Hoi,
There is only one argument that I cannot refute about American money. It is
American money that gets us the bulk of our funding. The one obvious reason
is that the fund-raising is targeting the USA. When money is spend, it is
spend predominantly in the USA and targeted for Wikipedia and English
Wikipedia at that.
Arguably the WMF is a global organisation and spending is best allocated
based on where people live. When money is targeted on where we grow, we
would not spend as much on the needs of Wikipedia. We would recognise the
importance of projects like Wikisource and finally give it some attention.
It would benefit particularly benefit India. When the model they have
adopted is introduced elsewhere, it will make many, many more books
available. THAT would have a real impact educationally speaking.
Given the small size of many communities, it is important that they benefit
from the things we already have but the thing that is so easily forgotten
is the road to get there. That road is not a universal given and it is
dominated by the road English WIkipedia has taken. What I find is that
people are happy where we are at. Never mind the nay sayers.
You mention chapters and we have good chapters in Europe. Sadly their
impact on Wikipedia is neglible because they are "not part of the
community" and what they do is largely fringe.
Really English and Wikipedia is over served. IMHO the law of diminishing
returns applies.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 10 February 2016 at 16:43, Andrew Lih <andrew.lih(a)gmail.com> wrote:
GerardM,
As much as I agree with you on many things related to Wikimania, your
statement about en.wp and USA being “over subsidized” is off base.
For the last few years I’ve held my tongue as American applicants get a
fraction of 10% of all the funding for Wikimania scholarships. That’s
because 10% is allocated to all of North America, so US based folks compete
with Canadians for that small slice of the pie. Indeed, key community
members from the US could not afford to go to Wikimania, and did not,
because of the limited funding. We also do not have a strong chapter system
to make up for that shortcoming, where European chapters can, and do,
underwrite their local members with other funds.
I am not against the bulk of the scholarship money going to
underrepresented developing markets and giving new voices a chance to
attend. But I wanted to dispel the myth that Americans are always gorging
at the trough.
https://wikimania2013.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships#Scholarship_selection…
https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships#Selection_process
-Andrew
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 6:49 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Hoi,
Pine with all due respect, the USA is not the problem and English
Wikipedia
has been overly subsidised, given way too much
attention. Indeed having
more people from the USA attend Wikimania is not a good value
proposition.
The USA and Britain is overrepresented as it is.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 10 February 2016 at 10:13, Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> From a US perspective, even here in the global north we have plenty of
> students and middle-class participants for whom $1500 in travel, food
and
> lodging plus 5 days away from work, family,
or school amounts to a
> significant or impossible sacrifice.
>
> Perhaps someone could tell us the statistics for how many people have
> attended Wikimania each year who were not WMF employees, FDC or WMF
Board
members,
scholarship recipients, or financially sponsored by WMF
affiliates
> or WEF. Of those people who pay 100% of their own costs plus the cost
of
> admission tickets, my guess is that many
live within a day's travel
time
by
> train, car, or bus.
>
> I would hypothesize that thematic conferences also have a low
percentage
of
people who pay 100% of their own costs, but that
regional conferences
which
> have lower travel costs for the average attendee receive modestly
higher
> percentages of unsubsidized attendance.
>
> It seems to me that WMF finacial support for conferences, including
> regional and thematic conferences, will continue to be the norm.
>
> Whether $1 million is appropriate for Wikimania and whether a more
modest
budget
would be appropriate and feasable are different questions that
merit
careful reflection.
Pine
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>