User:Qgil-WMF/Sandbox
Good practices
[edit]Discuss
[edit]Sooner is better
[edit]Early feedback and first conversations are very useful to grasp first reactions, which can inform next steps when proposals and projects are still open and flexible.
Clear feedback requests
[edit]When you ask for feedback, explain clearly your motivation, the input you expect, your deadline, what will you do with the feedback received, and why all this is important to the people you are seeking feedback from.
Lies and attacks
[edit]Lies and attacks don't belong to civil discussion, and they must be addressed as soon as they appear.
Should I post or should I not?
[edit]If you hesitate replying to a discussion, then don't reply. Tell a colleague, sleep one night, and read that discussion again. If you still hesitate, rinse and repeat.
In muddy discussions, a Q&A section helps
[edit]In lengthy, complex, or ugly conversations, address questions and concerns with the support of a Q&A section. Otherwise great answers might be missed or manipulated in the middle of the discussions.
Old, to be reviewed
[edit]- Common understanding
- We are communities with a foundation, not a foundation with communities.
- All documentation in mediawiki.org - including value proposition and user documentation.
- Easier to maintain, promote and watch.
- OSS development context clear. Links to/from Bugzilla etc are natural.
- Simplified, adapted intros can be created in Wikimedia projects when deployment comes.
- Calls for feedback point to a central point in mediawiki.org.
- Criticism happens next to the core docs and it's easier to integrate.
- Less risk of Wikipedia-centrism. Neutral field for all Wikimedia projects and 3rd parties.
- Less risk of duplicated discussions in different places.