hi,
i find this a delicate topic in general, boiling down to two aspects at the
end. first, value edits (article space, not talk page and meta edits),
software contributions. when persons apply for positions in the wikiverse,
edits are considered a nice to have - which is imo setting a bad
example. second the technology that edit is easy highly influences
contributions. mobile edit experience is by far not where it should be, for
me it is unusable. given that africa is a mobile connected country it is no
wonder that we have so little contributions.
on a scholarship side, factor in the financial possibilities, and the cost
of coming might not be to bad. if africans contribute and 20 apply, i would
not find it wasted money to have them all come. i do not care about africa
as a continent, or percentage of whatever. it is a personal, human factor.
what counts is if persons from regions attend where the knowledge of the
movement is not so high. let people mix up with experienced persons to
discuss attitudes. but - they need to meet persons who edit otherwise it
has more an effect of travel agency :) this also means that i consider it
pointless if every year the same persons come. my mail does not mean i
appreciate the style and tone of olaniyans mail though, there i am 100%
with asaf, and rex.
rupert
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 10:40 PM, Douglas Scott <douglas.i.scott(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
I think Rexford and Asaf raise some good points here.
If we are serious
about Africa having a stronger presence at future Wikimanias we must
improve our efforts at increasing the number of editors from the continent
whist encouraging more editors to apply for scholarships with high quality
applications. It's a long road to travel that requires a lot of work but I
feel that the rewards in terms of edits from African sources and
representation within the broader community make it well worth it.
Regards,
Douglas.
On 11 Mar 2016 23:13, "Nkansah Rexford" <nkansahrexford(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> Thank you Ellie for the short breakdown of the stats in here. Will be on
> standby for more of these stats to be put up on the wiki.
>
> I think things will be more clearer when all the stats are up.
>
> Thanks.
> On 11 Mar 2016 7:25 pm, "Ellie Young" <eyoung(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
>> Isla,
>>
>> I am in the process of putting up information from the scholarship
>> committee onto the wiki and will respond to the other thread on wikimania-l
>> soon.
>>
>> 124 Scholarships were awarded.
>>
>> Of the 400 scholarships that passed into Phase 2 of the review, 20 were
>> African applicants passed Phase 2. 4 of those got scholarships, so by my
>> calculations that's 20% of the eligible African applicants.
>>
>> Geographic regions are *not* the emphasis of the program.
>>
>> You might want to take this up directly with the Scholarship Committee
>> if you have ideas for changes to the program in the future?
>>
>> Ellie Young
>> WMF Events Manager
>> on behalf of the Scholarship Committee
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 6:18 AM, Isla Haddow Flood <
>> isla(a)wikiloveswomen.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Okay - so - of 170 potential full and partial scholarships offered by
>>> the WMF, Africa got 4.
>>>
>>> FOUR.
>>>
>>> that is 0.02% of what was on offer.
>>>
>>> Mexico I could understand was difficult to access. BUT you couldn’t
>>> get closer to Africa than Italy, if you tried.
>>>
>>> That is just not acceptable.
>>>
>>>