Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2018-20/Working Groups/Partnerships/Recommendations/Q2 R1
- 1 Recommendation 1: A central infrastructure for content partnerships requiring technical solutions
- 1.1 Q 1 What is your Recommendation?
- 1.2 Q 2-1 What assumptions are you making about the future context that led you to make this Recommendation?
- 1.3 Q 2-2 What is your thinking and logic behind this recommendation?
- 1.4 Q 3-1 What will change because of the Recommendation?
- 1.5 Q 3-2 Who specifically will be influenced by this recommendation?
- 1.6 Q 5 How does this Recommendation relate to the current structural reality?
Recommendation 1: A central infrastructure for content partnerships requiring technical solutions
Q 1 What is your Recommendation?
A central infrastructure and support system for large-scale content partnerships, where proper stewardship, governance, support and funding is provided.
We recommend that a more thorough product management system to manage new and existing tools is established, with distributed responsibility among movement volunteers and institutions.
A technical Meta-database is ascertained (i.e. WikiData, etc) which archives a structured partnership database for the work done by different volunteers and affiliates. .
Q 2-1 What assumptions are you making about the future context that led you to make this Recommendation?
Cannot depend on mastery of individuals that figured out a way how to individually navigate the ecosystem. Some centralisation is needed, to structure this work and lessen our reliance on Individual MediaWiki contributors. The central support needs to be complemented by strong faith in decentralisation and distribution of tasks with others, strong notes in the network. We need to move beyond a zero-one situation where either the Foundation supports it, or someone invents it on its own, without any support plan.
Usability and user experience of these tools and learning from existing programs are important. Dependence on legacy tools and technology is not just about outdated technology - it's also about a culture that is connected to these existing tools.
Q 2-2 What is your thinking and logic behind this recommendation?
The merit of an Individual MediaWiki developer would be better enhanced within a central infrastructure framework, where developers can raise opinion, suggestions and also receive support such that they complement to make things better not be dependent on their scholarship.
Q 3-1 What will change because of the Recommendation?
Wikimedia Volunteers and Staff working with the GLAM institutions would have a relatively better time advocating, negotiating and most importantly for a smooth and convenient partnership flow.
Q 3-2 Who specifically will be influenced by this recommendation?
All our partners, All our volunteers
Q 5 How does this Recommendation relate to the current structural reality?
There is no framework today that provides for local indigineous technical solutions.