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@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
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:
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (Pine W)
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (cs)
Message: 1 Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 18:31:08 -0700 From: Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)" wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] Update on Wikimania '18 Message-ID: <CAF=dyJinVGV5eM7vBi7SFDLcqyLP4yakDa=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 )
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:31 PM, Harry Mitchell 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 +44 (0) 7507 536 971 Skype: harry_j_mitchell
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@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@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:wikimania-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote: Send Wikimania-l mailing list submissions to wikimania-l@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:
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (Pine W)
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (cs)
Message: 1 Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 18:31:08 -0700 From: Pine W <wiki.pine@gmail.com mailto:wiki.pine@gmail.com> To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)" <wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] Update on Wikimania '18 Message-ID: <CAF=dyJinVGV5eM7vBi7SFDLcqyLP4yakDa=VckDJZ4rPN76K1A@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@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
there is a reporting component, but in some cases the benefit is not what a person brings back, its the local experiences they share while there that really matters. Overall the exchanging of knowledge and the building of relationships is the key value of Wikimanias yet when it comes to reporting its the immediate numbers that get focus, nowhere have the wmf gone back to recipients 2,3 or 4 years later to see what the impact was and if that continued beyond the immediate post event reporting.
Maybe the scholarship process could open earlier so that more time can be invested in the selection process, its would also give more time to arrange visas and help more people plan ahead
On 1 June 2018 at 23:07, Sjoerd de Bruin sjoerddebruin@me.com wrote:
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@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@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
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:
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (Pine W)
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (cs)
Message: 1 Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 18:31:08 -0700 From: Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)" wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] Update on Wikimania '18 Message-ID: <CAF=dyJinVGV5eM7vBi7SFDLcqyLP4yakDa=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 )
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:31 PM, Harry Mitchell 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 +44 (0) 7507 536 971 Skype: harry_j_mitchell
Concurring with Gnangarra: equally , if not much more important, is the invaluable face-to-face opportunity to discuss projects on which people work together online - and with the WMF if they are involved. There is no substitute for it - especially for en.Wiki whose volunteers are spread around the entire globe. The impact I brought back from Wikimanias was in 2012 in D.C. which resulted in the creation of the NewpagesFeed/Curation tools, and Italy 2016 which finally resulted in ACTRIAL this year after years of wrangling - both major Wikipedia features/policies requiring the consent of senior WMF staff. Admittedly my attendance doesn't do much for Thailand where I actually live as an expat.
The scholarships system does not take this kind of work for the movement by people who need to be present at these meetings into consideration, and I’m sure this is equally important for volunteers, who just for example, are dedicated to closing the gender gap, making Wikipedia more accessible in the 'Global South’, and discussing policies and technical issues.
There is also the point I mentioned earlier that there needs to be more coordination between the scholarships committe and the presentations committee for the people who have developed significant presentations only to be rejected at the last minute, or even after their arrival at the conference. In my experience, plenty of presentations are not actually of major importance or interest, and maybe this is one of the reasons, as mentioned by Gnangarra why the process should be begun earlier.
Kudpung
On 01, Jun2018, at 22:31, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
there is a reporting component, but in some cases the benefit is not what a person brings back, its the local experiences they share while there that really matters. Overall the exchanging of knowledge and the building of relationships is the key value of Wikimanias yet when it comes to reporting its the immediate numbers that get focus, nowhere have the wmf gone back to recipients 2,3 or 4 years later to see what the impact was and if that continued beyond the immediate post event reporting.
Maybe the scholarship process could open earlier so that more time can be invested in the selection process, its would also give more time to arrange visas and help more people plan ahead
On 1 June 2018 at 23:07, Sjoerd de Bruin <sjoerddebruin@me.com mailto:sjoerddebruin@me.com> wrote: 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@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@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:wikimania-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote: Send Wikimania-l mailing list submissions to wikimania-l@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:
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (Pine W)
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (cs)
Message: 1 Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 18:31:08 -0700 From: Pine W <wiki.pine@gmail.com mailto:wiki.pine@gmail.com> To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)" <wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] Update on Wikimania '18 Message-ID: <CAF=dyJinVGV5eM7vBi7SFDLcqyLP4yakDa=VckDJZ4rPN76K1A@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@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
That's true: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Wikimania_scholars/Reviewer%27s_guide... (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@me.com An: Wikimania general list (open subscription) 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@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@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
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: 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@gmail.com To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)" <wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia. org> Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] Update on Wikimania '18 Message-ID: <CAF= dyJinVGV5eM7vBi7SFDLcqyLP4yakD a=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 )
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:31 PM, Harry Mitchell 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 +44 (0) 7507 536 971 Skype: harry_j_mitchell
Thinking about it, drawing lots might not be the silliest idea in the universe.
After all, ability to write a great application is at best a rough proxy for actual impact. Why not have a less granular system that filters out the "clear No"s and then allocate the remaining places by ballot, taking into account the demographics/projects that need to be represented?
Chris
On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 4:19 PM, DerHexer derhexer@wikipedia.de wrote:
That's true: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Wikimania_scholars/Reviewer%27s_guide... (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@me.com An: Wikimania general list (open subscription) 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@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@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
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:
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (Pine W)
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (cs)
Message: 1 Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 18:31:08 -0700 From: Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)" <wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia. org> Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] Update on Wikimania '18 Message-ID: <CAF= dyJinVGV5eM7vBi7SFDLcqyLP4yakD a=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 )
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:31 PM, Harry Mitchell 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 +44 (0) 7507 536 971 Skype: harry_j_mitchell
Chris,
I don’t think drawing lots is the solution. If anything, even more attention should be given to applicants’ including their editing history and or other active participation, and whether or not they have planned a presentation. I have to say I have met people at the conferences who admitted to me they simply made an application in the hope of receiving a scholarship and just got lucky. This of course is our fault as former committee members, but being on that commitee as it is organised, is one heck of a big job.
Kudpung
On 05, Jun2018, at 22:53, Chris Keating chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com wrote:
Thinking about it, drawing lots might not be the silliest idea in the universe.
After all, ability to write a great application is at best a rough proxy for actual impact. Why not have a less granular system that filters out the "clear No"s and then allocate the remaining places by ballot, taking into account the demographics/projects that need to be represented?
Chris
On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 4:19 PM, DerHexer derhexer@wikipedia.de wrote:
That's true: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Wikimania_scholars/Reviewer%27s_guide... (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@me.com An: Wikimania general list (open subscription) 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@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@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
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:
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (Pine W)
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (cs)
Message: 1 Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 18:31:08 -0700 From: Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)" <wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia. org> Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] Update on Wikimania '18 Message-ID: <CAF= dyJinVGV5eM7vBi7SFDLcqyLP4yakD a=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 )
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 12:31 PM, Harry Mitchell 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 +44 (0) 7507 536 971 Skype: harry_j_mitchell
Chris Keating, 05/06/2018 18:53:
Thinking about it, drawing lots might not be the silliest idea in the universe.
Sure. It's used in several kinds of official selections and there's ample research on the effects. That said, it's rarely popular, because it's often perceived as a failure or last resort.
Federico
I think in our case the advantages would be
a) it saves a lot of volunteer time because applications would need much less assessment b) it protects the system from the perpetual accusation that "there are some people who always get scholarships" c) it also removes "skill in writing applications" as a factor in deciding who gets a scholarship
The drawback would be d) arguably it might reduce the impact of the event, if quality of application is in fact linked to the impact from a particular person attending the conference
It's worth noting that the other big movement event, the Wikimedia Conference, does not award scholarships based on applications, or merit - the WMF just funds whoever various chapters and user groups want to attend (which is more often a case of who's the first to put up their hand, or the last to run out of the room, than any kind of rigorous process)
Not saying that a lottery would necessarily be the right answer but the more I think about it the more I think "well, what IS the case for application-based scholarships, and do they really achieve the goals for the event?"
Chris
On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 8:13 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Chris Keating, 05/06/2018 18:53:
Thinking about it, drawing lots might not be the silliest idea in the universe.
Sure. It's used in several kinds of official selections and there's ample research on the effects. That said, it's rarely popular, because it's often perceived as a failure or last resort.
Federico
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@wikipedia.de wrote:
That's true: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Wikimania_scholars/Reviewer%27s_guide... (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@me.com An: Wikimania general list (open subscription) 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@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@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:wikimania-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote: Send Wikimania-l mailing list submissions to wikimania-l@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:
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (Pine W)
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (cs)
Message: 1 Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 18:31:08 -0700 From: Pine W <wiki.pine@gmail.com mailto:wiki.pine@gmail.com> To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)" <wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia. org mailto:wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] Update on Wikimania '18 Message-ID: <CAF= dyJinVGV5eM7vBi7SFDLcqyLP4yakD a=VckDJZ4rPN76K1A@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@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
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@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@wikipedia.de wrote:
That's true: 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@me.com *An:* Wikimania general list (open subscription) < 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@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@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
Send Wikimania-l mailing list submissions to wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia. org 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 wikimania-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
You can reach the person managing the list at wikimania-l-owner@lists. wikimedia.org 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:
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (Pine W)
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (cs)
Message: 1 Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 18:31:08 -0700 From: Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)" <wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia. org wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] Update on Wikimania '18 Message-ID: <CAF= dyJinVGV5eM7vBi7SFDLcqyLP4yakD a=VckDJZ4rPN76K1A@mail.gmail. com 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@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 +44 (0) 7507 536 971 Skype: harry_j_mitchell
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@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@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@wikipedia.de mailto:derhexer@wikipedia.de> wrote:
That's true: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Wikimania_scholars/Reviewer%27s_guide... 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@me.com mailto:sjoerddebruin@me.com> An: Wikimania general list (open subscription) <wikimania-l@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@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@lists.wikimedia.org mailto:wikimania-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote: Send Wikimania-l mailing list submissions to wikimania-l@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:
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (Pine W)
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (cs)
Message: 1 Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 18:31:08 -0700 From: Pine W <wiki.pine@gmail.com mailto:wiki.pine@gmail.com> To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)" <wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia. org mailto:wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] Update on Wikimania '18 Message-ID: <CAF= dyJinVGV5eM7vBi7SFDLcqyLP4yakD a=VckDJZ4rPN76K1A@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@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
Hi Kudpung,
(without being intimitely familiar with this particular year, the underneath is based on my experience and conversations from previous years) I would almost say: of course. As the disburser, the WMF will at the very least have to check that the recipient is not on some terrorism watchlist or otherwise unable to receive the money, on a blacklist of the Trust and Safety, etc. As such, they need some flexibility to overrule the committee.
I agree it would be /nice/ for the scholarship process to have earlier program decisions. However, the other side is that for the program, it would be nice to have as late as possible submissions, because that improved the likelihood that the sessions are still relevant by the time the conference is there. When there are project related sessions, that there is actually a clear overview of what to present.
As with many decisions, the timeline of Wikimania is a fragile one with many timelines that need to be coordinated. It will never be perfect - because every time you improve something on the right, something on the left will suffer.
Best, Lodewijk
On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 7:43 PM, cs cs@edubkk.org wrote:
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@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@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@wikipedia.de wrote:
That's true: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Wikimania_schol ars/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@me.com *An:* Wikimania general list (open subscription) < 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@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@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
Send Wikimania-l mailing list submissions to wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia. org 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 wikimania-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
You can reach the person managing the list at wikimania-l-owner@lists. wikimedia.org 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:
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (Pine W)
- Re: Update on Wikimania '18 (cs)
Message: 1 Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 18:31:08 -0700 From: Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com To: "Wikimania general list (open subscription)" <wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia. org wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] Update on Wikimania '18 Message-ID: <CAF= dyJinVGV5eM7vBi7SFDLcqyLP4yakD a=VckDJZ4rPN76K1A@mail.gmail. com 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@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 +44 (0) 7507 536 971 Skype: harry_j_mitchell
wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org