Space Progress Report - November 2019

November was a month of sustained growth and more conversation in Space. Let’s see how December goes, with the holidays celebrated in many regions.

Thank you so much for your feedback to our question in last month’s report. Good discussion! This time we want to ask you: if we should focus on one problem Space has, what problem would that be?

If you have any other questions or suggestions, please comment below.

See also Space Community Spotlight #1.


These metrics correspond to November 2019 unless specified otherwise. The target numbers refer to the Success criteria for the Wikimedia Space prototype. The previous numbers refer to Space Progress Report - October 2019.


For more information about these levels, see Trust levels and user rights in Wikimedia Space.

Weekly signups Jun 5 - Nov 30

Weekly user visits (registered users) Jun 5 - Nov 30

Click here for more graphics

Daily engaged users (weekly average) Jun 5 - Nov 30

New contributors (weekly) Jun 5 - Nov 30

Daily signups

Daily user visits (registered users)

Daily engaged users

New contributors


  • 6.6 blog posts per week (average, target 3, previous 6.5)
  • :white_check_mark: 4 languages other than English with at least 1 blog posts per month: Spanish, French, Portuguese, Arabic (target 3, previous 0)
    • 1 in non-Latin script (target 2, previous 0)
    • 1 in right-to-left script (target 1, previous 0)
  • 0 volunteers in the Editorial Board (target 2, previous 0)
  • 2 languages other than English supported by native volunteer reviewers: French, Arabic (target 3, previous 0)


  • 61.3 daily visits (registered users, average, target 200, previous 51.7)
  • 22.6 daily engaged users (liking or posting, average, target 40, previous 18.0)
  • 108 users liking or posting monthly excluding Foundation staff (target 190, previous 80)
  • 19 users posting at least 5 times in the past month excluding Foundation staff (target 40, previous 7)
  • 1 active closed group/category (at least 1 post, target 3, previous 3)
  • :white_check_mark: 3 languages other than English with more than 5 users participating in that language: French, Spanish, Portuguese (target 3, previous 2)
    • 0 in non-Latin script (target , previous 0)
    • 0 in right-to-left script (target, previous 0)
  • 0 volunteers in the Moderators team (group/category moderators not counted, target 2, previous 0)
  • 0 languages represented by volunteers on Moderators team (B2 level, target 2, previous 0)

Wikimedia Foundation

  • 0% of departments formally briefed about Wikimedia Space (0 of 8, target 100%, previous 0%)
  • 40% of Foundation announcements published in Space on time (6 of 15, target 100%, previous 60%)

The one thing I’d love to have for Space is to be able to invite people by email. This works pretty well in Mailman: either an event organiser, or the participant themselves, can put an email address in the ‘subscribe’ form and the person gets a confirmation email. After responding to that, they get updates about whatever’s going on.

For something similar to work in Space, it’d have to be able to invite them and (after confirmation) automatically watch a tag, I think. No idea if that’s possible, but it’d be cool!


Well, I’m not sure there is “one main problem”.

But just yesterday I was speaking with a new contributor who’d like to be aware of events happening in his city. I would have loved to be able to answer: “hey, just go to this Space map, enter your location and activate notifications for events happening nearby”. Such a feature would really be great.


Thanks for these thoughts, @Samwilson and @Opsylac. Totally agree.

Invite by email will be commissioned to work with the Wikimedia login next quarter and is being tracked here:

This would be an interesting addition. The out-of-the-box Discourse invites allow the invitee to be automatically added to a closed group, but as far as I know doesn’t allow for automatic watching of a tag, category or subcategory. I can see a lot of value in this. I’ve added it to the Phab task.

And @Opsylac, I really like this use case. It was more or less captured in but I’ve added a comment to specify. I have this under the workboard for this quarter, but given how long multilingual features are taking, it may end up getting pushed to next quarter (recurring events have priority over this, but this would be next).

Thanks to both of you for helping add more detail to these feature requests.


I’d probably say mailing list emulation, as there are a lot of people who use email and aren’t really interested in learning another web interface.

Other relatively high-profile issues:

  • category moderators can’t actually moderate
  • mobile notifications suck
  • making login less fragile
  • how can we make Space more like a set of spaces, instead of one single large space? E.g. how do I know how many people from my community participate / lurk?

I don’t quite get that part.

Otherwise I agree :slight_smile:

Categories like arwiki or Tremendous Wiktionary UG are meant to function like mailing lists or forums for some specific community, but the people managing them do not get the tools they would with a list or forum for guiding outreach (list of members, number of active members etc).

1 Like

I agree this is a hurdle for people who want to take ownership over their community categories. Unfortunately the category moderator feature ended up being a total dud (it only allowed for responding to flags, with no other moderator rights). We could commission further development of it, but we thought if we expand category moderator powers to include access to that important information you’re mentioning (along with other rights), then the category moderators should go through the same vetting/nomination/selection process as regular site moderators. So the idea was we might as well just have umbrella moderators, with a process that applies to anyone interested, and give these users general moderator rights. Moderators who want to focus on their communities would be able to do that.

Well, all that information is public in theory (you could count how many users have posted in the category etc) just not displayed anywhere. So I don’t see why that would require extra vetting.

That said, giving category moderators is certainly one way to handle things. The main issue with it would be whether moderators have access (especially unlogged access) to personal data (like IPs) and to private groups / messages. I would not want any category moderator anywhere to be able to read potentially confidential conversations. As far as not using moderation actions outside the category, I don’t think that would be a problem. People are generally good at following rules when rule violations are publicly visible, and the damage done by a rouge moderator using actions somewhere where they do not have the authority would be basically zero.

What does that mean? Intuitively a daily engaged user is a user who engages every day. But how can it then be a fraction?

“Daily engaged users” means: in one day, how many users engage ( :heart:, comment…).

The percentage comes from the calculation of the "Daily engaged users"average for the month (which is different than how many users have engaged at least once during a month).

I see, if one wanted to be less ambiguous one could phrase it as “# of users engaging on average per day”.


No more progress reports?
Is Space still treated as the space for Wikimedia communication?

1 Like