Wikipedia talk:Petition to the WMF on handling of interface changes

Petition wording

Discussion of petition wording. {{draft proposal}} notice to be removed once consensus is clear.

Support current wording, which is mine and is OK, but not great. Suggestions for improvements welcome. Rd232 ^talk 10:43, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Both sides of the debate have seemed very arrogant at times, but the WMF need to remember that it's the multitude of editors that are more important than a few WMF employees. In addition to this, the notifications system was released with some major flaws, and appeared out of nowhere for a lot of us - even someone who keeps an eye on what happens behind-the-scenes occasionally (ie me) missed any news on it completely. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 14:33, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to note that the above is both a comment on the wording, which seems good to me, and my opinions on the matter. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 14:34, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Because more communication before changes is a good thing, even if the changes are also a good thing. :) — Cirt (talk) 04:26, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I think we're good to go now; removing draft status, and moving this discussion to the talk page to avoid distracting people. Rd232 ^talk 15:59, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Interface changes

Do we want to include something from the essay Wikipedia:Interface changes in this petitition?

We could even ask them to accept the essay as a guide to how to do things.

At the very least we could add in some words about making things opt-in or very easy to opt out.

Yaris678 (talk) 16:50, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New executive director and trustee election

Are you guys all aware that the board of trustee elections are coming soon, and that Wikimedia is hiring a new ED? Both of these will have far more influence than a petition, so I suggest you pay attention. II | (t - c) 05:25, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are we endorsing the examples of "good and bad practice"?

The petition itself seems like it's just recommending good practice, but I don't want to endorse the examples section. Wikid77 has posted a comment there (about making new features opt-in) which is the exact opposite of my opinion and which I want to actively oppose. So I'm wary of signing the petition lest I could be taken to endorse that view. Can the "examples" be a separate area of proposals with discussion and !votes on their merits? MartinPoulter (talk) 15:20, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think examples of good/bad practice is the most important aspect of this page. So, more input there would be welcome. – SJ + 19:45, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

+1 -- More examples, and discussion of said examples, would be super. -- phoebe / (talk to me) 21:50, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edited the "petition"

I edited the "petition". Grammar and punctuation. Respectfully, Tiyang (talk) 06:23, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]