New project process

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Correct.svg This page is currently a draft. More information pertaining to this may be available on the talk page.

Translation admins: Normally, drafts should not be marked for translation.

Other languages:
العربية • ‎български • ‎English • ‎español • ‎فارسی • ‎français • ‎galego • ‎italiano • ‎한국어 • ‎Bahasa Melayu • ‎português do Brasil

Previous pages to merge into this one:

The new project process is a guideline for proposing new sister projects. This includes reviewing, categorizing, editing, merging, approving and closing proposals. This draft is a combination of past ideas. The process shall be facilitated by a sister projects committee (SPCom).

Any user can make a proposal for a new project – either starting an entirely new wikimedia project or adopting an existing non-wikimedia project as a Wikimedia sister project.

Anyone not affiliated with a proposal may close a discussion considered disruptive, pending review. If an SPCom member considers that a proposal has no reasonable possibility of a positive decision, a proposal may be closed immediately. This may be reverted by any editor who finds value in the proposal.

Proposing a new sister project[edit]

  • See the Handbook for new project requesters if you want to propose a new project.
    A template for such proposals is being developed at Template:New sister project proposal
  • A proposal is open for at least 30 days for comments and questions from the community and committee members. This is not a vote; arguments presented are judged by the committee.
  • SPCom decides within 1–2 weeks if the proposed project could be a viable Wikimedia project[1]. If appropriate, SPCom will give specific recommendations for improvement, or suggestions for where else the project might find hosting/support.
  • If the outcome of the initial discussion is positive, and attracted possible contributors, an "official" trial/demo version may be opened on Wikimedia Incubator (unless an external demo exists; or if there are special technical requirements that could more easily be realized on a test wiki outside of Incubator). It might help to draft a roadmap or project plan. See for instance the Wikimedia Commons project plan.
  • The success of an incubated demo will be assessed after at most one year—either recommending its approval as a new project, suggesting targets it should meet in order to be recommended, or recommending it be closed or moved.

The following repeats a lot of aspects already mentioned above and should be removed or integrated, as appropriate

Possible criteria for a successful demo
  • 10 interested participants / supporters
  • set up in an incubator, with core pages drafted: main page, a dozen sample policy and content pages (incl. initial policies)
  • roadmap (for the first 6–12 months), project plan
  • proposal noting how this is in line with our mission, what its full scope is, who early audiences are / where outreach should happen.
  • demo is active for many months straight.
Review, communication on status of proposals
  • If there are tech needs: review if features are really needed, how things could be done (get in touch with devs)
  • Updates on the proposal talk page. Inform various language communities (via mailing lists, village pumps? int'l pumps on meta/commons? on the largest existing wmwiki in that language?)
  • If a project is reviewed and found lacking, reasons should be given. It can update its proposal and resubmit it later for further peer review, or continue as an independent project.
Closing dormant or unworkable proposals
  • Proposals which are judged to be incompatible or unworkable, and not simply incomplete or 'not ready yet', may be merged with other proposals or closed.
  • Proposals that have had no activity for over 6 months may be marked as historical; if they alter become active, they should go back to past supporters and see if they are still interested in contributing.
After recognition
  • Keep developing the incubator demo until the new project is created—and continue outreach to initial editors and additional language-communities.
  • Ensure any domain names are owned by the WMF.
  • Devs create the new project and New wikis importers seed it with the incubated content.
  • Update the lists and tables on Complete list of Wikimedia projects and Wikimedia projects.
  • Advertise it on the mailing lists, and ask to have it added (or add it yourself) to main pages of relevant projects.

Adopting an existing project into Wikimedia[edit]

  • A Template for such proposals is needed
  • A proposal is then open for at least 30 days for comments and questions from the community of Wikimedia projects and the community of the affected existing non-WMF project and committee members. Everyone is welcome to comment on the proposal and encouraged to discuss whether (and in which way) it is a good idea to integrate the project. This is not a vote, and will be assessed by the committee on its merits and chances of flourishing.
  • If the community from the existing non-WMF project makes clear that they don't want to become a WMF project, such a proposal will be outright rejected.
  • Within 1–2 weeks the committee decides if the proposed project could be a viable Wikimedia project[1]. If appropriate, SPCom will give specific recommendations for improvement, or suggestions for where else the project might find hosting/support.
  • < more discussions, consideration, etc., see the general considerations below ... >
  • If SPCom thinks a proposal to make a non-WMF wiki a WMF project should be accepted, a recommendation to that effect goes to the Board of Trustees, which has the final say.
General considerations
  • Does the proposal fit into one of the existing projects?
  • Would there be side-effects on existing projects?
  • All process stages should be public.
  • Community comments are welcome at all times.
  • SPCom can make other recommendations apart from those specifically mentioned here.
  • The committee should help in the implementation of its recommendations as far as possible.

Further reading[edit]

Current lists of project proposals
 
References
  1. a b This needs to be developed further, but including: compatible with general principles (freely licenced, spreading free knowledge, BLP rules), Vision & Mission statement