Wikimania-l

wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org

2233 discussions

Video recording of Wikimania sessions
by Guillaume Paumier 15 Aug '15

15 Aug '15

Hello, First of all, I want to congratulate and thank the Wikimania organizing team for putting together one of the best-organized Wikimanias I've attended. It's easy to only notice the problems, so I wanted to call out the great work explicitly. My main disappointment this year is that many sessions seem to go unrecorded. In previous years, I seem to recall that videos for most sessions were recorded, and sometimes even streamed live. It sometimes took months for the videos to be processed and uploaded to Commons or other video hosting sites, but the videos existed. If the session isn't taped at all, then the record is lost forever. We have a lot of talented presenters giving insightful talks and generating great discussions, but only for the benefit of the small subset of our community that's present in the room. If we can't share what happens at Wikimania with our larger community, it seems like a missed opportunity for our movement. Even for Wikimania attendees, when there are up to 8 simultaneous tracks, it's easy to miss sessions you're interested in. I realize it's probably too late to do anything for this year's Wikimania, but I'd like to start a discussion about making video recordings of all sessions (not just a selection of them) a requirement for upcoming Wikimania bids. -- Guillaume Paumier

33 49

Wikimania Scholarship Reports Due Now
by Ellie Young 12 Aug '15

12 Aug '15

I sent an email out to everyone who received scholarships from WMF, WMDE, etc for Wikimania this year. The email was meant ONLY for those of you who have not yet submitted your report. I am sorry for any confusion it may have given anyone. Here is the reminder again: As part of your receiving a scholarship to attend Wikimania, you are required to share share something from the conference with the Wikimedia movement. Please submit your short report on meta-wiki using the instructions and input box provided here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_scholars#Reporting Thank you on behalf of the Foundation, Ellie Young Conference Coordinator Wikimedia Foundation

1 0

Re: [Wikimania-l] Wikimania Scholarship, Ellie Young's comments
by Mina Theofilatou 10 Aug '15

10 Aug '15

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) ----- Original Message ----- From: <wikimania-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org> To: <wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2015 4:28 AM Subject: Wikimania-l Digest, Vol 113, Issue 2 > 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: Wikimania Scholarship (Ellie Young) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 16:34:55 -0700 > From: Ellie Young <eyoung(a)wikimedia.org> > To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)" > <wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> > Cc: Sati Houston <shouston(a)wikimedia.org> > Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] Wikimania Scholarship > Message-ID: <556B5E55-5C3E-4DE4-B77B-837E17AD1D35(a)wikimedia.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > On behalf of the two of us here at WMF who work on the Scholarship Program > (Ellie and Sati), we’d like to offer the following response to the various > points raised in this thread: > > (1) To the point around repeat scholarship recipients: Given the concerns > about scholarships being awarded to the same people year over year, for > the 2015 Scholarship Program we included a two new questions in the > application[1]. From these new questions, the Scholarship Committee could > understand how an applicant's previous attendance had changed or improved > their Wikimedia contribution, and how attending this year would do so > again. To Stuart's previous point, the intention was to set the bar was > higher for those who had attended Wikimania before on a WMF scholarship, > but without setting an automatic or blanket penalty. > > As a data point, of the 2015 Scholarship recipients ~26% received a > scholarship in 2014 from WMF[2]. Unfortunately, we don't have data readily > available to do a year-over-year comparison for past Wikimainias. > > (2) and (3) To the point around enriching home communities / countries and > selection criteria:"Enrichment" was a big focus on the revised 2015 > Scholarship application and selection criteria. In previous years, the > application questions and selection criteria focused on an applicant's: > contribution to the Wikimedia movement, contribution to other free > knowledge/software movements, and interest in Wikimaina. Based on feedback > from previous scholarship applicants, recipients, the Scholarship > Committee, Wikimania organizers, and WMF staff, these questions and > criteria were changed to focus on: relevant experience within the > Wikimedia movement [3] as well as "Enrichment". > > From the Scholarships page[4], "Enrichment" means: "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. Applicants are encouraged to > write about or provide examples demonstrating this ability; a few examples > could be on-wiki reports, personal blog posts, or talks/presentations > given about what they learned from an event, conference, or discussion. > > To this end, as in 2014 we have required all scholarship recipients to > create an on-wiki report[5]. The summarized outcomes from 2014 can be > found here[5]. Once all 2015 scholarship reports have been submitted, > another analysis and summary of outcomes will be posted here[2]. > > [1] Question added into the 2015 application: > Have you previously attended Wikimania on a WMF scholarship? YES/NO > Note: there is already a separate question on "Have you attended Wikimania > before? If so, in what year or years?" > If YES, please use the space below to tell us about something great that > happened as a result of attending Wikimania previously? What are your > goals for attending Wikimania again? > [2] > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_scholars/2015_Outcomes > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_scholars/2015_Outcomes> > > [3] > https://wikimania2015.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships#Relevant_experience > <https://wikimania2015.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships#Relevant_experience> > > [4] https://wikimania2015.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships#Enrichment > <https://wikimania2015.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships#Enrichment> > > [5] > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_scholars/Proposed_2015… > <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_scholars/Proposed_2015…> > > (4) To the point of why we do not offer partial scholarships anymore, the > overhead processing to adminster this was high. We also noted that there > were regular occurrances of people then declining the offer and partial > scholarsips going unused was also high. > > If anyone would like to reach out to either one of us offlist to followup > with questions, we can be contacted at: > > eyoung(a)wikimedia.org > shouston(a)wikimedia.org > > Thanks, > > Ellie Young and Sati Houston > Wikimedia Foundation Community Engagement > >> On Jul 31, 2015, at 7:45 AM, Osmar Valdebenito >> <b1mbo.wikipedia(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> 2015-07-31 9:16 GMT-03:00 Lane Rasberry <lane(a)bluerasberry.com >> <mailto:lane@bluerasberry.com>>: >> Hello, >> >> 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. >> >> 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. >> >> Here are some of the complaints which I have repeatedly heard, and which >> are critical to address for the sake of community health: >> People who get scholarships somehow become better candidates for getting >> more scholarships, when ideally, new people from a region should attend >> Wikimania every time >> As I mentioned, this is complex. Because the option would be to penalize >> the applications of some people because they attended in the past, even >> if they made great presentions or where very active in the organization, >> and I don't really like that idea. People that received scholarships in >> the past is because they have been very active Wikimedians and that >> usually doesn't change year to year, so probably they will have great >> chances in following Wikimanias. >> 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. >> Being a member of the so-called Global South, I think this particularly >> wrong (and almost offensive). This is not an issue that only applies to >> the so-called Global South, but in general in our movement. Usually, >> leadership in most of our organizations are very stable, with some >> exceptions. Particularly because it is something that takes a lot of time >> and dedication. Saying that scholarship recipients "actively or >> unconsciously suppress development of local communities" is a huge >> accusation, especially when most of them work a lot trying to disseminate >> Wikipedia and increase the participation. And saying that it is "in the >> Global South especially", even more. >> 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/mexic… >> <http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/07/24/world/social-issues-world/mexic…>) >> 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. >> An international conference for ~1000 participants is expensive. We don't >> know the details but probably the WMF and the local organization made >> everything possible to have a very good Wikimania and saving resources as >> much as possible. I think WM2015 was a success and I'm very happy that >> scholarships recipients were able to be in a hotel next to the rest of >> the conference, when in other opportunities scholarship recipients had a >> lot of difficulties regarding accomodation. I think it was a step >> forward. >> However, I never heard anyone complaining about how much was spent in >> London, where prices are much higher than in Mexico City and where it was >> much more difficult for people in developing countries to participate. >> Mexico has a lot of difficulties (just like many other developed >> countries have), but questioning the decision to host Wikimania there and >> the decisions made by the local organization is also culturally >> insensitive. >> 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(a)gmail.com <mailto: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, >> >> Nicholas >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> Am 31.07.2015 um 07:39 schrieb Nkansah Rexford <nkansahrexford(a)gmail.com >> <mailto:nkansahrexford@gmail.com>>: >> >>> I 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(a)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(a)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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 31 Jul 2015, at 05:59, praveenp <me.praveen(a)gmail.com <>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> 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(a)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(a)lists.wikimedia.org <> >>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>>>>> <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 >>>>> <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 >>>> <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 >>>> <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 >>>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> +Rexford <http://google.com/+Nkansahrexford> | khophi.co >>> <http://khophi.co/about> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikimania-l mailing list >>> Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org> >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimania-l mailing list >> Wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> 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 <mailto:Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >> <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 > >

4 4

Update on what happened since the Wikimedia Conference 2015
by Cornelius Kibelka 06 Aug '15

06 Aug '15

Hello dear friends, I’m happy to provide you with an update about what happened since the Wikimedia Conference in Berlin. Some of the conference participants met again at the WMCON Follow-Up Day before Wikimania and build upon certain topics.[1] As it is my role as the Program and Engagement Coordinator for the Wikimedia Conference, I’m tracking what happened around the main issues of the conference. You can find all the details on Meta.[2] If you’re interested in certain topics, please don’t hesitate to contact the respective thematic ambassadors. Also, if you feel that specific aspects are missing, drop me a line. By the way: Have you seen our lovely grant report on the Wikimedia Conference? It contains a lot of learnings for the movement and might be useful for preparing future movement conferences of any kind.[3] Best regards Cornelius [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2015/Program_and_Engag… [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2015/Documentation_and… [3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/WM_DE/Wikimedia_Conference_2015/… <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/WM_DE/Wikimedia_Conference_2015/…> ******************************** <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/WM_DE/Wikimedia_Conference_2015/…> For your convenience, I have copied the summary of the sessions here. For details, photos and links, please check the report on Meta.[2] == Movement Roles == * At the WMCON Follow-Up Day Nicole Ebber held a session regarding the idea of a “Movement Roles” consultation. People agreed that such a broad themed consultation wasn’t useful and should be focused on a certain issue. == Partnerships & External Grants == * At the WMCON Follow-Up Day, John Andersson led a first session regarding external grants processes and needs among affiliates. Together with the PEC, next steps to pursue are mapping the current interested and responsible persons for external grants among the chapters and creating a kind of knowledge sharing hub on Meta for that topic. * At the WMCON Follow-Up Day, Anne-Laure Prévost (WMFR) led a session on partnerships, partnership processes and hurdles to reach them. Anne-Laure will publish a summary of the session soon. If you’re interested in that topic or would like to share your process creating a partnership with an institution, reach out to her! === Advocacy / Public Policy === * At the WMCON Follow-Up Day, Dimi Dimitrov collected and gathered further input and added them to the brainstorming list. Based on the five core policy areas (Copyright, Censorship, Access to Knowledge, Intermediary Protection, Privacy & Surveillance), the WMF Legal Team will start to produce “policy white papers” and publish them on a proper site. === Governance === * Tim Moritz Hector (chair of the board of WMDE) and Abraham Taherivand (chair of the transition committee), publish a document of lessons learnt on how Wikimedia Deutschland managed its Executive Direction transition phase. == Communication == * Based on the Communications session at the Wikimedia Conference 2015, Michael Jan (WMDE) and the WMF Communications team publish the Movement Communications skill page on Meta. Please add your information, ideas and questions. * At Wikimania 2015, the WMF Communications Team and members of the Communications Committee (ComCom) met to discuss several issues. Based on the conversations, the WMF Communications team plans (until September 30) to improve and reevaluate this list, to map people on the ComCom maing list, to find out who wants to stay on the list and to assess and clarify list membership criteria. === Community Support === * The VSN published its working paper and gathered further input for it at the WMCON Follow-Up Day. * Sati Houston and Asaf Bartov published her report on the results of her research on needs and ways to support emerging communities in June. The report was published on Community Capacity Development Framework. * Based on Abraham Taherivand’s presentation at the Wikimedia Conference 2015 on user-centered software engineering, Birgit Müller is a continuous exchange with Wikimedia Israel to implement a similar process in the Hebrew Wikipedia. === Miscellaneous === * Cornelius Kibelka (PEC) supports the CEE meeting organisers in the program developing process. The process is based on gathering questions and needs of its members and members-to-be on Wikimedia CEE Meeting 2015/Questions&Needs. At the CEE meeting, Cornelius will start to gather thematic input for the next Wikimedia Conference. * The WMCON2015 organising team (Nicole Ebber, Cornelius Kibelka, Wenke Storn, Daniela Gentner) published an extensive report including learnings on the Wikimedia Conference 2015. At the WMCON Follow-Up Day at Wikimania, Nicole presented her plan and timeline for the next Wikimedia Conference. -- Cornelius Kibelka Program and Engagement Coordinator (PEC) for the Wikimedia Conference Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0 http://wikimedia.de Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei! http://spenden.wikimedia.de/ Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.

2 2

Re: [Wikimania-l] remind me - where was the discussion and explanation on changing the venue?...
by Deror Avi 04 Aug '15

04 Aug '15

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

1 0

Re: [Wikimania-l] Wikimania-l Digest, Vol 113, Issue 12
by Deror Avi 04 Aug '15

04 Aug '15

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

1 0

Fwd: Wikimania Scholarship
by praveenp 03 Aug '15

03 Aug '15

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 >>> >>> >> >> > >

25 37

remind me - where was the discussion and explanation on changing the venue?...
by Lane Rasberry 02 Aug '15

02 Aug '15

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

3 2

links and bounces
by Jane Darnell 01 Aug '15

01 Aug '15

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)

2 1

Re: [Wikimania-l] Wikimania Scholarship
by Amir Ladsgroup 01 Aug '15

01 Aug '15

(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 >> >

2 1

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

Wikimania-l