[Apologies for cross-posting.]
Hi all,
We invite you to nominate one or more scholarly research publications to be considered for the Wikimedia Foundation Research Award of the Year. Learn more below.
=Purpose of the award= Recognize recent research on or about the Wikimedia projects or recent research that is of importance to the Wikimedia projects. Recognize the researchers behind the research.
You can learn more about 2021's winners at https://research.wikimedia.org/awards.html .
=Eligibility criteria= Your nomination must meet the following criteria:
* The research must be on, about, using data from, and/or of importance to Wikipedia, Wikidata, Wikisource, Wikimedia Commons or other Wikimedia projects.
* The publication must be available in English.
* The research must have been published between January 1, 2021 and December 31, 2021.
=Nomination process= Submit your nominations by 2022-02-07 through https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=wmfray2021 . We will ask you to provide the following information in your nomination:
* Title of the manuscript * A copy of the manuscript you are nominating * A summary of the research and a clear justification for why the work merits the award (in 350 words or fewer in English).
Note that self-nominations and nominations of others' work are both welcome.
==Winner(s)== The winner(s) will be announced in a ceremony as part of Wiki Workshop 2022: https://wikiworkshop.org/2022/ .
If you have any questions, please contact us at wmf-ray-2021@easychair.org or here.
Best, Benjamin Mako Hill (University of Washington) Leila Zia (Wikimedia Foundation)
Thank you, Leila.
It's good to have an award like this and I always apreaciate the publications. We have to think about "publication must be available in English" though. On the top of my head I can think of very good non-English research that was published last year. Do we want to be global and inclusive?
Best, Gereon
Am 07.01.2022 um 20:48 schrieb Leila Zia:
[Apologies for cross-posting.]
Hi all,
We invite you to nominate one or more scholarly research publications to be considered for the Wikimedia Foundation Research Award of the Year. Learn more below.
=Purpose of the award= Recognize recent research on or about the Wikimedia projects or recent research that is of importance to the Wikimedia projects. Recognize the researchers behind the research.
You can learn more about 2021's winners at https://research.wikimedia.org/awards.html .
=Eligibility criteria= Your nomination must meet the following criteria:
- The research must be on, about, using data from, and/or of
importance to Wikipedia, Wikidata, Wikisource, Wikimedia Commons or other Wikimedia projects.
The publication must be available in English.
The research must have been published between January 1, 2021 and
December 31, 2021.
=Nomination process= Submit your nominations by 2022-02-07 through https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=wmfray2021 . We will ask you to provide the following information in your nomination:
- Title of the manuscript
- A copy of the manuscript you are nominating
- A summary of the research and a clear justification for why the work
merits the award (in 350 words or fewer in English).
Note that self-nominations and nominations of others' work are both welcome.
==Winner(s)== The winner(s) will be announced in a ceremony as part of Wiki Workshop 2022: https://wikiworkshop.org/2022/ .
If you have any questions, please contact us at wmf-ray-2021@easychair.org or here.
Best, Benjamin Mako Hill (University of Washington) Leila Zia (Wikimedia Foundation) _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Hi/Bon dia
As being said, I assume that the eligibility criteria for the award means that some reviews or research articles published by colleagues or by me in Catalan are considered second-class publications.
If publishing about Wikimedia in our mother languages (most of them minorized at several or all levels) results as an exclusion from Wikimedia awards, I suspect that the inclusivity of 2030 Strategy is not being understood nor starting well at all.
Xavier Dengra
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
El dissabte, 8 de gener 2022 a les 10:20, Gereon Kalkuhl gkalkuhl@freenet.de va escriure:
Thank you, Leila.
It's good to have an award like this and I always apreaciate the
publications.
We have to think about "publication must be available in English" though.
On the top of my head I can think of very good non-English research that
was published last year.
Do we want to be global and inclusive?
Best, Gereon
Am 07.01.2022 um 20:48 schrieb Leila Zia:
[Apologies for cross-posting.]
Hi all,
We invite you to nominate one or more scholarly research publications
to be considered for the Wikimedia Foundation Research Award of the
Year. Learn more below.
=Purpose of the award=
Recognize recent research on or about the Wikimedia projects or recent
research that is of importance to the Wikimedia projects. Recognize
the researchers behind the research.
You can learn more about 2021's winners at
https://research.wikimedia.org/awards.html .
=Eligibility criteria=
Your nomination must meet the following criteria:
The research must be on, about, using data from, and/or of
importance to Wikipedia, Wikidata, Wikisource, Wikimedia Commons or
other Wikimedia projects.
The publication must be available in English.
The research must have been published between January 1, 2021 and
December 31, 2021.
=Nomination process=
Submit your nominations by 2022-02-07 through
https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=wmfray2021 . We will ask you
to provide the following information in your nomination:
Title of the manuscript
A copy of the manuscript you are nominating
A summary of the research and a clear justification for why the work
merits the award (in 350 words or fewer in English).
Note that self-nominations and nominations of others' work are both welcome.
==Winner(s)==
The winner(s) will be announced in a ceremony as part of Wiki Workshop
2022: https://wikiworkshop.org/2022/ .
If you have any questions, please contact us at
wmf-ray-2021@easychair.org or here.
Best,
Benjamin Mako Hill (University of Washington)
Leila Zia (Wikimedia Foundation)
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/...
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/...
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
I can understand the indeed for all the publications to be published in one common language, to enable easier comparison between works and to be able to share the work across more of the community so we can benefit from the work.
Perhaps there can be some support provided by the WMF to enable translations of the research to english in a timely manner. Or at least allow for an abstract to translated now and for finalists of the potential works to be translated. Inclusion of communities must be our first priority above any recognition through awards anything short of that goal doesnt bestow any value to being awarded something as part of a global community.
On Sat, 8 Jan 2022 at 17:40, F. Xavier Dengra i Grau via Wikimedia-l < wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
Hi/Bon dia
As being said, I assume that the eligibility criteria for the award means that some reviews or research articles published by colleagues or by me in Catalan are considered second-class publications.
If publishing about Wikimedia in our mother languages (most of them minorized at several or all levels) results as an exclusion from Wikimedia awards, I suspect that the inclusivity of 2030 Strategy is not being understood nor starting well at all.
Xavier Dengra
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
El dissabte, 8 de gener 2022 a les 10:20, Gereon Kalkuhl < gkalkuhl@freenet.de> va escriure:
Thank you, Leila.
It's good to have an award like this and I always apreaciate the
publications.
We have to think about "publication must be available in English" though.
On the top of my head I can think of very good non-English research that
was published last year.
Do we want to be global and inclusive?
Best, Gereon
Am 07.01.2022 um 20:48 schrieb Leila Zia:
[Apologies for cross-posting.]
Hi all,
We invite you to nominate one or more scholarly research publications
to be considered for the Wikimedia Foundation Research Award of the
Year. Learn more below.
=Purpose of the award=
Recognize recent research on or about the Wikimedia projects or recent
research that is of importance to the Wikimedia projects. Recognize
the researchers behind the research.
You can learn more about 2021's winners at
https://research.wikimedia.org/awards.html .
=Eligibility criteria=
Your nomination must meet the following criteria:
The research must be on, about, using data from, and/or of
importance to Wikipedia, Wikidata, Wikisource, Wikimedia Commons or
other Wikimedia projects.
The publication must be available in English.
The research must have been published between January 1, 2021 and
December 31, 2021.
=Nomination process=
Submit your nominations by 2022-02-07 through
https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=wmfray2021 . We will ask you
to provide the following information in your nomination:
- Title of the manuscript
- A copy of the manuscript you are nominating
- A summary of the research and a clear justification for why the
work
merits the award (in 350 words or fewer in English).Note that self-nominations and nominations of others' work are both
welcome.
==Winner(s)==
The winner(s) will be announced in a ceremony as part of Wiki Workshop
2022: https://wikiworkshop.org/2022/ .
If you have any questions, please contact us at
wmf-ray-2021@easychair.org or here.
Best,
Benjamin Mako Hill (University of Washington)
Leila Zia (Wikimedia Foundation)
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org,
guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/...
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/...
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 at 19:48, Leila Zia lzia@wikimedia.org wrote:
=Eligibility criteria=
- The publication must be available in English.
I echo others' concerns about this.
I'm equally concerned that, while WMF regard being in English as essential for one of their awards, they do not regard the use of an open licence as a requirement.
Hi all, Thank you for your feedback. I take your comments as a sign of genuine care and I'm happy to engage and learn with you how we can do better. (Note: I'm responding to all lists, though some of the feedback has been sent only to wikimedia-l.)
* Galder, Gereon, Xavier, Gnangarra, and Andy: thank you for your feedback.
* Andy, I'll respond to your comment first. We do not require the work to be published under a free license for us to consider it for the award. However, if the work is shortlisted, we reach out to the authors, tell them that it's shortlisted, and it can be considered for the award if the work is at least made publicly available. At that point, we also encourage the authors to publish under a free license and share with them a few ways they may be able to (even if the work is published somewhere already with restrictions). The issue of licenses is on top of our mind and we actively look for ways to push for more Wikimedia research work to be published under free licenses.
* I am going to share with you some of my thoughts, and a possible improvement we can make in the process.
** Let's try to keep things simple to be able to improve things together. This is not a case of "WMF did x". The idea of the award was created in the Research team, and both last year and this year, we've been grateful to have the support of researchers outside of WMF for it. (Aaron Shaw (Northwestern University), and Benjamin Mako Hill (U. of Washington)). I take full responsibility for the execution of the award and I can take your feedback and see where we can improve the process. :)
** In order to be able to improve the process, I should share more details about how we do the search for the publications first. We have multiple sources for searching for research published in a given year: 1. The nomination process we shared on this thread. 2. Research publications shared in WikiResearch twitter account. 3. External research search engines and repositories for different fields: we use scholar.google.com, dblp.org and more.
To give you a sense of the distribution of scholarly publications we identified last year from each of the above sources: 11 nominations and 170+ research publications through the twitter account and external searches. The award chairs (2 people; this year it is going to be Mako and I) reviewed all identified publications. We discussed every publication at varying depth depending on the result of our initial reviews.
** Knowing the process, there are at least a few ways I think the process must be improved. I'm sure now that you see more you can critique even more. :) I proactively share with you some of them here: ::* I need to have an easychair account to nominate. That can/must change (but to what? we want these nominations to be private, and we need a way to be able to process them efficiently because we're only 2 people. We are considering openreview.net for the future years because they're open source; but they still have other limitations. For this year, easychair it is.). ::* We need more people on the committee: both for workload sharing, and also including more perspectives. (This is /a lot/ to ask of researchers. I'm grateful that Mako and Aaron have supported us in the past.) ::* We need other non-English sources to source community research. (WikiResearch is primarily in English and about research published in English.) ::* The shared language of reviewers is assumed to be English. If we are going to at scale consider other languages, then we need a way that this group of people can converse on academic topics with one another without having to share a language.
** I also understand the reality of the resources available to me and our team. I understand the importance of working on multiple fronts with regards to the research community (Wikimedia Research Funds, Wiki Workshop, global research competitions, research showcases, monthly office hours, talks and presentations, formal collaborations, and more). I believe in the importance of motivation (and we have seen a very good momentum around the award idea from last year's run). We need to do many things, with very limited resources; Our values and ideals are important and we have to attempt to hold them all as we make decisions. In practice, sometimes we can't meet all the ambitions we have. We need to make trade-offs. What is important is to be aware, to listen, to try to improve, and to be honest.
I will leave you with the above and I commit to talk with Mako to consider ways to open up the process for more languages to be included (in 2021 or in 2022+; I can't promise changes for the 2021 process.). One of us will write back here with what we decide to do.
Thanks, Leila
On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 5:42 AM Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 at 19:48, Leila Zia lzia@wikimedia.org wrote:
=Eligibility criteria=
- The publication must be available in English.
I echo others' concerns about this.
I'm equally concerned that, while WMF regard being in English as essential for one of their awards, they do not regard the use of an open licence as a requirement.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing https://pigsonthewing.org.uk _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list -- wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe send an email to wiki-research-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Thanks, Leila, for answering the question raised.
I'm a bit confused with this, I supposed that the Wikimedia Foundation Research Award was an initiative from the Research team of the WMF (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research), but I read in your answer that "WikiResearch is primarily in English and about research published in English". I understand that the main working language of the WMF is English, as this mailing list is, but I would assume that an Award promoted by the WMF should be multilingual.
Me, as a Basque Wikimedians User Group member, I promote Wikimedia activities in Basque language, because that is our goal. But the WMF is not the English Wikimedians User Group, as far as I understand. Our designated lingua franca may be English, but the WMF can't exclude research that is not made in this language from an Award. I would understand if the (non-existing) English Wikimedians User Group created the "EWUG Research in English Award of the Year", but is not the case.
Cheers,
Galder
________________________________ From: Leila Zia lzia@wikimedia.org Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 8:04 PM To: wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org Cc: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org; Discussion list for the Wikidata project. wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: [Wiki-research-l] Re: The Wikimedia Foundation Research Award of the Year - Call for Nominations
Hi all, Thank you for your feedback. I take your comments as a sign of genuine care and I'm happy to engage and learn with you how we can do better. (Note: I'm responding to all lists, though some of the feedback has been sent only to wikimedia-l.)
* Galder, Gereon, Xavier, Gnangarra, and Andy: thank you for your feedback.
* Andy, I'll respond to your comment first. We do not require the work to be published under a free license for us to consider it for the award. However, if the work is shortlisted, we reach out to the authors, tell them that it's shortlisted, and it can be considered for the award if the work is at least made publicly available. At that point, we also encourage the authors to publish under a free license and share with them a few ways they may be able to (even if the work is published somewhere already with restrictions). The issue of licenses is on top of our mind and we actively look for ways to push for more Wikimedia research work to be published under free licenses.
* I am going to share with you some of my thoughts, and a possible improvement we can make in the process.
** Let's try to keep things simple to be able to improve things together. This is not a case of "WMF did x". The idea of the award was created in the Research team, and both last year and this year, we've been grateful to have the support of researchers outside of WMF for it. (Aaron Shaw (Northwestern University), and Benjamin Mako Hill (U. of Washington)). I take full responsibility for the execution of the award and I can take your feedback and see where we can improve the process. :)
** In order to be able to improve the process, I should share more details about how we do the search for the publications first. We have multiple sources for searching for research published in a given year: 1. The nomination process we shared on this thread. 2. Research publications shared in WikiResearch twitter account. 3. External research search engines and repositories for different fields: we use scholar.google.com, dblp.org and more.
To give you a sense of the distribution of scholarly publications we identified last year from each of the above sources: 11 nominations and 170+ research publications through the twitter account and external searches. The award chairs (2 people; this year it is going to be Mako and I) reviewed all identified publications. We discussed every publication at varying depth depending on the result of our initial reviews.
** Knowing the process, there are at least a few ways I think the process must be improved. I'm sure now that you see more you can critique even more. :) I proactively share with you some of them here: ::* I need to have an easychair account to nominate. That can/must change (but to what? we want these nominations to be private, and we need a way to be able to process them efficiently because we're only 2 people. We are considering openreview.net for the future years because they're open source; but they still have other limitations. For this year, easychair it is.). ::* We need more people on the committee: both for workload sharing, and also including more perspectives. (This is /a lot/ to ask of researchers. I'm grateful that Mako and Aaron have supported us in the past.) ::* We need other non-English sources to source community research. (WikiResearch is primarily in English and about research published in English.) ::* The shared language of reviewers is assumed to be English. If we are going to at scale consider other languages, then we need a way that this group of people can converse on academic topics with one another without having to share a language.
** I also understand the reality of the resources available to me and our team. I understand the importance of working on multiple fronts with regards to the research community (Wikimedia Research Funds, Wiki Workshop, global research competitions, research showcases, monthly office hours, talks and presentations, formal collaborations, and more). I believe in the importance of motivation (and we have seen a very good momentum around the award idea from last year's run). We need to do many things, with very limited resources; Our values and ideals are important and we have to attempt to hold them all as we make decisions. In practice, sometimes we can't meet all the ambitions we have. We need to make trade-offs. What is important is to be aware, to listen, to try to improve, and to be honest.
I will leave you with the above and I commit to talk with Mako to consider ways to open up the process for more languages to be included (in 2021 or in 2022+; I can't promise changes for the 2021 process.). One of us will write back here with what we decide to do.
Thanks, Leila
On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 5:42 AM Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 at 19:48, Leila Zia lzia@wikimedia.org wrote:
=Eligibility criteria=
- The publication must be available in English.
I echo others' concerns about this.
I'm equally concerned that, while WMF regard being in English as essential for one of their awards, they do not regard the use of an open licence as a requirement.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing https://pigsonthewing.org.uk _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list -- wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe send an email to wiki-research-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Hi Galder,
Please see below.
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 12:26 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga galder158@hotmail.com wrote:
Thanks, Leila, for answering the question raised.
Anytime.
I'm a bit confused with this, I supposed that the Wikimedia Foundation Research Award was an initiative from the Research team of the WMF (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research), but I read in your answer that "WikiResearch is primarily in English and about research published in English". I understand that the main working language of the WMF is English, as this mailing list is, but I would assume that an Award promoted by the WMF should be multilingual.
Sorry. Let me clarify. What I was referring to when I used WikiResearch in my email was the WikiResearch twitter account: https://twitter.com/WikiResearch . I did not intend to refer to the WMF Research team or Wikimedia Research community. And to repeat: this is one source we use to find research done on the Wikimedia projects. There are other sources as I mentioned in my response.
Me, as a Basque Wikimedians User Group member, I promote Wikimedia activities in Basque language, because that is our goal. But the WMF is not the English Wikimedians User Group, as far as I understand. Our designated lingua franca may be English, but the WMF can't exclude research that is not made in this language from an Award. I would understand if the (non-existing) English Wikimedians User Group created the "EWUG Research in English Award of the Year", but is not the case.
I understand and acknowledge your point about inclusion. I hope some of the points I shared about our existing process in my other email can help you find possible solutions we can consider doing. :) On my end: I have a todo to come back to you all.
Best, Leila
Cheers,
Galder
From: Leila Zia lzia@wikimedia.org Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 8:04 PM To: wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org Cc: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org; Discussion list for the Wikidata project. wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: [Wiki-research-l] Re: The Wikimedia Foundation Research Award of the Year - Call for Nominations
Hi all, Thank you for your feedback. I take your comments as a sign of genuine care and I'm happy to engage and learn with you how we can do better. (Note: I'm responding to all lists, though some of the feedback has been sent only to wikimedia-l.)
Galder, Gereon, Xavier, Gnangarra, and Andy: thank you for your feedback.
Andy, I'll respond to your comment first. We do not require the work
to be published under a free license for us to consider it for the award. However, if the work is shortlisted, we reach out to the authors, tell them that it's shortlisted, and it can be considered for the award if the work is at least made publicly available. At that point, we also encourage the authors to publish under a free license and share with them a few ways they may be able to (even if the work is published somewhere already with restrictions). The issue of licenses is on top of our mind and we actively look for ways to push for more Wikimedia research work to be published under free licenses.
- I am going to share with you some of my thoughts, and a possible
improvement we can make in the process.
** Let's try to keep things simple to be able to improve things together. This is not a case of "WMF did x". The idea of the award was created in the Research team, and both last year and this year, we've been grateful to have the support of researchers outside of WMF for it. (Aaron Shaw (Northwestern University), and Benjamin Mako Hill (U. of Washington)). I take full responsibility for the execution of the award and I can take your feedback and see where we can improve the process. :)
** In order to be able to improve the process, I should share more details about how we do the search for the publications first. We have multiple sources for searching for research published in a given year:
- The nomination process we shared on this thread.
- Research publications shared in WikiResearch twitter account.
- External research search engines and repositories for different
fields: we use scholar.google.com, dblp.org and more.
To give you a sense of the distribution of scholarly publications we identified last year from each of the above sources: 11 nominations and 170+ research publications through the twitter account and external searches. The award chairs (2 people; this year it is going to be Mako and I) reviewed all identified publications. We discussed every publication at varying depth depending on the result of our initial reviews.
** Knowing the process, there are at least a few ways I think the process must be improved. I'm sure now that you see more you can critique even more. :) I proactively share with you some of them here: ::* I need to have an easychair account to nominate. That can/must change (but to what? we want these nominations to be private, and we need a way to be able to process them efficiently because we're only 2 people. We are considering openreview.net for the future years because they're open source; but they still have other limitations. For this year, easychair it is.). ::* We need more people on the committee: both for workload sharing, and also including more perspectives. (This is /a lot/ to ask of researchers. I'm grateful that Mako and Aaron have supported us in the past.) ::* We need other non-English sources to source community research. (WikiResearch is primarily in English and about research published in English.) ::* The shared language of reviewers is assumed to be English. If we are going to at scale consider other languages, then we need a way that this group of people can converse on academic topics with one another without having to share a language.
** I also understand the reality of the resources available to me and our team. I understand the importance of working on multiple fronts with regards to the research community (Wikimedia Research Funds, Wiki Workshop, global research competitions, research showcases, monthly office hours, talks and presentations, formal collaborations, and more). I believe in the importance of motivation (and we have seen a very good momentum around the award idea from last year's run). We need to do many things, with very limited resources; Our values and ideals are important and we have to attempt to hold them all as we make decisions. In practice, sometimes we can't meet all the ambitions we have. We need to make trade-offs. What is important is to be aware, to listen, to try to improve, and to be honest.
I will leave you with the above and I commit to talk with Mako to consider ways to open up the process for more languages to be included (in 2021 or in 2022+; I can't promise changes for the 2021 process.). One of us will write back here with what we decide to do.
Thanks, Leila
On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 5:42 AM Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 at 19:48, Leila Zia lzia@wikimedia.org wrote:
=Eligibility criteria=
- The publication must be available in English.
I echo others' concerns about this.
I'm equally concerned that, while WMF regard being in English as essential for one of their awards, they do not regard the use of an open licence as a requirement.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing https://pigsonthewing.org.uk _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list -- wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe send an email to wiki-research-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Hi Leila, I have read it, that's why I'm confused. ________________________________ From: Leila Zia lzia@wikimedia.org Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 9:40 PM To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Cc: wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org; Discussion list for the Wikidata project. wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: [Wiki-research-l] Re: The Wikimedia Foundation Research Award of the Year - Call for Nominations
Hi Galder,
Please see below.
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 12:26 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga galder158@hotmail.com wrote:
Thanks, Leila, for answering the question raised.
Anytime.
I'm a bit confused with this, I supposed that the Wikimedia Foundation Research Award was an initiative from the Research team of the WMF (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research), but I read in your answer that "WikiResearch is primarily in English and about research published in English". I understand that the main working language of the WMF is English, as this mailing list is, but I would assume that an Award promoted by the WMF should be multilingual.
Sorry. Let me clarify. What I was referring to when I used WikiResearch in my email was the WikiResearch twitter account: https://twitter.com/WikiResearch . I did not intend to refer to the WMF Research team or Wikimedia Research community. And to repeat: this is one source we use to find research done on the Wikimedia projects. There are other sources as I mentioned in my response.
Me, as a Basque Wikimedians User Group member, I promote Wikimedia activities in Basque language, because that is our goal. But the WMF is not the English Wikimedians User Group, as far as I understand. Our designated lingua franca may be English, but the WMF can't exclude research that is not made in this language from an Award. I would understand if the (non-existing) English Wikimedians User Group created the "EWUG Research in English Award of the Year", but is not the case.
I understand and acknowledge your point about inclusion. I hope some of the points I shared about our existing process in my other email can help you find possible solutions we can consider doing. :) On my end: I have a todo to come back to you all.
Best, Leila
Cheers,
Galder
From: Leila Zia lzia@wikimedia.org Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 8:04 PM To: wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org Cc: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org; Discussion list for the Wikidata project. wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: [Wiki-research-l] Re: The Wikimedia Foundation Research Award of the Year - Call for Nominations
Hi all, Thank you for your feedback. I take your comments as a sign of genuine care and I'm happy to engage and learn with you how we can do better. (Note: I'm responding to all lists, though some of the feedback has been sent only to wikimedia-l.)
Galder, Gereon, Xavier, Gnangarra, and Andy: thank you for your feedback.
Andy, I'll respond to your comment first. We do not require the work
to be published under a free license for us to consider it for the award. However, if the work is shortlisted, we reach out to the authors, tell them that it's shortlisted, and it can be considered for the award if the work is at least made publicly available. At that point, we also encourage the authors to publish under a free license and share with them a few ways they may be able to (even if the work is published somewhere already with restrictions). The issue of licenses is on top of our mind and we actively look for ways to push for more Wikimedia research work to be published under free licenses.
- I am going to share with you some of my thoughts, and a possible
improvement we can make in the process.
** Let's try to keep things simple to be able to improve things together. This is not a case of "WMF did x". The idea of the award was created in the Research team, and both last year and this year, we've been grateful to have the support of researchers outside of WMF for it. (Aaron Shaw (Northwestern University), and Benjamin Mako Hill (U. of Washington)). I take full responsibility for the execution of the award and I can take your feedback and see where we can improve the process. :)
** In order to be able to improve the process, I should share more details about how we do the search for the publications first. We have multiple sources for searching for research published in a given year:
- The nomination process we shared on this thread.
- Research publications shared in WikiResearch twitter account.
- External research search engines and repositories for different
fields: we use scholar.google.com, dblp.org and more.
To give you a sense of the distribution of scholarly publications we identified last year from each of the above sources: 11 nominations and 170+ research publications through the twitter account and external searches. The award chairs (2 people; this year it is going to be Mako and I) reviewed all identified publications. We discussed every publication at varying depth depending on the result of our initial reviews.
** Knowing the process, there are at least a few ways I think the process must be improved. I'm sure now that you see more you can critique even more. :) I proactively share with you some of them here: ::* I need to have an easychair account to nominate. That can/must change (but to what? we want these nominations to be private, and we need a way to be able to process them efficiently because we're only 2 people. We are considering openreview.net for the future years because they're open source; but they still have other limitations. For this year, easychair it is.). ::* We need more people on the committee: both for workload sharing, and also including more perspectives. (This is /a lot/ to ask of researchers. I'm grateful that Mako and Aaron have supported us in the past.) ::* We need other non-English sources to source community research. (WikiResearch is primarily in English and about research published in English.) ::* The shared language of reviewers is assumed to be English. If we are going to at scale consider other languages, then we need a way that this group of people can converse on academic topics with one another without having to share a language.
** I also understand the reality of the resources available to me and our team. I understand the importance of working on multiple fronts with regards to the research community (Wikimedia Research Funds, Wiki Workshop, global research competitions, research showcases, monthly office hours, talks and presentations, formal collaborations, and more). I believe in the importance of motivation (and we have seen a very good momentum around the award idea from last year's run). We need to do many things, with very limited resources; Our values and ideals are important and we have to attempt to hold them all as we make decisions. In practice, sometimes we can't meet all the ambitions we have. We need to make trade-offs. What is important is to be aware, to listen, to try to improve, and to be honest.
I will leave you with the above and I commit to talk with Mako to consider ways to open up the process for more languages to be included (in 2021 or in 2022+; I can't promise changes for the 2021 process.). One of us will write back here with what we decide to do.
Thanks, Leila
On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 5:42 AM Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 at 19:48, Leila Zia lzia@wikimedia.org wrote:
=Eligibility criteria=
- The publication must be available in English.
I echo others' concerns about this.
I'm equally concerned that, while WMF regard being in English as essential for one of their awards, they do not regard the use of an open licence as a requirement.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing https://pigsonthewing.org.uk _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list -- wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe send an email to wiki-research-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Hi all,
We gave the option of accepting nominations in more languages some more thought. I want to be very honest: I don't have a good solution to accommodate more languages in this cycle. We considered the option of allowing/encouraging nominations in other languages, and not doing the broader search we do in English in those languages. However, even this option is not really guaranteed to work because we consider "scholarly publications" which can be papers of a few pages or books that can be hundreds of pages. We cannot guarantee that we can translate the scholarly publication (independent of its length) in-time for the review.
Given the above, my suggestion to you is that if you know of a scholarly publication that is in another language than English and you think we should consider it, still nominate it. We will consider it, even if I can't guarantee that we review it.
I'm sorry that I am not able to offer a better solution for this cycle. We will continue thinking about this point for the future cycles.
Best, Leila
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 12:46 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga galder158@hotmail.com wrote:
Hi Leila, I have read it, that's why I'm confused. ________________________________ From: Leila Zia lzia@wikimedia.org Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 9:40 PM To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Cc: wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org; Discussion list for the Wikidata project. wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: [Wiki-research-l] Re: The Wikimedia Foundation Research Award of the Year - Call for Nominations
Hi Galder,
Please see below.
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 12:26 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga galder158@hotmail.com wrote:
Thanks, Leila, for answering the question raised.
Anytime.
I'm a bit confused with this, I supposed that the Wikimedia Foundation Research Award was an initiative from the Research team of the WMF (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research), but I read in your answer that "WikiResearch is primarily in English and about research published in English". I understand that the main working language of the WMF is English, as this mailing list is, but I would assume that an Award promoted by the WMF should be multilingual.
Sorry. Let me clarify. What I was referring to when I used WikiResearch in my email was the WikiResearch twitter account: https://twitter.com/WikiResearch . I did not intend to refer to the WMF Research team or Wikimedia Research community. And to repeat: this is one source we use to find research done on the Wikimedia projects. There are other sources as I mentioned in my response.
Me, as a Basque Wikimedians User Group member, I promote Wikimedia activities in Basque language, because that is our goal. But the WMF is not the English Wikimedians User Group, as far as I understand. Our designated lingua franca may be English, but the WMF can't exclude research that is not made in this language from an Award. I would understand if the (non-existing) English Wikimedians User Group created the "EWUG Research in English Award of the Year", but is not the case.
I understand and acknowledge your point about inclusion. I hope some of the points I shared about our existing process in my other email can help you find possible solutions we can consider doing. :) On my end: I have a todo to come back to you all.
Best, Leila
Cheers,
Galder
From: Leila Zia lzia@wikimedia.org Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 8:04 PM To: wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org Cc: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org; Discussion list for the Wikidata project. wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: [Wiki-research-l] Re: The Wikimedia Foundation Research Award of the Year - Call for Nominations
Hi all, Thank you for your feedback. I take your comments as a sign of genuine care and I'm happy to engage and learn with you how we can do better. (Note: I'm responding to all lists, though some of the feedback has been sent only to wikimedia-l.)
Galder, Gereon, Xavier, Gnangarra, and Andy: thank you for your feedback.
Andy, I'll respond to your comment first. We do not require the work
to be published under a free license for us to consider it for the award. However, if the work is shortlisted, we reach out to the authors, tell them that it's shortlisted, and it can be considered for the award if the work is at least made publicly available. At that point, we also encourage the authors to publish under a free license and share with them a few ways they may be able to (even if the work is published somewhere already with restrictions). The issue of licenses is on top of our mind and we actively look for ways to push for more Wikimedia research work to be published under free licenses.
- I am going to share with you some of my thoughts, and a possible
improvement we can make in the process.
** Let's try to keep things simple to be able to improve things together. This is not a case of "WMF did x". The idea of the award was created in the Research team, and both last year and this year, we've been grateful to have the support of researchers outside of WMF for it. (Aaron Shaw (Northwestern University), and Benjamin Mako Hill (U. of Washington)). I take full responsibility for the execution of the award and I can take your feedback and see where we can improve the process. :)
** In order to be able to improve the process, I should share more details about how we do the search for the publications first. We have multiple sources for searching for research published in a given year:
- The nomination process we shared on this thread.
- Research publications shared in WikiResearch twitter account.
- External research search engines and repositories for different
fields: we use scholar.google.com, dblp.org and more.
To give you a sense of the distribution of scholarly publications we identified last year from each of the above sources: 11 nominations and 170+ research publications through the twitter account and external searches. The award chairs (2 people; this year it is going to be Mako and I) reviewed all identified publications. We discussed every publication at varying depth depending on the result of our initial reviews.
** Knowing the process, there are at least a few ways I think the process must be improved. I'm sure now that you see more you can critique even more. :) I proactively share with you some of them here: ::* I need to have an easychair account to nominate. That can/must change (but to what? we want these nominations to be private, and we need a way to be able to process them efficiently because we're only 2 people. We are considering openreview.net for the future years because they're open source; but they still have other limitations. For this year, easychair it is.). ::* We need more people on the committee: both for workload sharing, and also including more perspectives. (This is /a lot/ to ask of researchers. I'm grateful that Mako and Aaron have supported us in the past.) ::* We need other non-English sources to source community research. (WikiResearch is primarily in English and about research published in English.) ::* The shared language of reviewers is assumed to be English. If we are going to at scale consider other languages, then we need a way that this group of people can converse on academic topics with one another without having to share a language.
** I also understand the reality of the resources available to me and our team. I understand the importance of working on multiple fronts with regards to the research community (Wikimedia Research Funds, Wiki Workshop, global research competitions, research showcases, monthly office hours, talks and presentations, formal collaborations, and more). I believe in the importance of motivation (and we have seen a very good momentum around the award idea from last year's run). We need to do many things, with very limited resources; Our values and ideals are important and we have to attempt to hold them all as we make decisions. In practice, sometimes we can't meet all the ambitions we have. We need to make trade-offs. What is important is to be aware, to listen, to try to improve, and to be honest.
I will leave you with the above and I commit to talk with Mako to consider ways to open up the process for more languages to be included (in 2021 or in 2022+; I can't promise changes for the 2021 process.). One of us will write back here with what we decide to do.
Thanks, Leila
On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 5:42 AM Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 at 19:48, Leila Zia lzia@wikimedia.org wrote:
=Eligibility criteria=
- The publication must be available in English.
I echo others' concerns about this.
I'm equally concerned that, while WMF regard being in English as essential for one of their awards, they do not regard the use of an open licence as a requirement.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing https://pigsonthewing.org.uk _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list -- wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe send an email to wiki-research-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Hi Leila,
What are the requirements for evidence of peer review and the quality of editorial oversight for the published research, or are you accepting nominations of unreviewed research so long as it's printed in a "scholarly publication", for example, a letter or report rather than a paper?
On Thu, 13 Jan 2022 at 02:55, Leila Zia lzia@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi all,
We gave the option of accepting nominations in more languages some more thought. I want to be very honest: I don't have a good solution to accommodate more languages in this cycle. We considered the option of allowing/encouraging nominations in other languages, and not doing the broader search we do in English in those languages. However, even this option is not really guaranteed to work because we consider "scholarly publications" which can be papers of a few pages or books that can be hundreds of pages. We cannot guarantee that we can translate the scholarly publication (independent of its length) in-time for the review.
Given the above, my suggestion to you is that if you know of a scholarly publication that is in another language than English and you think we should consider it, still nominate it. We will consider it, even if I can't guarantee that we review it.
I'm sorry that I am not able to offer a better solution for this cycle. We will continue thinking about this point for the future cycles.
Best, Leila
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 12:46 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga galder158@hotmail.com wrote:
Hi Leila, I have read it, that's why I'm confused. ________________________________ From: Leila Zia lzia@wikimedia.org Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 9:40 PM To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Cc: wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org <
wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org>; Discussion list for the Wikidata project. wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: [Wiki-research-l] Re: The Wikimedia
Foundation Research Award of the Year - Call for Nominations
Hi Galder,
Please see below.
On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 12:26 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga galder158@hotmail.com wrote:
Thanks, Leila, for answering the question raised.
Anytime.
I'm a bit confused with this, I supposed that the Wikimedia Foundation
Research Award was an initiative from the Research team of the WMF ( https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research), but I read in your answer that "WikiResearch is primarily in English and about research published in English". I understand that the main working language of the WMF is English, as this mailing list is, but I would assume that an Award promoted by the WMF should be multilingual.
Sorry. Let me clarify. What I was referring to when I used WikiResearch in my email was the WikiResearch twitter account: https://twitter.com/WikiResearch . I did not intend to refer to the WMF Research team or Wikimedia Research community. And to repeat: this is one source we use to find research done on the Wikimedia projects. There are other sources as I mentioned in my response.
Me, as a Basque Wikimedians User Group member, I promote Wikimedia
activities in Basque language, because that is our goal. But the WMF is not the English Wikimedians User Group, as far as I understand. Our designated lingua franca may be English, but the WMF can't exclude research that is not made in this language from an Award. I would understand if the (non-existing) English Wikimedians User Group created the "EWUG Research in English Award of the Year", but is not the case.
I understand and acknowledge your point about inclusion. I hope some of the points I shared about our existing process in my other email can help you find possible solutions we can consider doing. :) On my end: I have a todo to come back to you all.
Best, Leila
Cheers,
Galder
From: Leila Zia lzia@wikimedia.org Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 8:04 PM To: wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org <
wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Cc: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org;
Discussion list for the Wikidata project. wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: [Wiki-research-l] Re: The Wikimedia
Foundation Research Award of the Year - Call for Nominations
Hi all, Thank you for your feedback. I take your comments as a sign of genuine care and I'm happy to engage and learn with you how we can do better. (Note: I'm responding to all lists, though some of the feedback has been sent only to wikimedia-l.)
- Galder, Gereon, Xavier, Gnangarra, and Andy: thank you for your
feedback.
- Andy, I'll respond to your comment first. We do not require the work
to be published under a free license for us to consider it for the award. However, if the work is shortlisted, we reach out to the authors, tell them that it's shortlisted, and it can be considered for the award if the work is at least made publicly available. At that point, we also encourage the authors to publish under a free license and share with them a few ways they may be able to (even if the work is published somewhere already with restrictions). The issue of licenses is on top of our mind and we actively look for ways to push for more Wikimedia research work to be published under free licenses.
- I am going to share with you some of my thoughts, and a possible
improvement we can make in the process.
** Let's try to keep things simple to be able to improve things together. This is not a case of "WMF did x". The idea of the award was created in the Research team, and both last year and this year, we've been grateful to have the support of researchers outside of WMF for it. (Aaron Shaw (Northwestern University), and Benjamin Mako Hill (U. of Washington)). I take full responsibility for the execution of the award and I can take your feedback and see where we can improve the process. :)
** In order to be able to improve the process, I should share more details about how we do the search for the publications first. We have multiple sources for searching for research published in a given year:
- The nomination process we shared on this thread.
- Research publications shared in WikiResearch twitter account.
- External research search engines and repositories for different
fields: we use scholar.google.com, dblp.org and more.
To give you a sense of the distribution of scholarly publications we identified last year from each of the above sources: 11 nominations and 170+ research publications through the twitter account and external searches. The award chairs (2 people; this year it is going to be Mako and I) reviewed all identified publications. We discussed every publication at varying depth depending on the result of our initial reviews.
** Knowing the process, there are at least a few ways I think the process must be improved. I'm sure now that you see more you can critique even more. :) I proactively share with you some of them here: ::* I need to have an easychair account to nominate. That can/must change (but to what? we want these nominations to be private, and we need a way to be able to process them efficiently because we're only 2 people. We are considering openreview.net for the future years because they're open source; but they still have other limitations. For this year, easychair it is.). ::* We need more people on the committee: both for workload sharing, and also including more perspectives. (This is /a lot/ to ask of researchers. I'm grateful that Mako and Aaron have supported us in the past.) ::* We need other non-English sources to source community research. (WikiResearch is primarily in English and about research published in English.) ::* The shared language of reviewers is assumed to be English. If we are going to at scale consider other languages, then we need a way that this group of people can converse on academic topics with one another without having to share a language.
** I also understand the reality of the resources available to me and our team. I understand the importance of working on multiple fronts with regards to the research community (Wikimedia Research Funds, Wiki Workshop, global research competitions, research showcases, monthly office hours, talks and presentations, formal collaborations, and more). I believe in the importance of motivation (and we have seen a very good momentum around the award idea from last year's run). We need to do many things, with very limited resources; Our values and ideals are important and we have to attempt to hold them all as we make decisions. In practice, sometimes we can't meet all the ambitions we have. We need to make trade-offs. What is important is to be aware, to listen, to try to improve, and to be honest.
I will leave you with the above and I commit to talk with Mako to consider ways to open up the process for more languages to be included (in 2021 or in 2022+; I can't promise changes for the 2021 process.). One of us will write back here with what we decide to do.
Thanks, Leila
On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 5:42 AM Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk
wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 at 19:48, Leila Zia lzia@wikimedia.org wrote:
=Eligibility criteria=
- The publication must be available in English.
I echo others' concerns about this.
I'm equally concerned that, while WMF regard being in English as essential for one of their awards, they do not regard the use of an open licence as a requirement.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing https://pigsonthewing.org.uk _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list -- wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe send an email to
wiki-research-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org,
guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/...
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org,
guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/...
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/...
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/...
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/... To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org