Grants talk:IdeaLab

Congratulations on the (re)Launch! The new design is fascinating, and I love the icons. Thanks for everyone who worked on this. --Haithams (talk) 19:47, 12 July 2013 (UTC) Reply

Could we use ISO 8601 (i. e. "YYYY-MM-DD") for dates, please? "11/12/13" makes my brain stumble :-). --Tim Landscheidt (talk) 20:41, 21 September 2013 (UTC) Reply

Agree the current format is too US-centric and that case makes my brain stumble too :) ISO 8601 feels a bit too far on the robotic end of the spectrum though. What if we used DD Month YYYY instead, as signatures do? (no idea how easy this is to implement, but I think it might be more familiar to the widest set of people if it wasn't too much trouble). Siko (WMF) (talk) 18:57, 23 September 2013 (UTC) Reply

Paging Jonathan Morgan! heather walls (talk) 21:21, 24 September 2013 (UTC) Reply

Yeah, please :) M/D/Y is only used by silly people ;-) Steven Zhang (talk) 13:42, 25 September 2013 (UTC) Reply

Just seeing this now. My pager must be on the fritz :) I can implement this, and it shouldn't take too much time. It's in my queue. Jtmorgan (talk) 18:58, 27 September 2013 (UTC) Reply

As a busy and active Wikimedian, I rely on my watchlist and pings to keep me informed, and sometimes I see things of interest in RecentChanges. I am finding that the construct of Grants:IdeaLab doesn't suit itself to easily watching developments here by that methodology, instead it requires visiting and eyeballing (a physical interactivity requirement). Is there a means that what is happening here could have "push" rather than just a "pull" type interaction. If this is not possible by watchlists, or an evident newsletter, could there be a means where users could transclude components for their user pages to track the happenings. If these things do exist, then they are not evident, and should be highlighted, maybe in a section for how the busy Wikimedian follows Grants. I know that this is somewhat selfish of me, however, if you can do that, it then waves at me, and can entice me in. Of course, my being opinionated, may lead to regrets.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:03, 30 October 2014 (UTC) Reply

Hi billinghurst. Thanks for the feedback. Push notifications definitely aren't off the table for future IdeaLab development. We want to make it easier for more people to participate in the IdeaLab. What kinds of events are you currently missing out on, that you would like to be notified about? Also: could you say more about how the design of the IdeaLab doesn't facilitate watching pages? I want to make sure I understand where we're falling short. Cheers, Jmorgan (WMF) (talk) 20:03, 31 October 2014 (UTC) Reply

I'd go along with this. I too am very watchlist-driven. It's part of a broader problem with watchlists, which are fine to track changes once an article exist, but don't help you knowing about the creation of a new article within a particular category (or using a particular template). Maybe there is something I can watch to find out, but I don't know about it. Kerry Raymond (talk) 00:06, 14 April 2015 (UTC) Reply

@Kerry Raymond:, I'm totally happy to brainstorm options, but I'm still not sure I understand billinghurst's original point. I maintain the IdeaLab by monitoring my watchlist, and by using Special:RecentChagesLinked feeds. For example, here's a Jmorgan (WMF) (talk) 17:24, 14 April 2015 (UTC) Reply

I am not sure I can speak for User:billinghurst. But to me, it sounds like the big difference is that you know how to do it and I don't (and I don't think I am the least technologically literate person on Wikipedia). I don't see new articles being created on my watchlist unless I have watched an existing redlink (which presupposes I know what the article will be called). I don't know how to configure my watchlist to contain RecentChanges in the way you describe (does not appear in Preferences?). But that's a general comment. Speaking specifically about IdeaLab, I am not sure I would want to receive notification of every single little edit on IdeaLab via my watchlist (I'd be unable to keep up with checking through the volume of notifications each day I suspect). I'd probably prefer to just have an idealab email list where announcements of new ideas were posted and then I could watch just those I found interesting. That's how I became aware of some of the ideas as the proposer sent an email to either the gendergap mailing list or the research mailing list announcing their idea. Kerry Raymond (talk) 21:34, 14 April 2015 (UTC) Reply

having to physically visit each specific feed page doesn't work for the casual observer. The current design of the page defeats the traditional watchlist system of New edit ... Visit. Your design only captures those truly active in the space. Disappointing.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:42, 14 April 2015 (UTC) Reply

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Kerry Raymond I didn't know how Special:RecentChangesLinked worked until relatively recently either. The amount of 'hidden' functionality in our software kind of amazes me sometimes. Your suggestion (and billinghurst's) for push/email notifications, either to a mailing list or individually, is a great one. @Billinghurst: I'm sorry, I still don't understand your point completely. It sounds like you're saying that the IdeaLab is harder to watch than other portals/pages on wiki, and I don't see why that should be the case. Specifically the sentence "The current design of the page defeats the traditional watchlist system of New edit ... Visit." confuses me. Cheers, Jmorgan (WMF) (talk) 16:37, 16 April 2015 (UTC) Reply

@Jmorgan (WMF): just if you watchlist the obverse of this page it never physically changes as it inhales templates. So all the activity occurs on subpages, so Watchlist is ineffective. Compared with something like RFC where new subpages are manually added so trigger the watchlist.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:35, 17 April 2015 (UTC) Reply

Ah, now I understand. Thanks for clarifying. I'll note the feedback for future development plans. Jmorgan (WMF) (talk) 15:52, 17 April 2015 (UTC) Reply

Hi

I'm almost finished writing a grant application for a position as Wikimedian in Residence at UNESCO, is IdeaLab the place I can share a proposal for wider community input when it's formatted to the PEG grant format already? I would very much like input from Wikiprojects and also chapters in terms of the content of the project and being able to register interest in participation.

Thanks

Mrjohncummings (talk) 18:21, 5 January 2015 (UTC) Reply

@Mrjohncummings: Since it's already formatted as a PEG, I would suggest submitting the request there. If you'd like to get community input before review, set the status to "DRAFT" in the infobox. Once you're ready for review, set the status to "OPEN". Hope that helps, Jmorgan (WMF) (talk) 18:34, 5 January 2015 (UTC) Reply

@Jmorgan (WMF):, many thanks, I will do that :) --Mrjohncummings (talk) 18:59, 5 January 2015 (UTC) Reply

For reference the application is here Grants:PEG/MrjohnCummings/UNESCO_Wikimedian_in_Residence Mrjohncummings (talk) 23:19, 5 January 2015 (UTC) Reply

I just endorsed an Idea. Does that mean I have to fund it if it gets passed? I sure hope not. --Mr. Guye (talk) 00:17, 12 March 2015 (UTC) Reply

No Mr. Guye, of course not :) This isn't Kickstarter. WMF grants will provide all the funding. You just get to give advice and enthusiasm. Cheers, Ocaasi (talk) 00:23, 12 March 2015 (UTC) Reply

@Jmorgan (WMF) and Siko (WMF):, The edit intro to making and making an IEG says "Step 1. Update your infobox Change the infobox template at the top of the edit window {{IdeaLab/Idea/Infobox}} to the IEG infobox: {{IEG/Proposals/Infobox}}". However Inspire Grant ideas seem to not have {{IdeaLab/Idea/Infobox}}, but {{Probox}}, which seems to be a Lua-based template that is quite similar. However it does not seem to support the paramter "status=". So what is the actual final template you'd like on a proposal? {{IEG/Proposals/Infobox}}, or {{Probox}} or other? Maximilianklein (talk) 12:22, 22 March 2015 (UTC) Reply

Hey Maximilianklein We want to use the Probox template. Thanks for the heads-up--I'll update the editintro and make sure that Probox supports status= consistently. Cheers, Jmorgan (WMF) (talk) 18:45, 22 March 2015 (UTC) Reply

Someone linked an idea and from looking at the description I couldn't tell that it had been formally submitted as grant request. I only understood it was when I saw the rejection message on the talk page. I think the infobox and categories should be more explicit; I'm also not sure whether it's good to have grant requests for IEG scattered across multiple base pages based on their history (some are under Grants:IEG, some under Grants:IdeaLab, some who knows where). --Nemo 07:06, 18 May 2015 (UTC) Reply

I think they are only under Grants:IdeaLab and Grants:IEG (right?), but I agree that the contents of the Idealab are overdue for consolidation and clarification. Mjohnson (WMF) and AWang (WMF) have been moving the recently awarded Inspire grant pages to the IEG and PEG portals, respectively. But now is a good time to do some basic cleanup around the IdeaLab, make sure everything's categorized correctly, and move things that need moving. I'll follow up with the program officers later this week. Thanks for the nudge, Jmorgan (WMF) (talk) 18:13, 18 May 2015 (UTC) Reply

Hello, I also would like guidance on the future of IdeaLab. I like using IdeaLab as a space for proposing ideas which could use collaborators but for which grant funding will not be requested. It is troublesome for people to support ideas which are labeled as "grants" because people are more likely to collaborate when money is not involved.

I would like for IdeaLab and Grants:Learning patterns to move out of the grants space and into any other space, maybe a new "Ideas" space or maybe just "Meta:" space.

The grants space is not even listed at Help:Namespace. Is Grants: the only meta namespace which is not listed? Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:39, 16 June 2015 (UTC) Reply

Hi Bluerasberry, glad you like using IdeaLab for ideas that don't need funding - that was always my hope! Agree that the Grants namespace can be confusing to some. We've looked into this a few times in the past, but getting a new namespace isn't all that easy and would introduce some complications into the backend systems (bot code, etc) that make IdeaLab go. We can keep looking into options, but until there is stronger justification to make this move happen relative to the effort it will require, I don't see it taking priority. Also, the Grants namespace has friendly space expectations now but it is unclear to me whether the meta community would support those extending to other namespaces...and we can't run an IdeaLab w/o a friendly space. Not sure about why the Grants namespace isn't listed or what else might be unlisted as well though, that seems like something that should just be fixed? Cheers, Siko (WMF) (talk) 16:23, 7 October 2015 (UTC) Reply

Siko (WMF) I commented at Grants_talk:Friendly_space_expectations#Strange_theory_about_where_this_applies - I would be keen on applying uniform civility expectations everywhere. I am sorry about what happened with Inspire but if you are suggesting that in the grants namespace there is selective policing against broader meta policy then something seems odd about that. I would like for meta to remain a community space in general. There are many options for keeping peace and engaging the community.

Instead of making a new namespace I would like to see the grants namespace renamed to "ideas". Most of the grants namespace is occupied by content unrelated to grants, so already there is a problem because super-users know to use it in ways unrelated to grants but casual users can only see it as the place to post "grants".

You set the priorities and you know the backend. Good luck - it must be difficult. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:46, 7 October 2015 (UTC) Reply

Hi

Is there a nice looking template or something that can be added to the top of the page to show that the idea has now been turned into a real thing?

Thanks

Mrjohncummings (talk) 15:36, 19 August 2015 (UTC) Reply

Not currently. But you could do something like...

Arbitrary text here

Status:  In progress

Jmorgan (WMF) (talk) 20:32, 19 August 2015 (UTC) Reply

Thanks Jmorgan (WMF), it would be really nice to have a good looking template or maybe just something in the infobox, it would also help with metrics to be easily able to look how many pages in the Ideaslab have come to fruition. Mrjohncummings (talk) 07:30, 20 August 2015 (UTC) Reply

Love this idea, John. We'll be doing another upgrade sprint on the IdeaLab at some point and will keep this suggestion in mind! @I JethroBT (WMF): let's add this to the wishlist. Siko (WMF) (talk) 16:27, 7 October 2015 (UTC) Reply

I have a grant proposal where I've budgeted in some co-funding, and we may have time to start early on the project. Would it be considered bad form to start some of the work ahead of time? --Unhammer (talk) 17:20, 5 October 2015 (UTC) Reply

Hi, Unhammer - it isn't bad form to start early, but we can't guarantee funding at this point. So I suppose the main risk is you'd get started with the partial funding you already have, and if the IEG committee doesn't end up recommending your proposal for funding, you may not be able to complete the task if it relies on WMF funding as well. As long as you're aware of that risk, I don't see a blocker to doing some early work with support from another funder though. Hope that makes sense! Copying @Mjohnson (WMF): to track this going forward. Siko (WMF) (talk) 16:35, 7 October 2015 (UTC) Reply

OK, that sounds good, thanks for clearing it up :) --Unhammer (talk) 18:05, 7 October 2015 (UTC) Reply

During my recent visit to plwiki I got the IdeaLab banner about the article curation. Maybe because I wasn't visually different from the typical message boxes, maybe because the text was in italics, maybe because it was left-aligned - I have actually read it and it was the first Central Notice banner that didn't annoy me. Congratulations and good job!  « Saper  // talk  »  19:50, 20 March 2016 (UTC) Reply