Hi! I have a lot of Wikimania Scholarship statistics - obviously what is in the report on wiki only highlights a piece of them. As always, comments on meta reports are always helpful (there are none).

There are some gaps in data: I (/WMF) don't have the registration information from year to year, so I can't confirm whether or not someone has registered for and attended Wikimania outside of a scholarship. What I did just quickly look up is our percentage of repeat WMF scholars from 2012 and 2013: 
Those are for WMF scholarships. It is important to note that about 40-50% of attendees at Wikimania who arrive on scholarships are actually sponsored directly by chapter rather than WMF. It is possible that this group of people are repeat attendees/scholars (I don't know). It is also true that many chapters send board representatives and/or staff to Wikimania. Again, this may contribute to the feeling that the same people are always attending. (Note: the same is true for WMF and WMF board.)

As is evident in the selection criteria the scholarship committee puts forth, contributions on our wiki projects is the key component to receiving a scholarship. The scores are so close, it is really difficult (impossible?) to receive a scholarship from WMF without having contributions on wiki. The committee also tries to look at someone's contributions in relation to his/her local-wiki context. One specific example of this is a former scholar from the Kyrgyz Wikipedia. On first glance, it looked like her aggregate edit count was low, but on further digging the committee realized she had only been editing for a year, and was already a top 5 contributor on that wiki!

I have lots of comments on the various topics that are getting throw around  -- partial scholarships, needs-based scholarships, disclosing of scholars names, data collection ... but I don't feel this is the best forum for discussion. If someone has a wiki page with these topics sectioned off, we should tackle a few together!


On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 12:26 AM, Samuel Klein <meta.sj@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 12:06 AM, Philippe Beaudette <philippe@wikimedia.org> wrote:

On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 7:35 PM, Samuel Klein <meta.sj@gmail.com> wrote:
I too am concerned that the current scholarship process tends to polarize the community, and too often simply rewards long-time community members, or those who are connected to large movement entities, with free travel: rather than increasing the diversity of new voices and faces at global events.

Do we have any statistics to back up this claim?

I share a concern; it would be welcome to find it unwarranted.

The public statistics I know of are these reports: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania/Scholarships/2013
That level of detail does not address either of the two stated concerns: that some recipients are not so active, and that there is limited rotation.

It would be welcome to see a count of the # of recipients who attended Wikimania for the first time; the # who received a travel scholarship for the first time; the # who were active contributors and to which {clusters of} projects.  I also find Nemo's version of transparency compelling:  In cases where scholarships are presented as an honor, the recipients are named, which also seems in the wiki-spirit.  

SJ

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l




--
Jessie Wild
Grantmaking Learning & Evaluation 
Wikimedia Foundation

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
the sum of all knowledge.  Help us make it a reality!
Donate to Wikimedia