There may be a rumour circulating among some editors that the same people get sponsorship every year, but there is also a rumour that there is no point even applying if you had a grant three years ago. I considered it worth applying for Mexico as I had been turned down for both Hong Kong and Washington DC, but I know at least one editor who didn't apply this year because he had had sponsorship two or three years ago.In these circumstances it would be helpful to have a little information, no need to have names, but if we could have the number of people who have had sponsorship once, twice, three times or more in the last six years I suspect it would do much to reassure people that the myth that the same people get sponsorship every year is either true or untrue.
RegardsJonathanHere are some of the complaints which I have repeatedly heard, and which are critical to address for the sake of community health:Hello,Thanks Praveen for voicing concerns. They are worth addressing and what you are saying is what a significant and large demographic also has been believing for years. I first heard this in 2012. It is good that this year for the first time the list of scholarship recipients was published and shared openly. Regardless of whether the scholarship award process is fair and adequate, it is definitely true that the rumor is circulating among many countries, especially in the Global South, that some people are getting scholarships repeatedly.
Leave the fairness of the scholarship process aside. Regardless of its fairness, the process is generating ill-will because of lack of transparency and poor communication. The problem might be growing to something beyond what volunteers can manage and perhaps paid staff support from the communications department of the WMF would be a worthwhile investment to protect community reputation considering the seriousness of this, the problem's persistence, and the fact that a little more communication would go a long way to resolving the negativity.
- People who get scholarships somehow become better candidates for getting more scholarships, when ideally, new people from a region should attend Wikimania every time
- In the Global South especially, people who get scholarships actively or unconsciously suppress the development of their local Wikimedia community so that they retain a leadership role and remain the most eligible people to receive scholarships, grants, attention from Wikimedia community leaders, and other privileges.
- There is a tremendous amount of ignorance and lack of cultural insensitivity about the value of scholarships among WMF staff and Wikimedia community members from richer countries. At this year's Wikimania, we stayed in a city where ~75% of residents make USD 160 a month, (http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/07/24/world/social-issues-world/mexico-poverty-rate-hit-46-2-last-year-2-million-join-ranks-poor/) and stayed in a hotel where the nightly charge per room was $320 or two month's income by local standards. The amount of money thrown around during Wikimania is shocking to many Wikipedians and this issue is never discussed, so far as I know.
- Just in general and beyond scholarships - there needs to be more discussion about how money is viewed differently in different places. This applies to grants, staffing, community engagement, and many other things. If complaints are not pouring in about this, it is only because people are not comfortable speaking up. Diversity creates a lot of concerns and we are a very diverse community.
yours,
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 7:49 AM, Nicholas Bashour <nicholasbashour@gmail.com> wrote:I believe that what Praveen may be saying is that he thinks the value that a repeat scholarship recipient can gain from coming back to wikimania numerous times is outweighed by the value that someone who has never been to wikimania but has nevertheless been a very involved wikimedian can gain from attending. Therefore, given that there are limited resources, scholarships should always go to the people who can gain the most from receiving them, which Praveen may be arguing will always be someone who has never been to wikimania versus someone who has. He's saying that despite having many repeat scholarship recipients, there has not been any added value on wiki to justify that, and therefore new recipients should be actively prioritized over repeat ones. That's not to say whether or not that's actually the case or that this was the point he was trying to convey, but rather what I understood his argument to be.Best,NicholasSent from my iPhoneI just want to know why some users were able to achieve scholarship again and again while regular Wikimedians being excluded.And that is EXACTLY what Stuart explained. I understood, unless you didn't!
On Friday 31 July 2015 04:01 PM, Stuart Prior wrote:
Praveen,
I was chair of the Scholarship Committee for this year.
It's unfortunate that you didn't get a scholarship, however there were many high quality applications and sometimes the difference between success and failure is very small, and I feel genuinely bad for any Wikimedian with a good application that didn't make it, but it's very competitive.
We do take into account previous scholarship awards, and focus on making sure new people get a chance. But consistently good applications and excellent work can warrant repeat scholarship awards despite this.
In some cases where people have been granted Scholarships previously but have been unable to attend the conference due to visa issues we have considered that when receiving their applications for the current year.
I won't comment on any individual's scholarship, but "regular Wikimedians" certainly make up the bulk of the scholars. Edit count is not the only factor, but it still is a significant (and clearly verifiable) factor when looking at someone's application.
However, we looked for organisers too. Some of our community are better facilitators and community builders than they are editors, and running events, training and building partnerships are things that were marked favourably.
Moreover, two identical applicants can make wildly differing applications. We look for those that comprehensively demonstrate their contributions and qualify their statements.
Please apply again next year. You have just as much opportunity as anyone else.
Hope this helps.
Best
Stuart Prior
User:Battleofalma
On 31 July 2015 at 09:16, Dariusz Jemielniak <darekj@alk.edu.pl> wrote:
Hi Praveen,
I've been a steward, as well as the chair of the FDC for three years, so you may assume I've been somewhat active in Wikimedia movement. I did not receive a global scholarship neither (although I did eventually go, as I got elected to the Board of Trustees).
I think it is clearly an assumption of bad faith to say that there is a bias in scholarship committee. The criteria are explicit, and obviously with limited resources a large number of excellent candidates, even with accepted presentations, will not make it.
I would suggest you focus on Wikimedia activity, prepare a great presentation for the next year as well as a compelling application, and try again.
Best,
DJ "pundit"
31 lip 2015 10:07 "praveenp" <me.praveen@gmail.com> napisał(a):
Hi,
Please don't derail the actual topic of the thread. I really didnt assume such an interpretation from quoting his words. Whenever I asked about the issue to anybody, I generally got such a reply, which I want to avoid here.
If it is need to start a new thread, I will do that. :-)
But please tell me why some people regularly get scholarships atleast since 2008, active (in Wikimedia projects / outreach programms) users never get a chance to share their experience and problems at Wikimania.
Regards,
Praveen. P
On Friday 31 July 2015 12:40 PM, WereSpielChequers wrote:
Praveen,
Whether there was anything personal or confidential in Gerard's private emails to you is for him to say not for you to decide.
Regards
Jonathan
Hi,
Osmar Valdebenito,
No offense was intended :-(. For prominent communities that may be true, but could you check list of users who got scholarship from Malayalam community.
Amir Ladsgroup,
1) As you can see there is nothing confidential or personal in Gerards reply. He just gave a summary of "known" practices.
2) Users are not asking for trophies. They also want to participate Wikimania and share and get the experience.
3) Wikimedia projects are community processes. I simply don't understand how granting scholarship to same persons again and again for five or six years help that process. I also dont understand that communication and sharing of multiple viewpoints, ideas and practices is possible in the above scenario.
4) Yes; If clicking tick marks in translatewiki on some 500 string in 5 minutes before applying for scholarship (as reviewing the translation) is a prominent contribution.
In the beginning every body treated equal, we have multiple participants (with understandable reasons) for Wikimania. It started to shrink later and now people plainly believe granting scholarship is an act of favoritism. I also want to prove I am wrong.
Regards,
Praveen. P
User:Praveenp
PS: Mail striped because mailman held my previous reply claiming " Message body is too big:"
On Friday 31 July 2015 05:03 AM, Amir Ladsgroup wrote:
There are several issues I want to comment:1-First of all. Do you have permission from Gerard to publish your conversation? Maybe there is something confidential in it, Did you care to check?2- Scholarship is not award or trophy, bear that in mind.3- People are expected to come here and learn, communicate, etc. that's why a same person gets scholarship,4- No one's wife got scholarship because of being wife of someone. They probably are prominent contributors too.5- Check my first question and answer that. (Emphasizing)
Best
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 12:05 AM Osmar Valdebenito <b1mbo.wikipedia@gmail.com> wrote:
Sorry, but when I read "No regular Wikimedian get any scholarship", I stopped reading.
It is not only a lie, but also very unfair to all the extremely great Wikimedians that attended and made great contributions in Wikimania, and also the volunteers that have helped now and in the past reviewing and evaluated thousand of applications in the Scholarship Committee.
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
_______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
_______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
--
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
--_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l