Hi Ellie,

is there an official statement by the WMF that explains why Wikimania 2020 is happening and that the funding for this event is secured? Wikimania does cost quite a lot of money and I was under the impression that it was unclear as to if, how and why Wikimania should take place 2020. But maybe I'm also mistaken on that point.

Best, Philip

On Sat, 8 Sep 2018 at 18:53, Ellie Young eyoung@wikimedia.org wrote:

No. We are looking more at rotating regions if we can, and excellent proposals/teams.

On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 3:31 AM Joseph Seddon josephseddon@gmail.com wrote:

...

Hello Ellie,

Is Wikimania still on its programme of "1 EU/US Wikimania" followed by an "Away Wikimania"?

Seddon

On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 11:44 PM Ellie Young eyoung@wikimedia.org

wrote:

...

...

The Wikimania Steering Committee and Wikimedia Foundation are seeking expressions of interest from interested parties for hosting Wikimani a 2020.

Please see the following for more information:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2020

If you are interested in discussing the possibilities and working with

the

...

WMF Events Manager in preparing a proposal to host and organize

Wikimania

...

...

20 20 , please contact eyoung at wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l by October 15th. Also, if you know of an individual or group that we should approach about hosting,

we

...

...

encourage nominations as well. The Steering Committee and WMF expect

to

...

...

make a decision by early 2019.

Thanks, Ellie _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

---

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

-- Ellie Young Events Manager Wikimedia Foundation eyoung@wikimedia.org c. 510 701 8649 _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

So it seems that the main rationale for an annual Wikimania brought up in the 2016 meeting was that Wikimania was vital for movement governance and accountability. Which wasn't particularly stressed in the WMF's consultation, but I can see why that kind of issue was very fresh in peoples' minds in 2016.

Now the Wikimedia Conference / Summit looks set to assume this role, what is the continued rationale for having Wikimania every year?

Chris

On Wed, 19 Sep 2018, 16:29 Andrew Lih, andrew.lih@gmail.com wrote:

Full disclosure: I’m a member of the Wikimania Committee but I am not speaking on behalf of that body in this mail.

The current custom is that Wikimania happens every year and that while the selection is made by the Wikimania Committee, the WMF has final approval over the selection and the operational parameters around its execution.

There was a consultation and discussion in 2015 about the future of Wikimania, and subsequent followup with in-person discussions at Wikimania 2016, Esino Lario, where there was overwhelming support for continuing the yearly model.

You can read more about the consultation and followups in these links. Thanks.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Towards_a_New_Wikimania

https://wikimania2016.wikimedia.org/wiki/Discussions/The_future_of_Wikimania https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Wikimania2016-discussion7b

-Andrew

On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 11:07 AM Philip Kopetzky < philip.kopetzky@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Hi Ellie,

is there an official statement by the WMF that explains why Wikimania

2020

...

is happening and that the funding for this event is secured? Wikimania

does

...

cost quite a lot of money and I was under the impression that it was unclear as to if, how and why Wikimania should take place 2020. But maybe I'm also mistaken on that point.

Best, Philip

On Sat, 8 Sep 2018 at 18:53, Ellie Young eyoung@wikimedia.org wrote:

...

No. We are looking more at rotating regions if we can, and excellent proposals/teams.

On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 3:31 AM Joseph Seddon josephseddon@gmail.com wrote:

...

Hello Ellie,

Is Wikimania still on its programme of "1 EU/US Wikimania" followed

by

...

an

...

...

"Away Wikimania"?

Seddon

On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 11:44 PM Ellie Young eyoung@wikimedia.org

wrote:

...

...

The Wikimania Steering Committee and Wikimedia Foundation are

seeking

...

...

...

...

expressions of interest from interested parties for hosting Wikimani a 2020.

Please see the following for more information:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2020

If you are interested in discussing the possibilities and working

with

...

...

the

...

WMF Events Manager in preparing a proposal to host and organize

Wikimania

...

...

20 20 , please contact eyoung at wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l by

October

...

...

...

15th. Also, if you know of an individual or group that we should approach about

hosting,

...

...

we

...

...

encourage nominations as well. The Steering Committee and WMF

expect

...

...

to

...

...

make a decision by early 2019.

Thanks, Ellie _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

...

...

...

<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org

?subject=unsubscribe>

...

...

...

---

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

...

...

...

mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

-- Ellie Young Events Manager Wikimedia Foundation eyoung@wikimedia.org c. 510 701 8649 _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

---

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

-- -Andrew Lih Author of The Wikipedia Revolution US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016) Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015) Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American University, Columbia University, USC

---

Email: andrew@andrewlih.com WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:46 PM James Heilman jmh649@gmail.com wrote:

The Wikimedia Conference is "closed" in that only those who are invited are allowed to attend. Wikimania is an open conference meaning basically anyone can attend, including those currently outside the movement.

This is a great point – in fact, not only has the mission of the Wikimedia Summit narrowed, the number of invite-only participants has shrunk as well to a basic allocation of one individual per affiliate, with the aim of having a maximum of 200 participants.

While I can understand the rationale of Cornelius Kibelka and the WMCON/WMSUMMIT team for this decision, and can endorse its direction, the fact remains that Wikimania being open to all and uncapped is a unique cornerstone for sustaining the community.

-Andrew

On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 1:10 PM Andrew Lih andrew.lih@gmail.com wrote:

On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:40 AM Chris Keating chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com wrote:

...

So it seems that the main rationale for an annual Wikimania brought up in the 2016 meeting was that Wikimania was vital for movement governance and accountability. Which wasn't particularly stressed in the WMF's consultation, but I can see why that kind of issue was very fresh in peoples' minds in 2016.

As the facilitator of the 2016 session discussing Wikimania, I don't recall the "main rationale" of the discussion being about "governance and accountability" and instead remember many more issues that stood out.

For example, the prominent phrases from the first part of the meeting include the following, with most of the notes echoing these themes:

• inspiring, and connecting
• opportunity for different communities to meet
• important to use opportunity to do outreach
• empower important volunteers

Sorry, don't think I expressed myself particularly well. Yes, those themes appear to have been present in the meeting, but they were also very much present in the WMF's consultation, which concluded that they could probably be fulfilled just as well by moving to a one-year-in-two rotation between Wikimanias and other regional gatherings.

...

Now the Wikimedia Conference / Summit looks set to assume this role, what is the continued rationale for having Wikimania every year?

Given the above, I think the basis of the question is not sufficiently established.

In fact, two recent reports or decisions reinforce Wikimania's role even more:

1. From the Community Engagement Insights 2018 Report - "Discovery of new

projects and ideas is best at Wikimania: While all conferences had a high proportion of participants that reported discovering new projects or ideas as the most important outcome, Wikimania had the highest proportion of them all." - The Community Engagement Insights 2018 Report [1] [2]

2. The Wikimedia Conference (WMCON) has pivoted to become the Wikimedia

Summit. In the process, they announced "learning and capacity-building will not be part of the program." [2] Therefore I'd argue that the onus is even *more* on conferences like Wikimania to facilitate this.

-Andrew

[1] - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Engagement_Insights/2018_Report#Co...

[2] - https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2018-September/091062.html _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Perhaps stating the obvious, but please remember there were some significant flaws with the consultation by the WMF that you refer to (especially with regards to the way questions were phrased and options were limited beforehand, if I recall correctly).

Wikimania's purpose is mostly pluriform and suits different needs for different people. That makes it particularly hard to evaluate - I grant you that. But given the diverse directions that we're trying to bring together, ranging from individuals to highly professionalized 100+ employee organizations, this is to be expected. To reduce costs, we have squashed more and more activities into this one annual event. That further reinforces the pluriform nature of the event(s). At this point it's hard to see Wikimania as an event, and it has more become like a piece of infrastructure that is being used by many events - including the main conference, but also tons of meetups, preconferences, committee meetings, strategy processes, consultations and side conferences.

Lodewijk

On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 5:36 AM Chris Keating chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com wrote:

...

...

So it seems that the main rationale for an annual Wikimania brought up

in

...

...

the 2016 meeting was that Wikimania was vital for movement governance

and

...

...

accountability. Which wasn't particularly stressed in the WMF's consultation, but I can see why that kind of issue was very fresh in peoples' minds in 2016.

As the facilitator of the 2016 session discussing Wikimania, I don't

recall

...

the "main rationale" of the discussion being about "governance and accountability" and instead remember many more issues that stood out.

For example, the prominent phrases from the first part of the meeting include the following, with most of the notes echoing these themes:

• inspiring, and connecting
• opportunity for different communities to meet
• important to use opportunity to do outreach
• empower important volunteers

Sorry, previous email sent half-finished.

Sorry, don't think I expressed myself particularly well. Yes, those themes appear to have been present in the meeting, but they were also very much present in the WMF's consultation, which concluded that they could probably be fulfilled just as well by moving to a one-year-in-two rotation between Wikimanias and other regional gatherings.

The thing that was present in the in-person meeting, but not from the consultation exercise, was the statement from all the chapter chairs saying that Wikimania was vital for movement governance and accountability.

Then of course there was a lot of enthusiasm about the idea of continuing Wikimania from people attending Wikimania who have attended many previous Wikimanias. Putting a load of people present at an event in a room and saying "should this event continue to happen?" is not great for rigorous decision-making.

(BTW, I'm not saying I favour the other option - the regional conferences seem to be happening anyway)

...

2. The Wikimedia Conference (WMCON) has pivoted to become the Wikimedia

Summit. In the process, they announced "learning and capacity-building

will

...

not be part of the program." [2] Therefore I'd argue that the onus is

even

...

*more* on conferences like Wikimania to facilitate this.

That would be good! But it kind of returns to the point that Wikimania's purpose is still fairly ill-defined. Personally I would really welcome Wikimania becoming explicitly focused on learning and capacity-building, because currently its focus changes every year and often when a focus is articulated it's not necessarily followed through.

Chris

---

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 4:31 AM Chris Keating chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com wrote:

Hi Lodewijk,

If Wikimania was an entity rather than an event, it would be in the top 5 entities in the movement - a smaller budget than WMF, Wikimedia Deutschland and the Wiki Education Foundation but larger than anything else...

Chris, you seem to have a particular angle determined through fitting particular data to your conclusion. A point by point breakdown will be mired down in bickering, so let me address some misconceptions while also embracing and agreeing with some of your feedback.

Since I've been to every single Wikimania and serve on the steering committee, obviously I don't share your existential doubt about Wikimania's role in our movement. But read on for things I do agree with you on regarding the future of the conference. Again: I'm not speaking on behalf of the commitee. This is just me.

- "If Wikimania was an entity rather than an event" - But it's not. The goals, format and audience is completely different and makes for a problematic financial comparison. But even if you get past that, I would argue that annual Wikimania is indeed one of the "top 5" occurrences in our community each year, even if it's not universally accessible to all volunteers. It's where ideas and experiences are exchanged and the only systematic way WMF openly interacts with the community in a face to face format. Recall - WMCON/Wikimedia Summit is casting off the "learning and capacity-building" and will be capped at 200 participants. This makes Wikimania even more crucial in this role.

Important initiatives of our movement started at Wikimania. You state in your user page you took part in one of the first GLAM engagement with the British Museum in 2010 with the Hoxne Challenge. Did you know that the GLAM movement had its genesis with Wikimania 2008 in Alexandria, Egypt, when Liam Wyatt and the Wikimania organizers had the first "backstage pass" and meeting with their staff? [1] [2]

- "it doesn't have any objectives" - But it does if you read the Wikimania page, even if it is not down to the level of detail of an academic conference or a board retreat. Wikimania is intentionally wiki-like in this aspect, which may be what is perceived as a lack of objective. By design, the ability of each team to run with a new concept is part of dynamic. One of Wikipedia's pillars is "we're here to build an encyclopedia," and people fill it with meaning. Similarly, the goal of Wikimania as "an annual gathering of the Wikimedia community" is filled differently with meaning from year to year with a BE BOLD ethos with different visions and parameters of the organizing team. Some years there is an experimental idea like 2016 Esino Lario.[3] Sometimes there is a button-downed public sector co-conference like 2012 Tech@State. [4]

- "online discussion that reached a conclusion that no-one appears willing to support" - As Lodewijk mentioned previously, there were significant issues with the way the consultation was run so that the conclusion was dubious. If you asked me to find the least desirable time period to do a consultation, it would be exactly the one chosen – "15 December 2015 to 19 January 2016" when globally, most folks in the professional world and academia are disengaged or removed from a computer screen. Additionally, it is hard to produce useful dialogue around strict voting for three rigid options. [5] Chris Schilling of the Foundation who oversaw the process was clear in Esino Lario's meeting that the consultation was not binding as was but one part of the discussion.

- Here's what I agree with you on:

-- Better reporting on results and evaluation of effectiveness - We do have reporting on the outcomes on meta wiki, including detailed stats and figures for each conference, as they need to be compared with the original bid. But the long term analysis is often lacking, with folk knowledge being more influential in decisions than explicit reporting and strategy. This year's Wikimania evaluation by Douglas Scott was presented at the September activities meeting and can be seen on the Youtube video. [6] But we rarely get a chance to evaluate long term trends or effectiveness.

-- Diversity in the Wikimania Committee - We should go beyond the existing practice of tapping previous Wikimania leads to be members. I was brought on as part of that trend, but it should be continued to expand the size and diversity of backgrounds of the committee. To be fair, it's a rather thankless job that was cobbled together over the years out of necessity rather than by design. But we should do better here.

- My overall view - Wikimedia/Wikipedia is a multibillion dollar brand that is consistently in the top 10 most visited web sites in the world. It shares that rarified air with companies in the hundreds of billions of dollars in valuation. Wikipedia is built on the efforts of volunteers, and it is vitally important we nurture that community or we die. Think about it – spending in the area of $1 million is a paltry sum compared to the value to our community and to the world. In fact, I'd argue we are very much underspending in this area, and way too insular in how we work. We are not systematically embracing our partners in open culture such as Internet Archive, Creative Commons, Mozilla Foundation and GLAM institutions, while they are running broad-based inclusive international conferences with a big tent. We are consistently seen in the public eye as the hallmark of open knowledge and the power of volunteerism, yet we do not lead with this conference nor do we readily open our doors to collaborators.

Thanks for your feedback. I don't want a debate on this issue to be seen as a silencing tactic. Far from it. It should be a way to sharpen existing practices and encourage new ideas.

As the Wikimania Committee liaison with the Sweden 2019 team, I've encouraged them to take on some of the things discussed above, such as working more closely with like-minded institutions and to not necessarily repeat all aspects of previous conferences. Discussions like these help bring these issues to the fore and make the whole process more transparent, which is a good thing.

-Andrew

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/British_Museum [2] - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimania_2008_-_The_Wikimedia_deleg... [3] - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2016_bids/Esino_Lario [4] - https://wikimania2012.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tech@State:_Wiki.Gov [5] - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Towards_a_New_Wikimania/Outco... [6] - https://youtu.be/TTtb4dEypQk?t=3m24s

Chris,

Just to followup on two points in your last communication:

We are doing a post-conference feedback survey and report this year with the Learning & Eval people here so that we can measure impact and also have more data year to year going forward. Stay tuned for that later this year.

The Steering committee has also expressed preference for moving the conference around as you indicated below but it isn't a hard and fast 'rule'. For 2020 there is a preference stated in the call for proposals to get proposals from Asia/Pacific. Of course the final recommendation will be based on the strongest proposal per the criteria. The committee is advisory and makes a recommendation to the WMF, who is responsible then for further vetting and funding. We will be revamping the Wikimania Handbook in the future and will try to clarify issues like this a bit more.

Great discussion/points Andrew and Chris... thanks

Ellie WMF Event Manager

On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 1:44 PM, Chris Keating chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com wrote:

Hi Andrew,

I think your conclusions are largely the same as the points I'm trying to make, so all is good! Don't get me wrong, I do think Wikimania has an important impact, and don't actually want to stop having it every year, I'm just curious about the silence that has followed that WMF consultation.

I do think though that of everything that happens in the movement, Wikimania is (usually, largely) the thing where there is the least clarity about goals and the least thinking about impact. There are grant proposals to the WMF for much less expensive (and indeed, less *important*) things that have gone into significantly more detail about expected impact and ways of measuring it than Wikimania ever has. In this way, Wikimania is usually very much an outlier from the process of learning and evaluation that the rest of the 'organised part' of the movement is taking part in. So far as I can tell, there are some good reasons contributing to this (the desire to keep things flexible for whoever is volunteering to organise it in the host country, and the relatively short planning cycle for such a massive event) as well as some not so good.

I was very pleased to see David talking about the impact of Wikimania at the metrics meeting, and hear about some interesting ideas about looking at its impact on South Africa - which is great, and significantly more than Wikimedia UK managed after Wikimania 2014 (another story there) - and it would be wonderful to see some kind of reflection about how we can measure the impact of Wikimania on the global Wikimedia community.

Equally, I can't say that I have a clear understanding of who is responsible for what regarding Wikimania. The last thing I heard from the Wikimania Committee was the idea of a three-year rotation between North America, Europe and Everywhere Else, which now seems to have been quietly abandoned (like... has it?)

Thank you for engaging in this conversation,

Chris On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 4:28 PM Andrew Lih andrew.lih@gmail.com wrote:

...

On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 4:31 AM Chris Keating <

chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com>

...

wrote:

...

Hi Lodewijk,

If Wikimania was an entity rather than an event, it would be in the top 5 entities in the movement - a smaller budget than WMF, Wikimedia Deutschland and the Wiki Education Foundation but larger than anything else...

Chris, you seem to have a particular angle determined through fitting particular data to your conclusion. A point by point breakdown will be mired down in bickering, so let me address some misconceptions while also embracing and agreeing with some of your feedback.

Since I've been to every single Wikimania and serve on the steering committee, obviously I don't share your existential doubt about

Wikimania's

...

role in our movement. But read on for things I do agree with you on regarding the future of the conference. Again: I'm not speaking on behalf of the commitee. This is just me.

• "If Wikimania was an entity rather than an event" - But it's not. The

goals, format and audience is completely different and makes for a problematic financial comparison. But even if you get past that, I would argue that annual Wikimania is indeed one of the "top 5" occurrences in

our

...

community each year, even if it's not universally accessible to all volunteers. It's where ideas and experiences are exchanged and the only systematic way WMF openly interacts with the community in a face to face format. Recall - WMCON/Wikimedia Summit is casting off the "learning and capacity-building" and will be capped at 200 participants. This makes Wikimania even more crucial in this role.

Important initiatives of our movement started at Wikimania. You state in your user page you took part in one of the first GLAM engagement with the British Museum in 2010 with the Hoxne Challenge. Did you know that the

GLAM

...

movement had its genesis with Wikimania 2008 in Alexandria, Egypt, when Liam Wyatt and the Wikimania organizers had the first "backstage pass"

and

...

meeting with their staff? [1] [2]

• "it doesn't have any objectives" - But it does if you read the

Wikimania

...

page, even if it is not down to the level of detail of an academic conference or a board retreat. Wikimania is intentionally wiki-like in

this

...

aspect, which may be what is perceived as a lack of objective. By design, the ability of each team to run with a new concept is part of dynamic.

One

...

of Wikipedia's pillars is "we're here to build an encyclopedia," and

people

...

fill it with meaning. Similarly, the goal of Wikimania as "an annual gathering of the Wikimedia community" is filled differently with meaning from year to year with a BE BOLD ethos with different visions and parameters of the organizing team. Some years there is an experimental

idea

...

like 2016 Esino Lario.[3] Sometimes there is a button-downed public

sector

...

co-conference like 2012 Tech@State. [4]

• "online discussion that reached a conclusion that no-one appears

willing

...

to support" - As Lodewijk mentioned previously, there were significant issues with the way the consultation was run so that the conclusion was dubious. If you asked me to find the least desirable time period to do a consultation, it would be exactly the one chosen – "15 December 2015 to

19

...

January 2016" when globally, most folks in the professional world and academia are disengaged or removed from a computer screen. Additionally,

it

...

is hard to produce useful dialogue around strict voting for three rigid options. [5] Chris Schilling of the Foundation who oversaw the process

was

...

clear in Esino Lario's meeting that the consultation was not binding as

was

...

but one part of the discussion.

• Here's what I agree with you on:

-- Better reporting on results and evaluation of effectiveness - We do

have

...

reporting on the outcomes on meta wiki, including detailed stats and figures for each conference, as they need to be compared with the

original

...

bid. But the long term analysis is often lacking, with folk knowledge

being

...

more influential in decisions than explicit reporting and strategy. This year's Wikimania evaluation by Douglas Scott was presented at the

September

...

activities meeting and can be seen on the Youtube video. [6] But we

rarely

...

get a chance to evaluate long term trends or effectiveness.

-- Diversity in the Wikimania Committee - We should go beyond the

existing

...

practice of tapping previous Wikimania leads to be members. I was brought on as part of that trend, but it should be continued to expand the size

and

...

diversity of backgrounds of the committee. To be fair, it's a rather thankless job that was cobbled together over the years out of necessity rather than by design. But we should do better here.

• My overall view - Wikimedia/Wikipedia is a multibillion dollar brand

that

...

is consistently in the top 10 most visited web sites in the world. It shares that rarified air with companies in the hundreds of billions of dollars in valuation. Wikipedia is built on the efforts of volunteers,

and

...

it is vitally important we nurture that community or we die. Think about

it

...

– spending in the area of $1 million is a paltry sum compared to the

value

...

to our community and to the world. In fact, I'd argue we are very much underspending in this area, and way too insular in how we work. We are

not

...

systematically embracing our partners in open culture such as Internet Archive, Creative Commons, Mozilla Foundation and GLAM institutions,

while

...

they are running broad-based inclusive international conferences with a

big

...

tent. We are consistently seen in the public eye as the hallmark of open knowledge and the power of volunteerism, yet we do not lead with this conference nor do we readily open our doors to collaborators.

Thanks for your feedback. I don't want a debate on this issue to be seen

as

...

a silencing tactic. Far from it. It should be a way to sharpen existing practices and encourage new ideas.

As the Wikimania Committee liaison with the Sweden 2019 team, I've encouraged them to take on some of the things discussed above, such as working more closely with like-minded institutions and to not necessarily repeat all aspects of previous conferences. Discussions like these help bring these issues to the fore and make the whole process more

transparent,

...

which is a good thing.

-Andrew

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/British_Museum [2] - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimania_2008_-_The

_Wikimedia_delegation_(2689602220).jpg

...

[3] - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2016_bids/Esino_Lario [4] - https://wikimania2012.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tech@State:_Wiki.Gov [5] - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Towards_a_New

_Wikimania/Outcomes

...

[6] - https://youtu.be/TTtb4dEypQk?t=3m24s _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik

i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l

...

New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

---

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe