On 11 September 2014 22:07, Charles Gregory <wmau.lists(a)chuq.net> wrote:
... but the conference has been running for a few
years, and has gradually
evolved over that time, from primarily chapters, to other affiliate
organisations, AffCom itself, FDC in recent years, etc. I don't think
anyone is suggesting any revolutionary changes for the next one? Just a
change in name to suit the current audience.
What's the problem with the name "Wikimedia" being used? It is, after
all,
a conference involving Wikimedians. It appears the main complaint is the
over-generic title "Wikimedia Conference".
Charles (User:Chuq)
You are correct, Chuq. "Wikimedia" by itself is the entire movement. It's
not a subgroup of the movement, which is what the chapters and affiliated
organizations are as a group. We don't call the hackathons "Wikimedia
Conference", nor do we call the diversity conferences "Wikimedia
Conference", yet arguably they are even more representative of Wikimedia
(the movement) than this particular conference is; while attendees are
largely self-selected, they are open to anyone who has the means and will
to attend. What's been known in the past as the "Wikimedia Conference" is
essentially a by-invitation conference that is not representative of the
movement.
It's a big movement with lots of parts. A better argument could be made
for renaming Wikimania the Wikimedia Conference than using that term for a
conference restricted to one small branch of the movement. Many
Wikimedians over the years, particularly those who are highly active in
core movement activities but not chapter/affiliate activities, have felt
disenfranchised and marginalized by having the name of the movement to
which they make their contributions used for a conference at which they
will never be welcome.
And the other reason for changing the name to be more representative of
what the conference is that it sets the tone for the agenda. The focus of
the conference is, at least in theory, chapters and affiliated groups: what
they can learn from each other, sharing of tools and ideas, making
connections within and external to the Wikimedia movement, etc. It's not
Wikimedia as a whole; it's far too exclusive (and exclusionary) for the
movement as a whole to be the focus of the conference.
From a different perspective, let's compare
ourselves to other conferences
that succeed because of their focus: A conference
for gastroenterologists
isn't going to call itself the "medical conference", nor would a conference
for neurosurgeons. They're going to wave the flag that they're focusing on
a specific aspect of medicine. It's what we do with the diversity
conference, and with the hackathons, too. You're not losing anything by
changing the name: you're recognizing the specialty focus of the conference.
Risker/Anne