Since some of you participated to that project, I forward the answer to you all.
Unfortunately, we are not in the list of funded projects. Well, we'll try again next year :-)
Anthere
---- Message renvoyé par ifapprojects@unesco.org ----
Date: De : ifapprojects@unesco.org À: board@wikimedia.org Copie : Répondre à: Sujet: [Ticket#: 118464-FW] UNESCO's Information for All P [...]
Version française ci-dessous
Dear project proponents,
The UNESCO Secretariat has pleasure in informing you that the Bureau of the Intergovernmental Council for the Information for All Programme, which met for its eight meeting in Paris, from 4 to 6 April 2005, has granted financial assistance to twenty-four projects related to information literacy, preservation of information, and ethical implications of information and communication technology (ICT).
The list of projects, for which funding was approved is at:
http://www.unesco.org/webworld/ifapprojects/2005
We shall shortly contact the proponents of projects which have been approved, for more details on the project implementation.
The Bureau, chaired by Daniel Malbert (France), approved US$758,000 in funding for eight projects concerning Africa; five concerning Asia and Latin America/Caribbean, respectively; and two concerning Eastern Europe and the Arab region, respectively. The Bureau also approved funding two international projects.
A total of 502 projects were submitted to the Bureau by organizations all over the world with a total of requested funds exceeding US$20 million.
We thank you for your interest in the UNESCO?s Information for All Programme.
Axel Plathe UNESCO Information Society Division a.plathe@unesco.org
______________________________________________________________________________
Bonjour
Le Secrétariat de l?UNESCO a le plaisir de vous informer que le Bureau du Conseil intergouvernemental pour le programme «Information pour tous», qui a tenu sa huitième session à Paris du 4 au 6 avril 2005, a accordé une assistance financière à vingt-quatre projets liés à l?alphabétisation de l'information, la préservation de l?information, et les implications éthiques des technologies de l'information et de la communication.
La liste de projets, pour lesquels des fonds ont été approuvés est à l?adresse suivante:
http://www.unesco.org/webworld/ifapprojects/2005.
Nous contacterons sous peu toux ceux dont les projets ont été approuvés, pour plus de détails quant à leur exécution.
Le Bureau, présidé par Daniel Malbert (France), a approuvé EU $ 758,000 pour le financement de huit projets concernant l?Afrique ; cinq projets concernant respectivement l?Asie et l?Amérique Latine et les Caraïbes, deux projets concernant respectivement l?Europe de l?Est et la Région Arabe. Le Bureau a également approuvé deux projets internationaux.
Au total 502 projets ont été soumis au Bureau par des organismes partout dans le monde avec un total de fonds demandés excédant EU $ 20 millions.
Nous vous remercions pour l?intérêt manifesté à l?égard du programme de l?UNESCO « Information pour tous ».
Cordialement
Axel Plathe UNESCO Division de la Société de l?information a.plathe@unesco.org
---- Fin du message retransmi ----
Question:
I am part of an organisation that's "recognized" by the UNESCO, although not "funded" by it, which helps us a lot fundraising money as it gives a moral caution. It happens under those directives: http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=10631&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_... I believe that is something the Wikimedia Foundation should try and achieve.
Thoughts?
Delphine ~notafish
hI,
Le Friday 22 April 2005 09:10, Delphine Ménard a écrit :
Question:
I am part of an organisation that's "recognized" by the UNESCO, although not "funded" by it, which helps us a lot fundraising money as it gives a moral caution. It happens under those directives: http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=10631&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_... =201.html I believe that is something the Wikimedia Foundation should try and achieve.
Yes, I advocated this since a long time. Of course, I am willing to help for whatever I can.
BTW, we are now listed here (I talked on the phone with Jean-Claude Dauphin who manages this): http://www.unesco.org/cgi-bin/webworld/portal_freesoftware/cgi/page.cgi?g=In...
Thoughts?
Delphine ~notafish
Regards,
Yann
Delphine Ménard wrote:
Question:
I am part of an organisation that's "recognized" by the UNESCO, although not "funded" by it, which helps us a lot fundraising money as it gives a moral caution. It happens under those directives: http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=10631&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_... I believe that is something the Wikimedia Foundation should try and achieve.
Thoughts?
Delphine ~notafish
Hoi, One subject that is covered on many wikipedia's in the World Heritage Fund (also UNESCO). I have been trying for some time to get us a "partner" status with them. I am at the stage that they have acknowledged that I requested this and that they are considering it. I have made a spiel on how well covered the world heritage sites already are..
I am in favour of being a "regognised" party but I think we should try to aim for more than that. :)
As to us not getting the IFAP money, is their a motivation? I would like to learn from it.
Thanks, Gerard
Gerard Meijssen a écrit:
Delphine Ménard wrote:
Question:
I am part of an organisation that's "recognized" by the UNESCO, although not "funded" by it, which helps us a lot fundraising money as it gives a moral caution. It happens under those directives: http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=10631&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_... I believe that is something the Wikimedia Foundation should try and achieve.
Thoughts?
Delphine ~notafish
I think Aurevilly also said he had some possible connexions there.
Hoi, One subject that is covered on many wikipedia's in the World Heritage Fund (also UNESCO). I have been trying for some time to get us a "partner" status with them. I am at the stage that they have acknowledged that I requested this and that they are considering it. I have made a spiel on how well covered the world heritage sites already are..
I am in favour of being a "regognised" party but I think we should try to aim for more than that. :)
As to us not getting the IFAP money, is their a motivation? I would like to learn from it.
Probably the number of requests... :-)
Thanks, Gerar d
On 4/22/05, Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
Gerard Meijssen a écrit:
Delphine Ménard wrote:
Thoughts?
I think Aurevilly also said he had some possible connexions there.
Official recognition would be lovely, and fitting. Making and maintaining contact with national UNESCO commissions would also be a useful step.
Hoi, One subject that is covered on many wikipedia's in the World Heritage Fund (also UNESCO). I have been trying for some time to get us a "partner" status with them. I am at the stage that they have acknowledged that I requested this and that they are considering it. I have made a spiel on how well covered the world heritage sites already are..
I am in favour of being a "regognised" party but I think we should try to aim for more than that. :)
As to us not getting the IFAP money, is their a motivation? I would like to learn from it.
Probably the number of requests... :-)
Or the fact that the submitted proposal did not claim to address any of the three "main priorities" of this rfp. The reviewers may not have bothered to read the rest.
Sj wrote:
On 4/22/05, Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
Gerard Meijssen a écrit:
Delphine Ménard wrote:
Thoughts?
I think Aurevilly also said he had some possible connexions there.
Official recognition would be lovely, and fitting. Making and maintaining contact with national UNESCO commissions would also be a useful step.
Hoi, One subject that is covered on many wikipedia's in the World Heritage Fund (also UNESCO). I have been trying for some time to get us a "partner" status with them. I am at the stage that they have acknowledged that I requested this and that they are considering it. I have made a spiel on how well covered the world heritage sites already are..
I am in favour of being a "regognised" party but I think we should try to aim for more than that. :)
As to us not getting the IFAP money, is their a motivation? I would like to learn from it.
Probably the number of requests... :-)
Or the fact that the submitted proposal did not claim to address any of the three "main priorities" of this rfp. The reviewers may not have bothered to read the rest.
Hoi, I disagree that the "main priorities" were not addressed. I do not want to speculate so I am interested in KNOWING the motivation. We cannot answer this question ourselves. Thanks, GerardM
On 4/22/05, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Sj wrote:
I am in favour of being a "regognised" party but I think we should try to aim for more than that. :)
As to us not getting the IFAP money, is their a motivation? I would like to learn from it.
Probably the number of requests... :-)
Or the fact that the submitted proposal did not claim to address any of the three "main priorities" of this rfp. The reviewers may not have bothered to read the rest.
Hoi, I disagree that the "main priorities" were not addressed. I do not want to speculate so I am interested in KNOWING the motivation. We cannot answer this question ourselves.
Ah, forgive me if I was unclear. I am using their terminology, not speculating. Section 3.1? of the application was entitled "Main priorities"; in that section were three different 'priorities' with a checkbox next to each one. The application asked which if any of these priorities the proposal addressed. The submitted proposal did not check any of them. (It did check a number of the secondary, more general, priorities further down the application form.)
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org