Suggestion for new group effort, to promote governance discussion, or committee or wikiproject

hi everyone. i have been following discussions here with interest, about how to make sure that discussions here are truly connected with the editing community at Wikipedia, plus connecting our discussions with important governance events, and processes at the Meta site, plus making sure that ideas presented here have some genuine chance of:

(a) being presented to the editing community in some way for genuine discussion;

(b) being made easily navigable and readable by the larger community, either for discussion prior to being finalized, or or for actual implementation and presentation to the community.

as part of this I am considering the following steps:

(A) create a useful navbox for the Meta site, which would link both to this site, plus to important group efforts and governance pages at meta site, plus some relevant resources at wikipedia which would help to keep the larger community informed.

(B) create a new wikiproject called “Community Facilitation;” or something similar, both to (1) link WMF more closely and effectively with the editing community, (2) enable the ordinary editors to discuss WMF actions and processes more easily, and (3) to enable WMF to accentuate its own valuable and beneficial efforts to build the Wikipedia community, by communicating its efforts more easily.

(C) Consider a range of resources similar to the ones above. I am thinkign of creating a page in the “Wikipedia:” project namespace at wikipedia, where links could be compiled to important WMF resources and governance processes; the current active elections for the WMF Board seats would be just one example, but there any many other similar resources and pages which could be included in this, for the benefit of the entire community.

Ok, so all of this is being presented herewith for discussion. I am fully willing to wait, to mull this over, to allow time for discussion, and to enable a full and complete discussion process, before I move ahead with any of this. please note I fully anticipate with any or perhaps all of this. however, I also fully see a profound value in waiting to hear feedback before doing any of this. and I see great, major value in allowing a full discussion process to occur, and getting the full range of feedback, ideas, input, and constructive or blunt feedback, from anyone interested from our editing community.

I welcome any of your comments. I truly hope to present these ideas a something beneficial, and I look forward to fuller discussion, over the long term. thanks!! --~~~~

Just a kind note on style - as a native English speaker I had to read this sentence about 5 times in order to understand what it was saying. I have to imagine for non-native speakers, it’s even harder. So the proposal may benefit from being broken down into more bite-sized chunks. :slight_smile:

As to the idea, I like the WP:BOLD ambition to link this forum into existing spaces even if I’m not sure what that form should take.



@Fuzheado , yes, well said. that is exactly the kind of blunt thoughtful feedback I can benefit from. thanks a huge amount for takign the time to read over my convoluted sentences,and to send a little solid feedback my way. that is very appreciated. please keep commenting on my ideas. I’m really trying to make some headway here. I very much need some actual feedback and interchange from others. otherwise, basically, I am just kind of talking to myself.

I very much welcome your feedback, and I totally encourage you to share any other thoughts. and yes, I think I will try to work over that sentence a little better. you are helping me an immense amount. thanks!!

EDIT: I edited the sentence, simply to add some numbering to each of the sub-items in that sentence itself. it is not a perfect solution admittedly, but I think it works. what do you think, @Fuzheado ? thanks!!

ok. please click the link below to view one draft I am working on for a possible navbox at wikipedia. the purpose of this navbox would be to provide a community resource, which could enable editors to find useful links in a single convenient place, to get info, updates, and an overview of various governance processes that are currently in progress. please click this link if you get a chance. I welcome and invite any feedback.

I am tagging a few people whose opinion and feedback will be needed on this at some point. right now, this is only an incomplete initial draft; however I wanted to still submit this just to illustrate one concept that I am trying to highlight for raising community awareness. i welcome any comments, feedback etc. tagging: @Xeno_WMF , @Fuzheado , @FPutz_WMF @FRomeo_WMF , @Tgr , @Rosiestep , @Braveheart . @Pharos @CKoerner_WMF @Abbad_WMF

note to forum moderators; I have been in touch with rosie step elsewhere, so tagging her here is not baseless; I realize I haven’t interacted with her here at this forum, so I just wanted to clarify that. thanks!!!

one more tag; @Zblace , because of the great thread they intiiated, which I have participated in just a short time ago today.

I really appreciate throwing this out here for all of us to mull over together. I’m a newcomer to WMF and in a newly created community-facing role…and I really struggle with determining when to cross-post on which forums. I’m quite drawn to your idea of a new wikiproject called something like “Community Facilitation.” However, we would need to determine how it exists alongside other efforts that are meant to centralize community-facing notices (like the Diff calendar, or this forum). Another question for me would be: who is responsible for posting all the relevant information - how do we prevent it becoming just another site that I need to copy&paste information to because I need to make sure I’m hitting as many people as possible across all the different spaces, platforms, sites that diverse groups use?

I’m aware I’m asking more questions than I am providing answers, but these are my initial musings. Thanks again for kicking this off.

1 Like

For one, there is Template:WMF-navigation - Meta. What do you see is lacking from this template?

There is (was?) Wikimedia Resource Center - Meta, which seem linked to this idea, but it is not actively maintained right now. Do you think we could improve this using the page as the base?

1 Like

on the contrary, you are asking some excellent questions. this is precisely what I need as input, feedback, etc. to answer some of your questions below, right off the cuff:

(1) we would need to determine how it exists alongside other efforts that are meant to centralize community-facing notices (like the Diff calendar, or this forum).

*Possible answer: that is a good point, however the fact that the need exists at all already identifies the niche for this effort, and the need for it.

one answer to your question is to look at the need specifically at it exists at the specific plat form that we are looking at, which in this case is English-language Wikipedia. in my opinion the answer is that there is almost no community-based group or effort designed to keep the liaison with WMF, and to address Wikipedia governance processes in general, not to mention, no platform to represent the community concerns, ideas, questions, or areas of cooperation that can be carved out in regards to WMF. I would like to carve one out, little by little.

Furthermore, Wikipedia is sorely in need of a platform/space/project in general which will greatly increase and foster the dynamic of community collaboration. it might seem like that’s what we are all about already; however that is not the case. the current trend towards local meetups who hold their meetings via zoom, illustrates a vast new potential area waiting to be tapped. we should be having zoom meetings for the editing community based around topic, not just around region. remember that my own role hinges upon WikiProject History, where I am the Lead Coordinator. I would like to work with one or two other people, and start developing a collaborative model and group communication process around this topical area.

As part of the last item above, I feel that we need an inter- WikiProject task force which would span several WikiProjects. each task force would be focused on one topical area. for example, I envision a task force based at WikiProject History, which would enlist reps and liaisons from several wikiprojects related to history, who could exchange ideas and information to promote greater community involvement. currently, there is nothing to draw an ordinary editor towards the WikiProject where activity is greatest, unless they specifically find it on their own. I would like to create some kind of inter-project task force/conduit/ collaboration. there would be one for each topical area. I would create one for history. there would be one for science, math, etc. I would also be willing to create one for politics, but only once the one for history has achieved stability.

furthermore, we need a wiki meetup for the USA as a whole. we currently have other meetups for entire countries; the USA is one of the few that does not have one. the reason is the highly active local meetups which already exist for the USA, which are highly exemplary local chapters. however one problem with them is that they are not available to hold regular meetings when requested to do so. the USA meetup would serve as a general resource for all interested editors, on a continuous basis; not just when some of the group moderators choose to hold meetings.

I realize I have gone a bit far afield, but all of this fits closely together. the next big direction for Wikipedia is to create whole new methods areas, and resources for greater open-ended collaboration. my core goal in joining this forum is to advocate for and foster ways to do so. we have the means to chart the course that will carry Wikipedia through the 21st century, and into future centuries. the time to act is now.

(2)Another question for me would be: who is responsible for posting all the relevant information - how do we prevent it becoming just another site that I need to copy & paste information to because I need to make sure I’m hitting as many people as possible across all the different spaces, platforms, sites that diverse groups use?

I understand; however, remember that on all the existing platforms, Admin Noticeboards, Village Pump, Teahouse, etc., there is little or no current updated body of data documenting all the governance processes currently in motion. we desperately need this at Wikipedia. I would like to move forward with this forthwith. to do so, I need the support of at least one highly-credible, well-respected editor with knowledge of WMF. I could greatly use your help in that respect.

furthermore, I have a new unprecedented idea which might help us to achieve this mission.

how about a Navbox with a chronological basis? in other words, we would create a Navbox called “2020s WMF process.” we would make it decade-based, because decade are the building block for chronology at Wikipedia. but furthermore, we don’t currently have any genre of navboxes which focus upon current updates relating to Wikipedia for a specific time period.

if we create this, that would be one step along the road to create a clear, approachable, and convenient resource for the community as a whole,. to bridge the gap between WMF processes and the editing community as a whole, and also to bring the editing community into contact with WMF in a way that would be positive, beneficial, and conducive to positive collaboration, for the benefit of both sides.

ok, that is a whole lot of typing! :slight_smile: what do you think? if possible, I picture moving ahead with you forthwith. by charting a course together, and then transferring our efforts to English Wikipedia, to start building on our ideas and efforts there. Nothing needs to happen right away; that is simply the overall oal that I picture down the road sometime, but nothing needs to happen on an immediate basis. what’s your thought? please feel free to let me know, @FPutz_WMF . thanks! :slight_smile:

@RamzyM_WMF , well the basic question or problem for the template that you cite above is that (a) it looks fine, overall, but (b) I meant to suggest that we create a navbox of that type at English Wikipedia; not at the meta site. also, i feel we should offer a new kind of navbox; namely, a navbox which would provide an overview and updates on WMF processes for a specific decade.

by doing so, we would give the wikipedia communtiy direct access to view current efforts and updates; and we would not be limited to providing static processes, but rather we could link to debates, discussions decisions, that are currently in process, and for which input is sorely needed.

I hope that idea sounds good to you. feel free to let me know. thanks!

North America is not my region, but don’t you have WikiConference North America - Meta? US groups are also coalescing around the idea of a North America Hub (the aptly named WALRUS - Meta). I’m pinging my colleague @Xeno_WMF, who facilitates for this region, in case he could help you further :slight_smile:

1 Like

@RamzyM_WMF thanks so much for your reply. ok, your reply is highly relevant. let me further explain in detail what I mean. please check out the page below. this is the page at wikimedia that is entitled “Wikimedia chapters.”

as you will see there are numerous chapters listed there for entire nations. however it so happens that the USA does not have an actual formally-constituted chapter for the country as a whole, within the terms of this page.

that was my sole and only meaning in my initial comment above, no more and no less. I hope this helps to clarify somewhat what I meant? I truly appreciate your helpful and perceptive reply. thanks!!


Hello @Sm8900 - great to see you here. It’s true that USA does not have a country-level chapter, and @RamzyM_WMF is correct in that WikiConference North America has somewhat filled this niche in the past, organizing live conferences (and a couple virtual ones in the recent years) for the country and continent.

Right now, the Hubs concept is moving forward. There are currently two draft pages about a North American (or, maybe to start, a US) hub.

To help focus North American strategy discussion, I’ll be making a separate thread so that we can brainstorm further.