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@lists.wikimedia.org To: wikimania-l@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@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@lists.wikimedia.org

You can reach the person managing the list at 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: Wikimania Scholarship (Ellie Young)

---

Message: 1 Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 16:34:55 -0700 From: Ellie Young eyoung@wikimedia.org To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)" wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org Cc: Sati Houston shouston@wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] Wikimania Scholarship Message-ID: 556B5E55-5C3E-4DE4-B77B-837E17AD1D35@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_Process#Outcomes_reported_by_2014_Scholars

(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@wikimedia.org shouston@wikimedia.org

Thanks,

Ellie Young and Sati Houston Wikimedia Foundation Community Engagement

...

On Jul 31, 2015, at 7:45 AM, Osmar Valdebenito b1mbo.wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:

2015-07-31 9:16 GMT-03:00 Lane Rasberry <lane@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/mexico... http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/07/24/world/social-issues-world/mexico-poverty-rate-hit-46-2-last-year-2-million-join-ranks-poor/) 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@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@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@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@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@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@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@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@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@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@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@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@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@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@bluerasberry.com mailto:lane@bluerasberry.com _______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@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@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l