| Alsee added a comment. |
In T107595#2666114, @RobLa-WMF wrote:In T107595#2666094, @Alsee wrote:Did anyone consider that it might be a bad idea to start building a radical change to the editing environment without investigating whether the editing community wants this?
Each of the use cases have had quite a bit of discussion, and has had quite a bit of investigation by the people proposing it.
So the answer is no, no thought of investigating whether the editing community wants this.
In T107595#2667512, @daniel wrote:What I take away from @Alsee's comment is that we should provide a more comprehensive and detailed overview of the use cases.
So the answer is no, no thought of investigating whether the editing community wants this.
You've got two editors who stumbled across (*) this project, both waving red flags that there may be a problem here.
The WMF has been working on a Technical Collaboration Guideline as part of the Software Devlopment Process. In part, "establishing best practices for inviting community involvement in the product development and deployment cycle". Most development goes smoothly and everyone is happy with a lot of what the WMF develops, but there is a long history of occasional projects that result in conflict. There have been cases where the WMF believed something was obviously a good idea, but where editors had a very different perspective. The editing community may weigh the pros and cons very differently than you have.
The idea of pulling categories, templates, and other things of out the wikitext is a pretty radical change. I understand you have use-case-proposals and the reasons you think they're good ideas. I'm not here to directly debate that. I'm here to alert you to the fact that this is a Big Deal. I am here to alert you that the Community may have a very different perspective, that this may be highly controversial. The proposed use cases may start evaporating if the community considers them unwanted or disruptive.
I'm saying it would be a good idea to post the template-use-case and/or category-use-case and/or others at EnWiki Village Pump to find out how it will be received. (EnWiki is nearly half the global community, you can certainly post elsewhere as well if you feel broader input is needed.)
The response could range from "we love it", to identifying must-have design requirements to support various workflows, to "hell no". Whichever way it goes, the time to get that information is before something is built.
Cc: ggellerman, Alsee, Florian, Liuxinyu970226, WMDE-leszek, Mholloway, Scott_WUaS, Niharika, MGChecker, LikeLifer, Elitre, Glaisher, JJMC89, RobLa-WMF, Yurik, ArielGlenn, APerson, TomT0m, Krenair, intracer, Tgr, Tobi_WMDE_SW, Addshore, Lydia_Pintscher, cscott, PleaseStand, awight, Ricordisamoa, GWicke, MarkTraceur, waldyrious, Legoktm, Aklapper, Jdforrester-WMF, Ltrlg, brion, Spage, MZMcBride, daniel, D3r1ck01, Izno, Luke081515, Wikidata-bugs, aude, jayvdb, fbstj, Mbch331, Jay8g, bd808
_______________________________________________ Wikidata-bugs mailing list Wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs
