Just to add - transportation was not a consideration to moving the conference to the Hilton, however this solved the serious transportation issues, and allowed starting the conference an hour earlier every day, and ending later, thus allowing time in the scheduled and allowing acceptance of about 30 more talks.Deror (Programme team)
From: "wikimania-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org" <wikimania-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
To: wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Monday, August 3, 2015 3:00 PM
Subject: Wikimania-l Digest, Vol 113, Issue 9
Send Wikimania-l mailing list submissions to
wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
wikimania-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
wikimania-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Wikimania-l digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: remind me - where was the discussion and explanation on
changing the venue?... (Ellie Young)
2. Re: remind me - where was the discussion and explanation on
changing the venue?... (Joseph Fox)
3. Re: Fwd: Wikimania Scholarship (praveenp)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2015 15:23:12 -0700
From: Ellie Young <eyoung(a)wikimedia.org>
To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)"
<wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] remind me - where was the discussion and
explanation on changing the venue?...
Message-ID: <E6F9AEF4-4AD9-46E8-B507-20885D49DAD7(a)wikimedia.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Back in May when we announced to this mailing list that registration was open we included the following:
* WMF and WM-MX are grateful to Conaculta and the Biblioteca Vasconcelos for
their kind offer to host the conference at the magnificent Biblioteca.
However, due to logistical issues, we had to change the venue to the Hilton
Hotel La Reforma. We will continue to work with both Conaculta and the
Biblioteca Vasconcelos to leverage the experience and capacity of all
institutions to generate and disseminate content that guarantees free and open
knowledge to the whole of society.
The biggest logistical issue at the Biblioteca that wasn’t resolved at that time was
being able to guarantee that our connectivity requirements could be met.
Ellie Young
WMF Conference Coordinator
> On Aug 2, 2015, at 1:57 PM, Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> In the 2014 Wikimania bidding process the library was advertised as the conference venue.
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblioteca_Vasconcelos <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblioteca_Vasconcelos>>
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2015_bids/Mexico_City/Biblioteca_… <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2015_bids/Mexico_City/Biblioteca_…>>
>
> At some point the venue changed to the Hilton Hotel.
>
> I had been excited that there would be a conference in a library. We had a nice conference just the same.
>
> Where can I find whatever published explanation and discussion there has been about the venue change?
>
> Also- thanks to all volunteer organizers for presenting a great Mexico conference. Everyone who contributed should be very proud and I hope that no one criticizes anything that any of the volunteers did. The conference was great thanks to the volunteer organizers.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Lane Rasberry
> user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
> 206.801.0814
> lane(a)bluerasberry.com <mailto:lane@bluerasberry.com>_______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
I agree with Pau.Deror
From: "wikimania-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org" <wikimania-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
To: wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2015 10:32 AM
Subject: Wikimania-l Digest, Vol 113, Issue 12
Send Wikimania-l mailing list submissions to
wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
wikimania-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
wikimania-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Wikimania-l digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Video recording of Wikimania sessions (Pau Giner)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 09:32:05 +0200
From: Pau Giner <pginer(a)wikimedia.org>
To: kerry.raymond(a)gmail.com, "Wikimania general list (open
subscription)" <wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] Video recording of Wikimania sessions
Message-ID:
<CALRPo1CGXrzpT7=ZVJSstioSR4-Qfnc9nYEJULdnbM8nrzziGw(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> However, I would suggest looking hard at the stats on how often videos are
> viewed (and if there is a way to know if they are viewed all the way
> through or not).
For Wikimania 2014, the Youtube page
<https://www.youtube.com/user/WikimaniaLondon/videos> and livestream
<https://livestream.com/wikimania> show some stats (videos are also
available in Commons so some views may not be captured in the former
pages). On livestream, were videos were shared first, the most viewed video
shows 2,359 views, it is not hard to find videos in the 100-500 view range,
and others just have less than 20 views.
Personally, even though I attended Wikimania this year I'd like to have
recordings available in order to (a) view sessions I was interested in but
I had to miss due to parallel tracks, and (b) be able to distribute the
recordings about the projects I'm involved in with the people that are
interested in those projects.
Pau
On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 12:13 AM, Kerry Raymond <kerry.raymond(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> As someone who has never attended a Wikimania but would like to, I don’t
> think videos are the solution. As someone who has organised conferences and
> had this issue of videoing come up, again I don’t think videos are the
> solution.
>
>
>
> Folks who can’t attend events for whatever reason do ask for videos (I’ve
> done it too!). However, I would suggest looking hard at the stats on how
> often videos are viewed (and if there is a way to know if they are viewed
> all the way through or not). I know that I might look at videos of a couple
> of keynotes and maybe some talk that someone really recommends to me
> knowing my interest, but I would be genuinely unlikely to look at a whole
> lot of them. When people say “I wish I could go to Wikimania”, I don’t
> think they are saying “I wish I could listen to those talks”. Conferences
> are much more about the opportunity to interact, including the opportunity
> to interact in relation to the talks. Also, when you go to a conference,
> you are committed to setting aside those days of your life to focussing on
> the conference (well, that used to be the case, now with mobile devices and
> wifi, everyone sits in conferences reading their email, checking FaceBook,
> and keeping on top of their job back home, and generally misses hearing the
> talks even though they are in the same room!). If you aren’t going to the
> conference, you don’t have the big block of time in your life set aside to
> watch all the videos. Also a conference generates its own excitement,
> you’re there and your endorphins are working overtime. With watching videos
> after the event, you don’t have that buzz. When I watch videos, I know I
> often give them my attention for a couple of minutes, then have them going
> while I read email or whatever – the video finishes and I haven’t heard it
> as my mind has been elsewhere.
>
>
>
> And, no matter what people say, there is a lot of work involved in
> creating videos both during the event and in postprocessing after the
> event. People say “quality doesn’t matter” in advance but then people
> complain afterwards if the quality isn’t perfect (can’t see the speaker
> clearly, can’t hear the speaker clearly, can’t see the slide projection).
> Again people say this can be done with volunteers, but actually your
> volunteers are wanting to engage with the conference, not spend the whole
> conference messing around with video equipment. And if the videos are not
> captured well in the first place, it’s hard to fix those problems after the
> event.
>
>
>
> Also video postprocessing is mostly done after the event (it’s too busy
> during the event). What people (who don’t organise conferences) don’t seem
> to understand is that for organisers, the end of the conference means a
> return to their normal activities. For months, they’ve been putting off
> their boss, colleagues, family and friends with “please, can this wait
> until after the conference”. Of course, there are post-conference actions
> that have to be done (payments and accounts finalised, thank you letters
> written, reports written, etc) but, as far as your
> boss/colleagues/family/friends are concerned, the conference is OVER – you
> have no favours left, you have to make it up to them. It’s hard enough to
> fit in the minimum post-conference actions that you have to do, let alone
> extra things like high quality videos. And the adrenaline that allowed you
> and your volunteers to get everything done before and during the conference
> has now deserted you; you’ve run your race and have nothing left in your
> tank.
>
>
>
> So videoing and postprocessing often ends up being done by professionals,
> meaning a lot of money spent. It’s so easy to say “use volunteers” but the
> thing about volunteers is that they do the things they want when they feel
> like doing them to the extent of their ability. And doing them in the
> middle of the conference and after the conference is not a great time for
> that (they want to engage with the conference and they need to return to
> their normal duties after the event too). And you might have the volunteers
> but who just don’t have that skill set. Also unless you get those videos
> out quickly, nobody will watch them – the momentum is lost.
>
>
>
> In summary, I think it is much cheaper and easier to collect presentation
> slides or speaker notes or whatever other material the presenter has and
> make them available as a way to get conference content to non-attendees and
> this should be the preferred strategy for the bulk of presentations. Videos
> should be limited to keynotes or talks expected to be of particular
> interest. Stats on viewing and perhaps surveying on how much of the videos
> are being viewed should be collected to see how much the videos are
> actually used. And look at using professionals to do the video work, unless
> you really do have suitably skilled volunteers available (and not committed
> to other tasks), if you want the videos to be of good quality and be
> available quickly.
>
>
>
> Kerry
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* wikimania-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
> wikimania-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org] *On Behalf Of *??????
> *Sent:* Tuesday, 4 August 2015 4:22 AM
> *To:* Wikimania general list (open subscription) <
> wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Wikimania-l] Video recording of Wikimania sessions
>
>
>
> Andrew++
>
> I find it odd that we are willing to have a huge budget for Wikimania and
> none for recording videos of talks for non-attendees to view. I think we
> owe it to them. It can be crowdfunded if need be.
>
> An interesting idea perhaps is to group video if we have a reliable way to
> crowd source this.
>
> I did notice a video cam recording the talk after mine. I am unsure if
> mine was recorded as well. Does anyone know who was operating the tripod
> camera? I seen it in other talks too.
>
>
> -- とある白い猫 (To Aru Shiroi Neko)
>
>
>
> On 18 July 2015 at 23:17, Asaf Bartov <abartov(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> Andrew++.
>
> A.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Andrew Lih <andrew(a)andrewlih.com> wrote:
>
> I'm trying to guerrilla video record as many Wikimania sessions that I can
> attend, so I cannot respond at length.
>
>
>
> But I do want to say: the cost/benefit analysis needs to consider the
> quality of the viewers and not just the quantity.
>
>
>
> When a Wikipedian in Residence can show their institution the video of
> their Wikimania presentation as evidence of impact and engagement, it can
> lead to renewal of their positions and more initiatives.
>
>
>
> When the video of a Wikimania panel on COI and PR editing can convince
> more multi-billion dollar PR firm to understand our guidelines and terms of
> use, that's a major outcome.
>
>
>
> When someone talks about Wiki Loves Earth, #100wikidays or other
> grassroots projects, video provides a unique window into the emotions and
> motivations you cannot capture in a mailing list or blog post.
>
>
>
> When in 10 years, we want to know the passions and personalities that led
> us to where the movement is, where will we look?
>
>
>
> If we're expecting Wikimania videos to rack up the same views as LOLcats,
> it ain't going to happen. It has always been a very small core community
> does a massive amount of the innovation and work that keeps the projects
> going, and the ability to talk to each other in deep, complex and
> accessible ways is vital.
>
>
>
> For a movement dedicated to capturing the sum of all human knowledge, it's
> surprising how blasé we are in letting our own community history fall by
> the wayside.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -Andrew Lih
> Associate professor of journalism, American University
> Email: andrew(a)andrewlih.com
> WEB: http://www.andrewlih.com
> BOOK: The Wikipedia Revolution: http://www.wikipediarevolution.com
> PROJECT: Wiki Makes Video
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wiki_Makes_Video
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 9:31 AM, Nkansah Rexford <nkansahrexford(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Recording video* is easy; you can do it on most mobile phones these days.
>
>
>
> And on that note, the wiki indaba conference was recorded solely on a
> mobile phone[1]. Although sound quality wasn't the best, with considerable
> thought on getting an appropriate accessory to handle sound, phones are
> also an alternative worth looking into.
>
>
>
> [1]
> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTdU_5c77__7y3igaHAauOyAvo2crj2cp
>
>
>
> --
>
> +Rexford <http://google.com/+Nkansahrexford> | khophi.co
> <http://khophi.co/about>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
>
> --
>
> Asaf Bartov
> Wikimedia Foundation <http://www.wikimediafoundation.org>
>
>
>
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
>
> https://donate.wikimedia.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
--
Pau Giner
Senior User Experience Designer
Wikimedia Foundation
Hi,
[ Since my question was repeatedly handled as my desperation of inability
to achieve the scholarship, I had to wait until Wikimania finished. :-) And
also this is not about someone going to Wikimanias again and again, it is
about granting Wikimania scholarships to same persons again and again]
I hope I could ask some questions directly:
* Why scholarship committee selecting same persons again and again for
years?
* What are the advantages to local community / Wikimedia of having a
"permanent" Wikimania scholarship holder?
* Why no regular Wikimedian get any scholarship, eventhough a developer's
wife got scholarships in multiple years even without any kind of
significant contributions?
* Is this scholarship committee solely depend on the "selling point"
provided by the applicant?
* Even now none of the Wikimanians shared anything with our community about
Wikimania, we even didn't see them anywhere near wikis. Did they attend the
Wikimania? How could we get their contributions to the Mania?
A slightly elaborated conversation is attached below (direction: bottom to
top), I got no clarity even after that. Please help.
Thanks and Regards,
Praveen P
User:Praveenp (ml.wp, commons, translatewiki)
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
Date: 4 May 2015 at 11:17
Subject: Re: Wikimania Scholarship
To: praveenp <me.praveen(a)gmail.com>
Hoi,
I know the WMF, it does not pull pranks like that to the best of my
knowledge. I would not even be surprised that there is a ticket for the
exact issue that you highlighted. (I am not looking for one, I have
interest). My point is again, it is NOT about having great language skills,
it is not about how often someone went. It is about how much of a
difference you may make at the conference. Preparing a speech is the way I
have done it and so can you.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 4 May 2015 at 07:16, praveenp <me.praveen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My point is not about someone going to Wikimanias again and again, it is
> about *Wikimania scholarships are granted to same persons again and again*.
> According to your argument persons with better language skill would be
> granted scholarship, and there is nothing wrong with it. IMO that is
> against Wikimedia philosophy and ethics. A scholarship committee is for
> assessing applicants through various ways. If they solely depend the
> "selling" point given by the applicant, there shouldn't be this scholarship
> committee :-).
>
> Consider this private post by me (I've added you), which is about a server
> error in application[1]:
> https://plus.google.com/+praveenp/posts/XtB1b9fmqcZ
> This roughly translates as, "I tried to apply Wikimania Scholarship, even
> server told me - F*** you". It was 19 January, and I was pretty sure that I
> wouldn't get any scholarship. I saw couple of other similar posts sharing
> same feeling. We are not Nostradamus :-) but we just know. And also it did
> happen just as we expected.
>
> I doubted that whether this should be shared or not (As you've clarified,
> this can easily be marked as inability to achieve scholarship). But on
> second thought, if this happened on ml.wikipedia, this would happened on
> every other projects.
>
> Regards,
> Praveen. P
> User:Praveenp
>
> [1]: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T87182
>
>
> On Sunday 03 May 2015 02:02 PM, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>
> Hoi,
> I have been to many Wikimanias myself. At every one of them I gave a
> presentation and I made it a point to have an idea of what it is that I
> achieved while being there. Your point is that the same people have been
> there, that is in and of itself not so relevant. It is what they achieved,
> it is how they networked. When people are known to be good at that, you
> will find that they often return to Wikimania.
>
> This year I do not have the bandwidth to go to Wikimania so I did not
> apply, I did not prepare a presentation even though it is trivially easy
> for me to do so.
>
> When you want to go to Wikimania, make sure that you are clear why you
> want to go, what you intend to achieve and make that obvious. That is why
> you may be selected for a grant. There is no justification in all the good
> work that you do when you cannot or do not express how going to Wikimania
> makes a difference.
>
> You have to sell this idea. There is no point in comparing yourself with
> others. They hope to achieve what they hope to achieve..
> Thanks,
> GerardM
>
> On 3 May 2015 at 09:57, praveenp <me.praveen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> It is hard for me to digest that scholarship committee is selecting same
>> persons again and again for last 6 or 7 years. I just put myself as an
>> example but I am sure there were many others have applied. :-)
>>
>> Regards,
>> Praveen. P
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sunday 03 May 2015 01:16 PM, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>>
>> Hoi,
>> Good to hear from you.. There are no policies except for the ones that
>> you know of as well. Obviously it makes a difference when you are able to
>> sell the reason why you should go to Wikimania. If someone does a better
>> job than you ... what can I say.
>>
>> The most obvious and easy way to get in is to submit proposals for a
>> talk, a workshop or anything else that shows that you want to achieve
>> something..
>> Hope that helps :)
>> Have fun
>> Gerard
>>
>> On 3 May 2015 at 09:38, praveenp <me.praveen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I don't know whether you are the right person but I truly believe you
>>> may have some ideas to answer my doubt :-) If I remember correctly, I did
>>> apply Wikimania scholarship last couple of years but never got one. :-(
>>> However every year User:Viswaprabha got scholarship even with his minimal
>>> wiki contributions. I know he is a great e-mail generator, but other than
>>> that I really wish to know whether there are any policies which restrict
>>> new people from getting scholarship.
>>>
>>> As you may know I translate Mediawiki, edit Wikipedia articles, file
>>> bugs, translate and contribute to commons, actively participate discussions
>>> (mostly as devils advocate :-) ) etc.. None of it never counts.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Praveen. P
>>> User:Praveenp
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Hello,
In the 2014 Wikimania bidding process the library was advertised as the
conference venue.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblioteca_Vasconcelos>
<
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2015_bids/Mexico_City/Biblioteca_…
>
At some point the venue changed to the Hilton Hotel.
I had been excited that there would be a conference in a library. We had a
nice conference just the same.
Where can I find whatever published explanation and discussion there has
been about the venue change?
Also- thanks to all volunteer organizers for presenting a great Mexico
conference. Everyone who contributed should be very proud and I hope that
no one criticizes anything that any of the volunteers did. The conference
was great thanks to the volunteer organizers.
Thanks,
--
Lane Rasberry
user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
206.801.0814
lane(a)bluerasberry.com
Mina,
Thanks for your input, and I hope you are eventually able to work your idea
into a proposal. I see that my original mail (which included the link you
request) didn't make it to the list. You can still see it here in the
archives from July as the last mail in the list under "Thread".
I don't know why it was blocked so I won't link it here but if you scroll
to the bottom of this mail and click there and then click through to
archives you will get there.
Maybe it's because I included too many links - I sometimes wonder about
these lists!
Jane
On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 9:38 AM, Mina Theofilatou <theoth(a)otenet.gr> wrote:
> Hi all and happy August:)
>
> I've been watching this discussion on Wikimania Scholarships, and I'm
> happy that Ellie joined in the discussion: I think her reply was the most
> valuable and well-referenced in the thread.
>
> Being a first-time Wikimania scholarship participant - I was offered a
> partial scholarship in 2011 but had to decline NOT because I wasn't
> satisfied with the terms, but for serious personal reasons - I would like
> to add a few comments to the discussion.
>
> 1) The Wikimania experience not only met my expecations, it exceeded them.
> It was amazing to live the energy, the enthusiasm of the Wikimedia
> community "live" for the first time instead of online. Finally meeting the
> faces behind the usernames I had interacted with for years was magical. And
> words cannot describe how I loved the place - Mexico City - all the new
> Mexican and international friends I made both inside and outside the wiki
> commuity, people I feel as if I've known for years... memories and
> acquantances that will be treasured for life:)
>
> 2) That said, I have to agree with all those supporting newcomers to
> Wikimania: this experience has added a new dimension to my relation with
> the community, and even if I never attend another Wikimania, its impact
> will last forever. So yes, I would be willing to "sacrifice" my chance at
> another scholarship if I knew that in 2016 another equally eligible and
> enthusiastic Wikimedian would have the opportunity to gain the Wikimania
> experience like I did at Wikimania 2015.
>
> 3) New participants want to soak in as much Wikimania as they can: they
> attend more sessions, interact with more people, attend all the receptions
> and parties (which means MORE interaction, more acquaintances, more
> prospects for collaboration on exciting transnational projects) and do not
> have the attitude "been there, done that" that I discerned in a couple of
> repeat scholarship recipients.
>
> 4) I agree that this doesn't mean repeat applications should be
> discouraged: just that their applications should be STRINGENTLY reviewed.
> For example: for me the most important session was IdeaLab, during which
> the two wonderful ladies holding the session helped me shape an idea that
> was going around in my mind for months into a proposal, which I will
> hopefully develop into a grant. That was absolutely amazing and it wouldn't
> have been possible if I weren't there. IF however I fail to develop the
> proposal further, I see no reason why I should be entitled to eligibility
> for a scholarship next year.
>
> 5) Finally, I would like someone to please provide a quick link to the
> Scholarship online report section for 2015, as I am eager to write about my
> experience.. I don't recall having received an e-mail pointing to the wiki
> for this (I've only submitted the general attendee survey).
>
> Thanks to Wikimania 2015 for an amazing experience, best wishes from
> Kefalonia, Greece:)
>
> Mina (User:Saintfevrier)
(It got in moderation because of big size, I deleted everything)
Not Correct.
When a regular attendee goes a Wikimania, he or she knows better about the
environment, can make better connection and work more efficiently.
I (as a regular attendee) reported to my community this year in 23 July
<https://fa.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%D9%88%DB%8C%DA%A9%DB%8C%E2%80%8…>
and
I haven't written my report for WMF yet. When I finish my report for WMF
you can see how a regular attendee can help in a way that a newbie can't
(and don't get me wrong, IMHO scholarships should be granted to combination
of newbies and regulars, regulars were newbies once.)
Accusation of trying to undermine other people of global south community so
we can get scholarship or lead the community is offensive to me. I helped
people in Persian Wikipedia to elect more 'crats (which the community
considers them as leaders) and helped wikimania newbies to write their
applications more efficiently and helped them to prepare proper documents
for visa which is super complicated.
Best
>
> On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 4:09 PM Zana Strkovska <777.zana(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Just some thoughts over this sentence:
>>
>> *The ability to share experiences and information with a wider community
>> indicates that the applicant, if awarded a scholarship, would be able to
>> bring those experiences or lessons learned at Wikimania back home, thereby
>> enriching their home wiki community or home country.*
>>
>> New attendants at Wikimania, I mean - new at Wikimania, not new in the
>> movement, are delighted by contact with so many Wikimedians, they bring new
>> ideas at home, want to share more, in a contrary of one who attends
>> Wikimania year after year.
>>
>> Sometimes this is not recognize as fact.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Zana
>>
>