So in other word’s, The WMF ‘does’ have the final say in who is awarded a
scholarship. I was not aware that this is the case. Thank you Ellie , for the
clarification.
I do believe the program selection should be begun earlier and that there should be
some active collaboration between the scholarships approvals systems(s) and those who do
the program selections.
Kudpung
On 07, Jun2018, at 00:59, Ellie Young
<eyoung(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
I'd like to clarify this a bit more:
The Scholarship committee reviews and scores the applications that make it into Phase 2.
The WMF staff uses these
scores to distribute the scholarships evenly among the groups. These scores are NOT
"mere recommendations". Also, if any person who gets their paper accepted to
the program and cannot attend because they did not receive a scholarship, the program
committee can recommend that we offer them support via the Wikimania budget.
Ellie Young
WMF Event Manager
On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 9:12 PM, cs <cs(a)edubkk.org <mailto:cs@edubkk.org>>
wrote:
I am surprised to learn that the jury’s selection is a mere recommendation to the WMF.
I was not aware of that.
I’m not sure that the program teams are ideally constituted. The choice of
presentations and/or allocations of time slots for various activities has often left me
baffled.
Kudpung
> On 05, Jun2018, at 22:19, DerHexer <derhexer(a)wikipedia.de
<mailto:derhexer@wikipedia.de>> wrote:
>
> That's true:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Wikimania_scholars/Reviewer%27s_guid…
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Wikimania_scholars/Reviewer%27s_guide#Score_adjustment_for_previous_scholars>
(that this is not the perfect system is well known to everyone in the committee which, as
Mardetanha said, changes every year—it's still very hard to implement a process which
does not favor these who are used to write good applications if we don't draw lots).
>
> We had to start the scholarship processes at some point due to visa regulations,
unfortunately before the program team could finish their process. For that reason, the
scholarship committee proposed to save some money for people who could not hold their
presentations without a scholarship. But in the end, it's the WMF who thankfully
manages all the outcomes and the jury only evalutes the applications at some point.
>
> Best,
> Martin/DerHexer
>
>
> Von: Sjoerd de Bruin <sjoerddebruin(a)me.com
<mailto:sjoerddebruin@me.com>>
> An: Wikimania general list (open subscription) <wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
<mailto:wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org>>
> Gesendet: 17:15 Freitag, 1.Juni 2018
> Betreff: Re: [Wikimania-l] Wikimania-l Digest, Vol 146, Issue 1
>
> I think that is already included in scholarship applications, if I remember
correctly.
>
> Greetings,
>
> Sjoerd de Bruin
>
>> Op 1 jun. 2018, om 17:06 heeft Julie Workman <mlle.julie.w(a)gmail.com
<mailto:mlle.julie.w@gmail.com>> het volgende geschreven:
>>
>> Is there at present any metric by which previous scholarship attendees are judged
on their dissemination of Wikimania experiences after the conference? The complaint being
brought up is not only about awardees getting repeat scholarships, but failing to enrich
their communities afterwards with what they learned / what it was like / who they met /
what they will do now. With a limited number of scholarships available, it is true that
the attendees are expected to share their good fortune with those who couldn't
attend.
>>
>> If nothing like that is in place, could it not be added? For example, a field on
the application: "were you awarded a scholarship last year (and attended)?"
"If yes, please describe (and provide links where possible) to the activities and
discussions you organised with your community regarding your experience at
Wikimania". If a sufficiently good and detailed response is not provided, the
application can receive a lower score (or possibly be discarded...? I'm not au fait
with the process).
>>
>> Julia W
>>
>> On 1 June 2018 at 13:00, <wikimania-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
<mailto:wikimania-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org>> wrote:
>> Send Wikimania-l mailing list submissions to
>> wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimedia. org
<mailto:wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/ mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l>
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> wikimania-l-request@lists.
wikimedia.org
<mailto:wikimania-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org>
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> wikimania-l-owner@lists.
wikimedia.org
<mailto:wikimania-l-owner@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: Update on Wikimania '18 (Pine W)
>> 2. Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (cs)
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------ ------------------------------ ----------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 18:31:08 -0700
>> From: Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com <mailto:wiki.pine@gmail.com>>
>> To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)"
>> <wikimania-l(a)lists.wikimediadia. org
<mailto:wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org>>
>> Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] Update on Wikimania '18
>> Message-ID:
>> <CAF= dyJinVGV5eM7vBi7SFDLcqyLP4yakD a=VckDJZ4rPN76K1A(a)mail.gmail. com
<mailto:VckDJZ4rPN76K1A@mail.gmail.com>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> Harry, I recall hearing that there was a push a year or two back to alter
>> the proportion of presentations at Wikimania so that there were fewer WMF
>> presentations and more community presentations. I don't know if that was a
>> one time event or if that's ongoing. I have never been to Wikimania, and
>> have no plans to go in the foreseeable future, but I watch what happens
>> with Wikimania partly because it's an expensive operation in terms of
>> financial cost and in terms of volunteer time. Also, the scholarship system
>> is a perennial point of friction.
>>
>> Dariusz or Ellie, are there any thoughts at WMF about doing a full review
>> of the scholarship system and the value of Wikimania to the community? With
>> WMF spending so much money on Wikimania year after year, and volunteers
>> spending so much time on Wikimania year after year, I think that it would
>> make sense to do this type of review, which might be possible to
>> synchronize with WMF's strategy process. I am very interested in ensuring
>> that there are SMART goals being achieved with all of the money and time
>> that goes into Wikimania. At the same time, I think that the scholarship
>> system could be reviewed to consider the strategic priorities for
>> scholarships and how to align those priorities to SMART goals. I don't
>> envision reducing funding for Wikimania and scholarships, but I think that
>> some re-thinking and evaluation would be good to align funding with the WMF
>> strategic plan and with SMART goals.
>>
>> Pine
>> (
https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/User:Pine
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine> )
>>
>> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:31 PM, Harry Mitchell <hjmwiki(a)gmail.com
<mailto:hjmwiki@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> > Since you raise chapter scholarships, it would be nice to see some of the
>> > other big chapters (and to some extent the WMF) spending more on
>> > scholarships for rank-and-file Wikimedians rather than staff and board
>> > members. That might help with the perception that Wikimania is the same old
>> > faces year in, year out.
>> >
>> > Harry Mitchell
>> >
http://enwp.org/User:HJ <http://enwp.org/User:HJ>
>> > +44 (0) 7507 536 971
>> > Skype: harry_j_mitchell
>> >
>>