Talk:Community Wishlist Survey

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page contains changes which are not marked for translation.

For information about the translations, see Community Wishlist Survey/Help us.

2023 survey timeline[edit]

Hello community tech. What dates should I be putting in my calendar so I don't miss any 2023 wishlist deadlines? Please ping on reply. Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:33, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Novem Linguae: You add the page Community Wishlist Survey 2023 into Your Watchlist. Dušan Kreheľ (talk) 21:42, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't check my meta watchlist. I'd much prefer a date for my calendar :) –Novem Linguae (talk) 00:12, 19 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'll see what I can find out Novem Linguae Face-smile.svg ~TheresNoTime-WMF (talk) 00:26, 19 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just FYI @Novem Linguae, an announcement has been made at Community Wishlist Survey/Updates#December 5, 2022: The 2023 Community Wishlist Survey will happen in JanuaryTheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 13:02, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@TheresNoTime: will continue annually I thought it became every two years. Nardog (talk) 22:51, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Nardog: Indeed, an update irt. the reduced frequency of the Community Wishlist was announced but later withdrawn. The update I linked to above confirms that the Community Wishlist is continuing annually — I'll ask someone to post an update to Community Wishlist Survey/Updates/2023 Changes Update. ~TheresNoTime-WMF (talk) 23:01, 5 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Noting that my above comment should have been made in my capacity as a volunteer, apologies. Struck part of my comment. — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 15:33, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

“Number of contributors” in the graph — what does it mean?[edit]

What does the label “Number of contributors” in the graph mean? The number of people who worked on a proposal? who submitted proposals? who voted? all of the above? none of the above? Thanks. Al12si (talk) 10:40, 12 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is a perfect example how not to create graphs. In addition to the missing explanation, it can be seen how much more supports were there in 2022 than proposals in the same year (does anyone really seriously thank that the proposal/vote ratio will be anywhere near one?), but I have no idea whether 2022 or 2016 had more proposals, I see two tiny rectangles, one of which may be one or two pixels taller, but this cannot be really seen. This should be three graphs, each with its own scale. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 15:24, 13 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
All good points — @CommTechUser:NRodriguez (WMF)User:KSiebert (WMF)User:DMaza (WMF)User:MusikAnimal (WMF)User:SWilson (WMF)User:HMonroy (WMF)User:DWalden (WMF)User:STei (WMF)User:JFernandez-WMFUser:JMcLeod (WMF)User:TheresNoTime-WMFUser:GMikesell-WMF: I'm not sure what "Number of contributors" in this graph means, could we clarify that and review the purpose of the graph? ~TheresNoTime-WMF (talk) 00:14, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"Number of contributors" is the same as the numbers you see towards the top of each survey, i.e. at Community Wishlist Survey 2022/Proposals it says "Total: 325 proposals, 1578 contributors, 9554 support votes." These are the three figures we've kept track of year-to-year.
Someone else created the table and the original graphs showing how these figures changed over time. I admit I consolidated the three into one chart, because I found the old version to be a bit of an eye sore. It's a shame mw:Extension:Graph doesn't give you labels on-hover so we could see the numbers all on the same chart, but I understand for purposes of comparison it makes more sense for them to be separate charts anyway. I won't intervene if anyone changes it back to the old format, or remove the chart(s) altogether, but having three big charts is still a bit tacky, in my opinion. MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 00:31, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"doesn't give you labels on-hover" yes it does, see :mediawikiwiki:Extension:Graph/Demo/Dimpvis Ppl just don't know how to use it and {{Graph:Chart}} doesn't implement them. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 09:35, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sunday, 6 February 2023[edit]

Hi! "Sunday, 6 February 2023" is an incorrect date. Did you mean "Sunday, 5 February 2023"? Davidpar (talk) 00:03, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, that should be Monday, 6 February. Thanks for pointing out the error! MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 00:38, 6 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For some reason, some of the messages are still reporting a wrong date on it. A correction will likely be issued. --Elitre (WMF) (talk) 09:57, 16 December 2022 (UTC) EDIT: I've discussed with the Product Manager and we agreed that since the incorrect date doesn't actually mean that volunteers have less time to participate, and given that linked pages do contain the correct one, we'll leave the sent announcements as they are. Thanks for your patience.Reply[reply]

Translation[edit]

Hi! Would the process be monolingual in English this year? I am unsure, as the invitation on village pumps is only in English and do not mention this aspect. I do not feel welcome in the process. Noé (talk) 20:40, 16 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey Noé. I appreciate your note. I don't foresee a change from last year. We'll make sure that further communications are clearer on this point. Appreciate your understanding and patience. --Elitre (WMF) (talk) 11:24, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nice, thanks! Sorry if I sounded a bit sharp, it was a feedback on a serious concern for me. Good to hear that you are still aware of this aspect of the process (I know you were during the past editions!) Noé (talk) 22:06, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Last year's survey as well as all moving forward should be 100% fully translatable. We do however rely on volunteers to translate proposals, so there's no guarantee you'll see proposals in your native tongue. If you're able to help with translation, we'd greatly appreciate it! There will be a dedicated aggregate group for proposals, and another dedicated group for all messages shown in the survey. With these you will be able to easily identify what still needs translation. MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 18:30, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Where do i add My wish?[edit]

Where do i add My wish? Yoitsme3342 (talk) 22:59, 17 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Yoitsme3342: You wait on January 23, so then. Dušan Kreheľ (talk) 00:06, 18 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok. Now where do I actually submit my proposal? Or is it deliberate that I have to make my way through a maze first? 86.171.69.218 08:28, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Go to Community Wishlist Survey 2023/Proposals, pick the category it belongs in, and enter a title in the box near the top next to the 'Create proposal' button. 3mi1y (talk) 02:48, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please, stop edit-warring[edit]

Hello. Recently user @Xavier Dengra created a proposal that can be read here: Community Wishlist Survey 2023/Archive/Dismantling of the annual Wishlist Survey system. The proposal was automatically archived by User:Community Tech bot after a comment by NRodriguez (WMF), what is quite ironic, as it was an anti-harassment proposal and this is a community wishlist. I recovered it, because not only free of expression, also the core idea of what a wish is was deleted without discussion. Then MusikAnimal (WMF) archived it again. I don't want to edit-war, but I think that a Meta administrator should protect user's wishes from the WMF arbitrary decissions on what a wish can be, because this process belongs to the community. Thanks. Theklan (talk) 20:53, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey, thanks for posting here in the Talk Page. We archive invalid wishes during the Propose phase of the CWS every year. Feel free to check out the Archive for the year 2022, for example. If you notice, in that Archive, you can see what we did here was standard protocol. Right now, our list of Archive reasons focus on the nature of the wish not being Technical in nature. Often, people come to the CWS with content requests, policy requests, and or staffing requests. The purview of the CWS is technical. In our FAQ, we dedicate a section to explaining that proposals must be within the Community Tech area of activity. I hope this shines some light on why I moved it into the Archive. The decision was not Abitrary and we try to be consistent with our Archive reasons-- which is why we've developed a list of 15 common Archive reasons. Thanks for reading and for participating, I hope to see other proposals from you! NRodriguez (WMF) (talk) 21:15, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
From the link:
  • The Community Tech team declines proposals if they
    • Only require doing edits on wiki, even if it's about "technical" edits (in templates, modules, etc.). NOT THE CASE
    • Are already in Wikimedia Foundation teams' plans. NOT THE CASE
    • Were declined by Community Tech or other Wikimedia Foundation teams in the past. NOT THE CASE
    • Call for removing or disabling a feature that a Wikimedia Foundation team has worked on. NOT THE CASE
  • Less than a year-long project, more than a bug. NOT THE CASE
  • Pick one specific problem and describe it in detail (it should be rephrased but, NOT THE CASE )
  • You don't have to suggest ways for resolving the problem. It will be the Community Tech task to find solutions. <<< read this, please.
So no, the archiving is not based on the guidelanes provided in the FAQ. Theklan (talk) 21:52, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To be clear, the proposal in question was not "automatically" archived by the bot. The bot only handles the (un)transcluding bits. @Xavier Dengra and others; Would you please pay mind to the edit notice? Category pages are maintained by the bot. I'm not going to undo your edits again, but the bot will eventually remove the transclusion anyway.
I want to be abundantly clear we're not trying to silence anyone. Criticism and feedback about the survey is most welcome here on the talk page, where "meta" kinds of discussions typically happen. See the archives for past examples. Thanks for your understanding and cooperation, MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 21:31, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks MusikAnimal. I untagged it, so the bot doesn't move it "automatically". Theklan (talk) 21:49, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Theklan That's not how it works... The propsoal is under the /Archive page, and only staff can move propsoals to and from there. The bot will still (eventually) remove the transclusion since it's not actually under /Anti-harassment.
Is there a reason why we can't have the same discussion here? I totally understand your sentiments, and believe it or not, we even want to hear your criticism. But forming it as a proposal isn't the way to do it. MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 22:01, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There's no way to do it. Last year there were two similar proposals and were moved below the carpet. One of those (1%) was one of the most voted proposals. It was dismissed. So no, there's no way to have a discussion.
Category pages are maintained by the bot. I'm not going to undo your edits again, but the bot will eventually remove the transclusion anyway. and The propsoal is under the /Archive page, and only staff can move propsoals to and from there. are opposite statements. Theklan (talk) 22:03, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As staff members are trying to change the status of the most voted proposals last year (excluding the "larger suggestions" proposals that were widely voted for adoption), I copy this table here, for the record.

Projects Project status
Templates translation
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
Notifications for user page edits
Gear from the Noun Project (2345699).png  In development
Real Time Preview for Wikitext
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
Tool that reviews new uploads for potential copyright violations
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
Improve SVG rendering
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
Allow filtering of WhatLinksHere to remove links from templates
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
Automatic duplicate citation finder
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
Select preview image
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
Generate Audio for IPA
Gear from the Noun Project (2345699).png  In development
Enhanced Move Logs
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done

This is the situation one year after the proposals were proposed, refined, declined and adopted by devoted volunteers. -Theklan (talk) 22:34, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done, undone and in progress[edit]

The current tables with the proposals that were done, not done or in progress is not even accurate. Most of the non-done proposals are excluded, and this gives a false sensation of "development", what is far from reality. Please, correct it to show the real numbers. Theklan (talk) 22:01, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Theklan I think there might be some confusion here. Since 2021, we expressly do not commit to the top 10. Instead, we use a prioritization framework to help us ascertain what we can afford to do annually. It's far from perfect, but we believe it's a step up from the old "top 10" commitment that we used to have, which left a lot of wishes undone. Your changes at Special:Diff/24421210 seem to make the assumption we committed to those "Not done" wishes, which is not true. We kindly ask you leave editing of our project pages to us. MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 22:27, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is even worse. So you ask volunteers to make proposals and discuss them, the WMF decides what can be discussed and what not, after that we vote and the WMF decides what was the correct result of the voting? WOW.
Projects Project status

2022

Better diff handling of paragraph splits
Gear from the Noun Project (2345699).png  In development
Notifications for user page edits
Gear from the Noun Project (2345699).png  In development
Real Time Preview for Wikitext
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
Tool that reviews new uploads for potential copyright violations
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
Improve SVG rendering
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
Allow filtering of WhatLinksHere to remove links from templates
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
Automatic duplicate citation finder
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
Select preview image
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
Generate Audio for IPA
Gear from the Noun Project (2345699).png  In development
Enhanced Move Logs
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done

2021

Templates translation
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
Warn when linking to disambiguation pages
Complete from the Noun Project (3557299).png  Done
Copy and paste from diffs
Complete from the Noun Project (3557299).png  Done
Live preview
Gear from the Noun Project (2345699).png  In development
Add sorting options in category pages
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
Improve graphs and interactive content
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
Multiple watchlists
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
InternetArchiveBot for Wikidata
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
Better diff handling of paragraph splits
Gear from the Noun Project (2345699).png  In development
Add filters to history pages
Cross CSS Red.svg  Not done
Realtime Preview is deployed to all wikis, so that one surely counts as done. All the others are not projects we committed to, and even some of those are at least partially done or in progress (just not by us). We use "Not done" to convey projects that we committed to but were unable to do, and there should be status updates that accompany those explaining why we were unable to do them. The same information is conveyed at Community Wishlist Survey 2022/Results, so I'm not sure why it needs to be duplicated on the tables we used for projects we did commit to.

We encourage you to read our documentation to better understand how the survey works. Your vote definitely matters, even if it seems like it doesn't :) Editing our project pages against our will and going against our processes here at the survey, however, is not constructive. We'd really appreciate it if you'd leave the survey management and project page editing to our team. Thanks for your cooperation, MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 23:00, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There's an article for this: en:Enlightened absolutism.
However, no, Realtime Preview is not available if you use the "new wikitext mode", so is not available for most of the advanced users. Not commited projects are, by definition, not done. You can make it worse and mark them as declined, but that wouldn't make your point better, so let's play this on your side.
The same information is conveyed at Community Wishlist Survey 2022/Results, yes. But not in the main page, where we can find a false summary of what has been done, giving the false impression that wishes are done.
What is not constructive is trying to avoid discussions, trying to decide what can be discussed and what not, trying to silence volunteers, making them spend hours of their time in a process that, at the end of the day, goes nowhere.
Let people vote. Let people decide. That's what the word wish is about. Theklan (talk) 23:09, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think its time you disengage. You seem to be overly invested. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 23:21, 23 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The word is concerned. Theklan (talk) 06:52, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I kindly ask you, @The DJ, to remove or rephrase your last comment. It is not only an unfounded tone policing to request a user with legitimate, founded arguments to disengage a talk based on being "overly invested". But also an incipient form of an "appeal to motive" user threat that pushes out diverging opinions from the public agora by unfastening them from the reasoning. Best regards. Xavier Dengra (MESSAGES) 08:09, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Translation of category button on Community Wishlist Survey 2023/Proposals[edit]

Hi, how can I add and proofread the translation of these category button? Tryvix1509 (talk) 01:59, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello @Tryvix1509! It should be in our "priority" list of messages. There's a list among the other message groups at Community Wishlist Survey/Help us. Specifically, the message names for the categories should be the same as the English message, as a subpage of Template:Community_Wishlist_Survey. So for instance, "Admins and patrollers" is at Template:Community Wishlist Survey/Admins and patrollers. Translatable messages are also categorized at Category:Community Wishlist Survey/Messages. Let me know if you need anymore help, and thanks for helping with translation :) Regards, MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 02:07, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wie kann ich Vorschläge übersetzen?[edit]

Konkret meinen eigenen Vorschlag, aber eventuell auch noch mehr. Ich habe den natürlich nicht auf Englisch angelegt, Englisch ist ja nur eine beliebige Sprache unter vielen und sollte nicht besonders herausgehoben werden. Allerdings kann ich die zufällig auch ganz gut, und würde meinen Vorschlag gerne dahin und auf Nederlands übersetzen, ich finde nur keine Möglichkeit dazu. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 10:52, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For those only capable of English: How can I translate especially my, but generally any, wish? Either, as with mine, to English and Nederlands, or perhaps as well some from English to German and/or Nederlands? Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 11:48, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is an example in last years' wishlist: Community Wishlist Survey 2021/Citations/Structuring of individual referencesTheDJ (talkcontribs) 11:57, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And where's the translations in different languages there? I just see one page, with little information, discussion in English, wish in German. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 12:21, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I tried something, but I don't know if it's the proper syntax: Community_Wishlist_Survey_2023/Untranslated/VisualEditor:_Allow_references_to_be_properly_named Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 13:42, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I guess there's no harm in using {{LangSwitch}} for now, but once a proposal is approved, we'll remove those and set the page up for proper translation. Only the proposal content is translatable, not the discussion. You can use {{LangSwitch}} on the discussions if you'd like.
Translatable proposals can be found at Category:Community Wishlist Survey 2023/Proposals/Translatable, or in the agg-Community_Wishlist_Survey_2023_Proposal aggregate group (direct link for translation).
It's only day 2 of the survey, so not many proposals have been approved yet. More will come in over time, and certainly before voting starts, all proposals should be fully translatable. When viewing in a non-English interface, you will also see a "Translate" link beneath the headings of translatable proposals. We are making an effort to get proposals approved as soon as possible to give more time for translators, so despite what the schedule says you won't necessarily need to wait until the "Review" phase.
Hope this helps and many thanks for your translation efforts! MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 16:07, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I expect this regardless of the language, English is not a lingua france, it's just one random language among many. So English-only is not good, it's something that needs to be made accessible for non-english speakers, i.e. most of the Wikiverse. A wish in just one language is less valid then a wish in 10. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 16:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discussion tools don't work on wishes pages[edit]

Tracked in Phabricator:
Task T327704 resolved

I'm guessing this is a known issue but I was disappointed to be unable to use the discussion tools (which I'm using now to write this section) on the talk pages for individual wishes. When I attempted to do so I get the error "Your comment could not be published to the most recent version of the page. To see the latest changes, copy your drafted comment and then use your browser to reload the page.". Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:47, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah, at least that clears up what was being reported at User talk:TheresNoTime-WMF#Related to my proposal.. :( ~TheresNoTime-WMF (talk) 17:04, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah, I don't know what changed as it worked fine last year. It's being tracked at phab:T327704. Apologies for the inconvenience. MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 17:06, 24 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This has reportedly been resolved. Thanks to the Editing team for the quick fix :) MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 21:48, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Prioritisation[edit]

Last year, the prioritisation equation weighted votes quite lightly, only about 1/4th of the total prioritization. Has it been decided yet if that is the same this year?

If it isn't decided yet, I hope we can make votes weight more heavily. Many aspects of the community score probably measure roughly the same as votes, but without input of the community. While it makes sense to put more weight on smaller communities for equity, I think putting more weight on wishes for admins is duplicative of the votes (admins are probs overrepresented); similarly, I don't see why non-textual aspects should be prioritised.

What about a system with 2/5rd of the prioritisation based on votes? Femke (talk) 19:06, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, the Prioritization framework we published last year is indeed subject to improvements. For what it's worth, right now we are working on Better diffs, which was the top wish (most votes) from last year, and it did not score that high in our prioritization score. After taking a hard look at the top ten wishes, even with our prioritization score taken into account, we decided that working on Better diffs was what made sense even though it was fairly complex. We are definitely going to continue to give votes a larger weigh in which wishes we accept for completion in 2023. NRodriguez (WMF) (talk) 19:26, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Brilliant :). Really excited to see you're working on better diffs now! Femke (talk) 19:35, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Translation[edit]

Please mark this for translation. As with last year, it's a bit frustrating the author of a proposal doesn't have a say in its detail once it gets moved to a subpage. It should be a principle that whenever the original proposer edits it during the first phase it gets marked. Nardog (talk) 06:15, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Nardog I'll try to build a system to make it more clear which proposals need to be marked for translation so that they can be tended to more quickly. In this case the error was my fault – I should have used tvar there! Thanks for adding it :)
We try to get any well-written, clear proposal up for translation as soon as possible to give translators more time. I guess there's an assumption that when the proposer submits, they are content with the content of their proposal. We only intervene if we see any issues. However any important changes by the proposer are most welcomed at any time, even after it's marked for translation. In your case there wasn't a change to the content, only to the translation template. Did you want to make any other changes? MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 16:52, 26 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, I came up with a better idea for this wish last year but it wasn't marked until after the voting ended. Phase 1 had already ended when I edited it so that's on me, but I think it got fewer votes as a result, as some of the comments indicate I didn't quite succeed in communicating the problem and solution. There aren't any more changes I want to make atm, but I think you should be notified of and be able to review all unmarked edits to the proposals before the voting begins, as (and I imagine I'm preaching to the choir when I say) communication is most important and yet most difficult when it comes to technical problems so there's always room for improvement. Nardog (talk) 07:10, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Would Community Tech actually work on Wikidata proposals?[edit]

The only Wikidata proposal that has been fulfilled in the past (Community Wishlist Survey 2020/Wikisource/Inter-language link support via Wikidata) was developed by Ladsgroup who I think was working for WMDE at the time?

Does Community Tech have the interest of taking the time to develop solutions for Wikidata (Wikidata internal code) or will requests possibly just be forwarded to WMDE to consider working on? It seems like Community Tech is not going to accept proposals that other WMF development teams could be working on so I'm a bit confused as to what possibility Wikidata proposals could have at being fulfilled if at all. Lectrician1 (talk) 06:09, 27 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]