community Wishlist Survey, please consider informing proposal makers to create a new page for each proposal instead of a new section. I would like to have the proposals in new pages because, some categories receive a lot of proposals and there's a lot of discussion in each of them. When I tried to load the page for the "Editing" section of this year's proposal in my mobile browser, it just freezed due to the large amount of content in it as a few proposals had a lot of discussions in them (as a result of which I couldn't vote this year :( ).

If each proposal was created in a new page in that section and if links to each proposal was added in the main page of the section, it would be easier for the person who wants to vote or discuss to load only the page of the proposal he wants avoiding the loading of the unwanted discussions of other proposals he is not interested in. It would not be heavy on the browser thus preventing users from getting frustrated due to browser freezes.

Just a little suggestion I wanted to make out of my bad experience. :) -- Kaartic ^{correct me, if i'm wrong} 14:13, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Kaartic, thanks for your suggestion. I'm sorry to hear that you weren't able to vote on that page at all! We split the proposals into a bunch of categories so it wouldn't get too overwhelming, but the Editing page really did get very long. We'll definitely keep that in mind when we plan the format for next year's survey. Thanks! -- DannyH (WMF) (talk) 02:59, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

You're welcome. -- Kaartic ^{correct me, if i'm wrong}

Results

You can find the results of the survey on Community Wishlist Survey 2016/Results. If you want to know what the next steps are, see Community Wishlist Survey 2016/FAQ. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 13:16, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Belated proposals?

Hello everybody! Is there any chance to still make technical proposals in whatsoever way? I just couldn't find the time to do that yet. If so, I could need a little help translating a number of proposals I made on the page for suggestions for improvement in German Wikipedia which are probably all related to universal Wiki applications or functions and which I think would be interesting for the community... Hoping for your understanding, best regards--Hubon (talk) 17:35, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Hubon. Unfortunately, the survey has ended for this year; we announced the final results a couple days ago. We'll have another Wishlist Survey next year, starting in November. -- DannyH (WMF) (talk) 17:39, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much! But does that really mean we can't do anything until then?--Hubon (talk) 23:16, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, it does. The survey ran from November 7th to December 12th. Of course, you're welcome to talk about and advocate for your ideas on the wikis where you're active; the wishlist survey isn't the only place to do that. But this survey is over, until next year. -- DannyH (WMF) (talk) 02:02, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you once again! The problem is: Up to now, unfortunately, I didn't receive very much feedback for my ideas – for instance, people didn't seem to be very interested in this proposal, though it did actually find several supporters here. So is there maybe any other option?--Hubon (talk) 04:05, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Linkfix

→ Community Wishlist Survey 2016/Categories/Editing#Voting – Editor-focused central editing dashboard

• Wikipedia:Tip of the day/July 28

has to be

• w:Wikipedia:Tip of the day/July 28

--Plagiat (talk) 19:10, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I fixed it. Thanks! -- DannyH (WMF) (talk) 22:59, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Anchors for proposals

URL anchors with these kind of titles aren't fun. I added anchors for every proposal using its given rank from results. Now they can be linked by PAGENAME#CW2016-R### --Plagiat (talk) 01:47, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

→Community Wishlist Survey 2016/Categories/Editing#CW2016-R006

Simplified anchors seems all right, but I don't know why NOEDITSECTION is being added to the proposal pages. Was there a request by the WMF to make it more difficult to continue discussions on proposals? Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 21:46, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

@Plagiat: That was a lot of work, thank you! Though I'm not sure why it was difficult to link to the actual heading. @Stevietheman: It looks like Plagiat added the NOEDITSECTION, but this is actually good. Some people are (erroneously) continuing to add votes, and at this point discussion should probably take place on the corresponding phab ticket. We may miss any updates to the discussions here. MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 01:18, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

I had had a look at 2015th and I think the best way is to freeze voting pages, it is over. It gave some votes and replies after conclusion, all were reverted. As MusikAnimal says, discussion should take place where development happens. @MusikAnimal (WMF): There are sections with <del>…</del>…<ins>…</ins> and other bad headlines. --Plagiat (talk) 21:05, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Late wishlist

As per my ultra-frustrated rant on User talk:Nikkimaria, I do not believe that leaving the task of researching image licensing to Wikipedia's volunteers is.... what word should I use? Reasonable? Efficient? I have had several conversations with the admirable Nikkimaria regarding finding licensing info for images (particularly magazines/journals), and the task is complex, time consuming, fraught with uncertainty and stress.. I hope you will take some time to become acquainted with this task before you set aside my complaints...

I am very unhappy, alas, that WM sees fit to spend tons of money on.... head-in-the-clouds, intangible administrative five-year-plan bullshit... and can't help actual, real editors with actual, real editing by hiring three grad students or new graduates to do this, plus one temporary consultant to teach them how.

rant ended. Thank you.Lingzhi (talk) 09:52, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Lingzhi, I am sorry to hear that you are frustrated. I am mostly active on German Wikipedia, where users can get answers to copyright-related questions on a special page that offers a lot of resources on the topic and where the discussions are moderated by users with experience in the field of copyright law (I hold a Ph.D. in German copyright law, for example). Apparently, the English Wikipedia's equivalent of this page is Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Also, the Wikimedia Foundation's legal team has published opinions on a few general copyright questions on Wikilegal, of which I prepared one while I was a fellow on the WMF legal team. Anyway, if I can be of any help, just let me know. Gnom (talk) Let's make Wikipedia green! 03:01, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

tks Gnom. I appreciate your response.Lingzhi (talk) 03:23, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Ajax editing of nsPage content update

@Ninovolador, Reptilien.19831209BE1, Shubha, Omino di carta, Jayantanth, and Alexmar983:: The idea has been implemented and is living into it.wikisource, it turned out as fast and comfortable as expected, more and more users are using it. It's an optional gadget named Edit in sequence (eis). --Alex brollo (talk) 20:13, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Alex brollo, Is it this gadget ? Reptilien.19831209BE1 (talk) 20:39, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

@Reptilien.19831209BE1: Yes, it is. --Alex brollo (talk) 17:26, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Summary of results?

Near the top of Community Wishlist Survey 2016, please link "Presentation of the initial assessment: Early January 2017" to where this assessment is.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼  11:41, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Last few days to propose for 2017

Hey everyone – the 2017 survey is going on right now, and this weekend is the last chance to post a proposal. If you had missed it so far this year, head over to 2017 Community Wishlist Survey to post something. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 01:18, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Vote in the 2017 Wishlist

You can now vote for proposals over at the 2017 Community Wishlist Survey! /Johan (WMF) (talk) 06:23, 28 November 2017 (UTC)