Jump to content

Talk:Hubs/Hub Piloting Guidelines

Add topic
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

This is a discussion space for hub piloting guidelines. This is a revised version of an initial Hub Piloting Criteria published as a basis for conversations on June 3, 2022. Following the discussions on meta, MS Forum, Telegram, and global conversations, we have consolidated all the feedback and input and have significantly revised proposed guidelines. We look forward to further conversations to move towards finalized guidelines here on meta, MS Forum, MS Telegram, and also with affiliate representatives at Wikimedia Summit. KVaidla (WMF) (talk) 15:54, 2 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

General feedback[edit]

This is a section for general feedback. KVaidla (WMF) (talk) 16:58, 2 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Open Question: How are potential overlaps and conflicts between hub pilots managed in a “bottom-up” process?[edit]

This is a section to discuss overlap and conflict management. KVaidla (WMF) (talk) 16:59, 2 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Wouldn't overlap be avoided in a pilot phase? I think the question is more relevant once a hub is established somewhere. A pilot phase should allow us to realize whether or not there is overlap. notafish }<';> 14:51, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Open Question: What is needed to avoid duplications and redundancies among Hubs?[edit]

This is a section to discuss duplication management. KVaidla (WMF) (talk) 16:59, 2 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Open Question: How will the risk assessment and mitigation take place?[edit]

This is a section to discuss risk assessment and management. KVaidla (WMF) (talk) 17:00, 2 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

A comment about the previous drafting phase[edit]

Hi, I would like to complement the release of these Hubs guidelines with a comment about the previous drafting phase in June, on behalf of the Movement Strategy and Governance team. The approach we took to produce Hubs/Minimum Criteria for Pilots unnecessarily stressed some volunteers involved in hub projects and committees mentioned in the draft. We aimed to bring these different stakeholders to a shared conversation, but our approach put several projects and committees suddenly on the spot without a warning. We apologize for the unintended negative impact that the publication of the initial criteria draft caused. We are grateful for people sharing their concerns, so we can improve.

Based on the lessons learned, this time we have taken a different approach:

  • We present a new version of this draft that (we believe) shouldn't contain any big surprises. It aims to be a direct evolution from the feedback received in June.
  • Important questions that haven't been addressed in previous discussions are presented as questions. We haven't tried to propose a potential solution. Instead, we invite the stakeholders involved to discuss and answer these questions.
  • The current draft doesn't mention any committee or any organization having a new role to be discussed in relation to hubs.
  • The current draft aims to provide objective and standard advice to help hub promoters manage their projects and make them visible to the movement.

We look forward to reading and hearing your feedback, before, during, and after the Wikimedia Summit. The future of hubs is first and foremost in the hands of the promoters of the hub projects. And we are here to support you in the ways that are most useful for your success. Qgil-WMF (talk) 09:50, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply