Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2018-20/Working Groups/Community Health

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

We invite everyone to have a look at the existing documentation of the Working Groups, and then add comments, additional input or share concerns via this talk page. Your comments will be taken into consideration by the respective Working Groups.

Is this the right place?[edit]

I'm surprised there is nothing on this page so far. Should we be using this page or should we use Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/2019_Community_Conversations/Community_Health? Thanks. -- Fuzheado (talk) 18:09, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

A definition of harassment[edit]

One common form of harassment, at least on EN Wikipedia, is trying to change rules by sanctioning or criticising those who follow or enforce that rule. I'm all for changing rules by consensus and respecting the principle that rule changes are not retrospective, that one can do in a courteous and respectful way. But trying to change policy by criticising those who follow that policy is or should be part of our textbook definition of harassment. Requests for Adminship on the English wikipedia would be a slightly different and markedly more civil place if we had that rule there. I suspect the site would also be more Asperger's friendly as well - We know that we have a lot of community members who are on the spectrum, and I've heard that for them there is more of a problem with criticising people for following a rule you disagree with than there is generally. WereSpielChequers (talk) 09:42, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Cross Wiki promotion[edit]

We have been discussing here about how it would be beneficial to promote the survey more widely on different platforms. Is there a way to promote this on a banner on English Wikipedia for example? Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:40, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Community Health Survey[edit]

I recently filled in the survey here, about ways to improve community health. I wanted to make the point that I am concerned about the leading nature of some of the questions asked. For example, the following text appears at the top of the second page:

There is a problem of incivility, harassment and overall bad behavior in the Wikimedia community. Bad behavior includes anything that makes others feel uncomfortable or unwelcome in their Wikimedia community. We understand experiencing or witnessing bad behavior can reduce participation. We understand the hurt community members might feel when others in the community do nothing to address bad behavior or incivility.

Various questions below this statement ask about how we should deal with this problem, but nowhere did the survey ask whether the respondent actually agrees that there is a problem - it simply starts with the assumption that there is one, and asks how we should deal with it.

Incivility is a general problem with human interaction. Of course it is present on EnWiki, because the editors are human. The questions should be about how we deal with it, and they should be phrased in such a way as to allow someone who does not see a problem with the current methodology to participate. As someone who feels that the current arrangements are adequate (indeed, praiseworthy), I felt excluded by this survey, like I was being asked to agree with the initial assumptions, or not participate. I persevered, but I fear that others will feel like I did, and this survey will become an echo-chamber - if you agree with the initial assumptions, please say your piece; if you don't, there is no place for you here. GirthSummit (blether) 22:45, 16 July 2019 (UTC)