Mailing List Archive

Granting Scholarship to same persons every year
Hi,

I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1]
<https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>,
but I haven't got a clear answer there yet. I simply asked why certain
people get Wikimania Scholarship each year, while other applicants rejected
repeatedly. I have used a comparison of User:Viswaprabha and myself
(User:Praveenp) there.

Please note that this email is not about someone going to Wikimanias again
and again, it is about granting Wikimania scholarships to same persons
again and again. This is not personal, I am just using personalities and
scholarships familiar to me. I am sure that, atleast other Indian language
communities facing similar problem. I occasionally hear people from other
communities mentioning scholarship by terms like "Winkimania Scholarship"
or "Wikimania Permanent Scholarship".

From my home wiki community (Malayalam Language Community), only year I
remember that User:Viswaprabha didn't recieve the Wikimania scholarship was
2016. I assume that was just because of the thread regarding this issue in
2015. User:Netha Hussain, another user from our premises also get repeating
scholarships (not this year), but I am not sure that whether she represents
Malayalam Language Community. Frankly, I haven't seen any of these
scholarship receivers sharing anything to community in recent years. Then,
what is the advantage of selecting same persons again and again for
scholarship? Isn't it better to let more different people to share and
experience global community?

I also wish to share a personal experience of intolerance. I raised the
issue in 2015 and then in 2016 I applied scholarship. I didn't even pass
"Selection Phase 1" yesteryear. According to Phase 1 criteria, every
serious application must pass to Phase 2. I asked about this to Ellie Young
in a reply, which I didn't get a response yet. Ironically, a very similar
application by me entered Phase 2 this year!

Could someone clarify?

[1] -
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html


Praveen Prakash
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
It would be incredibly inappropriate to discuss a specific person's
eligibility in public like this.

Simply put: people who get scholarships do so according to the published
selection criteria. People who do not, did not qualify.

In my opinion, sending emails like this one would
certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against.

On 19 May 2017 at 18:36, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1]
> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>,
> but I haven't got a clear answer there yet. I simply asked why certain
> people get Wikimania Scholarship each year, while other applicants rejected
> repeatedly. I have used a comparison of User:Viswaprabha and myself
> (User:Praveenp) there.
>
> Please note that this email is not about someone going to Wikimanias again
> and again, it is about granting Wikimania scholarships to same persons
> again and again. This is not personal, I am just using personalities and
> scholarships familiar to me. I am sure that, atleast other Indian language
> communities facing similar problem. I occasionally hear people from other
> communities mentioning scholarship by terms like "Winkimania Scholarship"
> or "Wikimania Permanent Scholarship".
>
> From my home wiki community (Malayalam Language Community), only year I
> remember that User:Viswaprabha didn't recieve the Wikimania scholarship was
> 2016. I assume that was just because of the thread regarding this issue in
> 2015. User:Netha Hussain, another user from our premises also get repeating
> scholarships (not this year), but I am not sure that whether she represents
> Malayalam Language Community. Frankly, I haven't seen any of these
> scholarship receivers sharing anything to community in recent years. Then,
> what is the advantage of selecting same persons again and again for
> scholarship? Isn't it better to let more different people to share and
> experience global community?
>
> I also wish to share a personal experience of intolerance. I raised the
> issue in 2015 and then in 2016 I applied scholarship. I didn't even pass
> "Selection Phase 1" yesteryear. According to Phase 1 criteria, every
> serious application must pass to Phase 2. I asked about this to Ellie Young
> in a reply, which I didn't get a response yet. Ironically, a very similar
> application by me entered Phase 2 this year!
>
> Could someone clarify?
>
> [1] - https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-Jul
> y/006921.html
>
>
> Praveen Prakash
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>


--
-- Luke // LFaraone
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 10:23 PM, LFaraone <wikipedia@luke.wf> wrote:

> It would be incredibly inappropriate to discuss a specific person's
> eligibility in public like this.
>
> Simply put: people who get scholarships do so according to the published
> selection criteria. People who do not, did not qualify.
>

I agree.

Best,
Samat
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
The same questions every year :)

Regards,
Zana

2017-05-19 22:25 GMT+02:00 Samat <samat78@gmail.com>:

> On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 10:23 PM, LFaraone <wikipedia@luke.wf> wrote:
>
>> It would be incredibly inappropriate to discuss a specific person's
>> eligibility in public like this.
>>
>> Simply put: people who get scholarships do so according to the published
>> selection criteria. People who do not, did not qualify.
>>
>
> I agree.
>
> Best,
> Samat
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
So it is incredibly appropriate to grant scholarship to same person
again and again? Usually applicant do not complain about this disparity
because it would immediately branded as their desperation. If we could
not speak about this, how could we ensure diversity and equality?

On Saturday 20 May 2017 01:53 AM, LFaraone wrote:
> It would be incredibly inappropriate to discuss a specific person's
> eligibility in public like this.
>
> Simply put: people who get scholarships do so according to the
> published selection criteria. People who do not, did not qualify.
>
> In my opinion, sending emails like this one would
> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against.

As a community, if questioning a process leads to disqualification, is
not a good tendency. I was the only one sent mails in 2015. Why none of
the other applicant gets scholarship?

While discussing this without any name, it immediately rebutted as false
argument. If we use any names, it is inappropriate!

>
> On 19 May 2017 at 18:36, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com
> <mailto:me.praveen@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1]
> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>,
> but I haven't got a clear answer there yet. I simply asked why
> certain people get Wikimania Scholarship each year, while other
> applicants rejected repeatedly. I have used a comparison of
> User:Viswaprabha and myself (User:Praveenp) there.
>
> Please note that this email is not about someone going to
> Wikimanias again and again, it is about granting Wikimania
> scholarships to same persons again and again. This is not
> personal, I am just using personalities and scholarships familiar
> to me. I am sure that, atleast other Indian language communities
> facing similar problem. I occasionally hear people from other
> communities mentioning scholarship by terms like "Winkimania
> Scholarship" or "Wikimania Permanent Scholarship".
>
> From my home wiki community (Malayalam Language Community), only
> year I remember that User:Viswaprabha didn't recieve the Wikimania
> scholarship was 2016. I assume that was just because of the thread
> regarding this issue in 2015. User:Netha Hussain, another user
> from our premises also get repeating scholarships (not this year),
> but I am not sure that whether she represents Malayalam Language
> Community. Frankly, I haven't seen any of these scholarship
> receivers sharing anything to community in recent years. Then,
> what is the advantage of selecting same persons again and again
> for scholarship? Isn't it better to let more different people to
> share and experience global community?
>
> I also wish to share a personal experience of intolerance. I
> raised the issue in 2015 and then in 2016 I applied scholarship. I
> didn't even pass "Selection Phase 1" yesteryear. According to
> Phase 1 criteria, every serious application must pass to Phase 2.
> I asked about this to Ellie Young in a reply, which I didn't get a
> response yet. Ironically, a very similar application by me entered
> Phase 2 this year!
>
> Could someone clarify?
>
> [1] -
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html
> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>
>
>
> Praveen Prakash
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> <mailto:Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l>
>
>
>
>
> --
> -- Luke // LFaraone
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
If there is a general opinion based on facts that the some individuals are
the recipients of a regular scholarship, then that is something that needs
to be discussed. Unfortunately to prove the hypothesis that this is
happening there does need to be some presentation of what the basis for
that theory is and that means actually naming individuals otherwise it gets
dismissed as nonsense but in naming, providing the basis the person gets
told *"**sending emails like this one would certainly in-and-of-itself be
a reason against." *ensures that no one ever questions the processes.
Well I really dont care anymore if I dont get to go to another Wikimania
I'm going to challenge the process because its seen as having flaws and
that to me needs to addressed.

What I see as the potential reasons for repeated scholarships for the same
person is that

- they are active, they apply every year
- they are good communicators and self promoters
- they have the time capacity to attend every year
- previous years application arent tested against current
applications for repetitions
- each year the applications are judged in isolation that year,...
- theres no validation of what was claimed in previous reporting to
actual outcomes
- the same core group of people put their hand up to make the selections
every year
- the criteria isnt sufficiently dynamic between each wikimania to draw
new applicants to the top


We can dismiss it as jealousy or sour grapes or some other type of gripe.
Alternatively we can ask the questions, is there a basis for the perception
can we do things better...

On 20 May 2017 at 09:48, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:

> So it is incredibly appropriate to grant scholarship to same person again
> and again? Usually applicant do not complain about this disparity because
> it would immediately branded as their desperation. If we could not speak
> about this, how could we ensure diversity and equality?
> On Saturday 20 May 2017 01:53 AM, LFaraone wrote:
>
> It would be incredibly inappropriate to discuss a specific person's
> eligibility in public like this.
>
> Simply put: people who get scholarships do so according to the published
> selection criteria. People who do not, did not qualify.
>
>
> In my opinion, sending emails like this one would
> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against.
>
>
> As a community, if questioning a process leads to disqualification, is not
> a good tendency. I was the only one sent mails in 2015. Why none of the
> other applicant gets scholarship?
>
> While discussing this without any name, it immediately rebutted as false
> argument. If we use any names, it is inappropriate!
>
>
> On 19 May 2017 at 18:36, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1]
>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>,
>> but I haven't got a clear answer there yet. I simply asked why certain
>> people get Wikimania Scholarship each year, while other applicants rejected
>> repeatedly. I have used a comparison of User:Viswaprabha and myself
>> (User:Praveenp) there.
>>
>> Please note that this email is not about someone going to Wikimanias
>> again and again, it is about granting Wikimania scholarships to same
>> persons again and again. This is not personal, I am just using
>> personalities and scholarships familiar to me. I am sure that, atleast
>> other Indian language communities facing similar problem. I occasionally
>> hear people from other communities mentioning scholarship by terms like
>> "Winkimania Scholarship" or "Wikimania Permanent Scholarship".
>>
>> From my home wiki community (Malayalam Language Community), only year I
>> remember that User:Viswaprabha didn't recieve the Wikimania scholarship was
>> 2016. I assume that was just because of the thread regarding this issue in
>> 2015. User:Netha Hussain, another user from our premises also get repeating
>> scholarships (not this year), but I am not sure that whether she represents
>> Malayalam Language Community. Frankly, I haven't seen any of these
>> scholarship receivers sharing anything to community in recent years. Then,
>> what is the advantage of selecting same persons again and again for
>> scholarship? Isn't it better to let more different people to share and
>> experience global community?
>>
>> I also wish to share a personal experience of intolerance. I raised the
>> issue in 2015 and then in 2016 I applied scholarship. I didn't even pass
>> "Selection Phase 1" yesteryear. According to Phase 1 criteria, every
>> serious application must pass to Phase 2. I asked about this to Ellie Young
>> in a reply, which I didn't get a response yet. Ironically, a very similar
>> application by me entered Phase 2 this year!
>>
>> Could someone clarify?
>>
>> [1] - https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-Jul
>> y/006921.html
>>
>>
>> Praveen Prakash
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> -- Luke // LFaraone
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing listWikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>


--
GN.
President Wikimedia Australia
WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
I don’t believe it is a to inform people that their scholarship application has passed Phase 1.
It raises false hopes and gets some people working hard to develop a presentation or workshop they intended to make and making preliminary tentative arrangements to comply with their domestic and professional commitments - for some people a Wikimania is a journey half around the world incurring a total absence from home of many more days than the duration of the conference. It’s not a pleasure trip.

Kudpung

> On 19May, 2017, at 23:36, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1] <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>, but I haven't got a clear answer there yet. I simply asked why certain people get Wikimania Scholarship each year, while other applicants rejected repeatedly. I have used a comparison of User:Viswaprabha and myself (User:Praveenp) there.
>
> Please note that this email is not about someone going to Wikimanias again and again, it is about granting Wikimania scholarships to same persons again and again. This is not personal, I am just using personalities and scholarships familiar to me. I am sure that, atleast other Indian language communities facing similar problem. I occasionally hear people from other communities mentioning scholarship by terms like "Winkimania Scholarship" or "Wikimania Permanent Scholarship".
>
> From my home wiki community (Malayalam Language Community), only year I remember that User:Viswaprabha didn't recieve the Wikimania scholarship was 2016. I assume that was just because of the thread regarding this issue in 2015. User:Netha Hussain, another user from our premises also get repeating scholarships (not this year), but I am not sure that whether she represents Malayalam Language Community. Frankly, I haven't seen any of these scholarship receivers sharing anything to community in recent years. Then, what is the advantage of selecting same persons again and again for scholarship? Isn't it better to let more different people to share and experience global community?
>
> I also wish to share a personal experience of intolerance. I raised the issue in 2015 and then in 2016 I applied scholarship. I didn't even pass "Selection Phase 1" yesteryear. According to Phase 1 criteria, every serious application must pass to Phase 2. I asked about this to Ellie Young in a reply, which I didn't get a response yet. Ironically, a very similar application by me entered Phase 2 this year!
>
> Could someone clarify?
>
> [1] - https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>
>
>
> Praveen Prakash
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
Gnangarra, you missed some possible reasons for repeated scholarships:

- the successful repeat applicants are performing at a higher standard
than others, year after year (I have seen people who make maybe 300 edits
in a year complain that they weren't selected over someone who's made
10,000 on multiple projects during that same year)
- the successful repeat applicants are identified with one or more
specific demographics that otherwise have significant difficulty in
attending (geographic, gender, sexual orientation, language group, etc.)
- the successful repeat applicants are bringing something specific to
Wikimania, such as excellent and well-attended presentations, knowledge of
some specific area of interest (e.g., one or more sister projects,
Wikidata), etc.


Let's not assume that people who have received scholarships more than once
have somehow gamed the system, or that there is a systemic error if someone
gets a scholarship more than once.


Risker/Anne (who received a partial scholarship once, long ago)

On 19 May 2017 at 22:35, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com> wrote:

> If there is a general opinion based on facts that the some individuals are
> the recipients of a regular scholarship, then that is something that needs
> to be discussed. Unfortunately to prove the hypothesis that this is
> happening there does need to be some presentation of what the basis for
> that theory is and that means actually naming individuals otherwise it gets
> dismissed as nonsense but in naming, providing the basis the person gets
> told *"**sending emails like this one would certainly in-and-of-itself
> be a reason against." *ensures that no one ever questions the
> processes. Well I really dont care anymore if I dont get to go to another
> Wikimania I'm going to challenge the process because its seen as having
> flaws and that to me needs to addressed.
>
> What I see as the potential reasons for repeated scholarships for the same
> person is that
>
> - they are active, they apply every year
> - they are good communicators and self promoters
> - they have the time capacity to attend every year
> - previous years application arent tested against current
> applications for repetitions
> - each year the applications are judged in isolation that year,...
> - theres no validation of what was claimed in previous reporting to
> actual outcomes
> - the same core group of people put their hand up to make the
> selections every year
> - the criteria isnt sufficiently dynamic between each wikimania to
> draw new applicants to the top
>
>
> We can dismiss it as jealousy or sour grapes or some other type of gripe.
> Alternatively we can ask the questions, is there a basis for the perception
> can we do things better...
>
> On 20 May 2017 at 09:48, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> So it is incredibly appropriate to grant scholarship to same person again
>> and again? Usually applicant do not complain about this disparity because
>> it would immediately branded as their desperation. If we could not speak
>> about this, how could we ensure diversity and equality?
>> On Saturday 20 May 2017 01:53 AM, LFaraone wrote:
>>
>> It would be incredibly inappropriate to discuss a specific person's
>> eligibility in public like this.
>>
>> Simply put: people who get scholarships do so according to the published
>> selection criteria. People who do not, did not qualify.
>>
>>
>> In my opinion, sending emails like this one would
>> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against.
>>
>>
>> As a community, if questioning a process leads to disqualification, is
>> not a good tendency. I was the only one sent mails in 2015. Why none of
>> the other applicant gets scholarship?
>>
>> While discussing this without any name, it immediately rebutted as false
>> argument. If we use any names, it is inappropriate!
>>
>>
>> On 19 May 2017 at 18:36, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1]
>>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>,
>>> but I haven't got a clear answer there yet. I simply asked why certain
>>> people get Wikimania Scholarship each year, while other applicants rejected
>>> repeatedly. I have used a comparison of User:Viswaprabha and myself
>>> (User:Praveenp) there.
>>>
>>> Please note that this email is not about someone going to Wikimanias
>>> again and again, it is about granting Wikimania scholarships to same
>>> persons again and again. This is not personal, I am just using
>>> personalities and scholarships familiar to me. I am sure that, atleast
>>> other Indian language communities facing similar problem. I occasionally
>>> hear people from other communities mentioning scholarship by terms like
>>> "Winkimania Scholarship" or "Wikimania Permanent Scholarship".
>>>
>>> From my home wiki community (Malayalam Language Community), only year I
>>> remember that User:Viswaprabha didn't recieve the Wikimania scholarship was
>>> 2016. I assume that was just because of the thread regarding this issue in
>>> 2015. User:Netha Hussain, another user from our premises also get repeating
>>> scholarships (not this year), but I am not sure that whether she represents
>>> Malayalam Language Community. Frankly, I haven't seen any of these
>>> scholarship receivers sharing anything to community in recent years. Then,
>>> what is the advantage of selecting same persons again and again for
>>> scholarship? Isn't it better to let more different people to share and
>>> experience global community?
>>>
>>> I also wish to share a personal experience of intolerance. I raised the
>>> issue in 2015 and then in 2016 I applied scholarship. I didn't even pass
>>> "Selection Phase 1" yesteryear. According to Phase 1 criteria, every
>>> serious application must pass to Phase 2. I asked about this to Ellie Young
>>> in a reply, which I didn't get a response yet. Ironically, a very similar
>>> application by me entered Phase 2 this year!
>>>
>>> Could someone clarify?
>>>
>>> [1] - https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-Jul
>>> y/006921.html
>>>
>>>
>>> Praveen Prakash
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> -- Luke // LFaraone
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing listWikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> GN.
> President Wikimedia Australia
> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
Hi, I'm Adrian. I was one of the organizers of the scholarship committee
this year. Obviously we cannot discuss the merits of specific applications
in this forum, but I wanted to clear up a couple of things.

First, what Risker said is largely true. Those who are repeatedly funded
tend to bring something to the table, and need to prove to the reviewers
that they have shared their past Wikimania experiences with their
communities. If people are being repeatedly funded, then there is usually a
reason for it. The scholarship committee is made up of mainly new people
every year, and each application is reviewed by a minimum of three people.
There isn't much room for unfairness or intentional bias in those
circumstances. The people who are repeatedly funded tend to be highly
active with the movement both on and off wiki, and write exceptional
applications for their scholarships.

That said, repeated funding of the same people is a concern. This year, we
introduced a rule where those who had been funded in the past year would
receive a point deduction on their score this year. This has leveled the
playing field a bit, and may be magnified a bit next year, though I won't
be one of the people making that decision. If you are very concerned with
this, I would recommend doing your own calculation of the percentage of
repeat winners each year, seeing if that has gone down this year, and then
use those concrete numbers to express a problem rather than comparing
yourself to someone who has received a scholarship.

Wikimania scholarships are highly competitive. Only one is awarded for
every 5-6 people that make it to phase 2, and every one of those
applications is a serious one. Don't be discouraged if you aren't selected
in any given year - there's always next year. Take a look at the reviewer's
guide to see specifically how these are marked (<
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_scholars/Reviewer%27s_guide
>).

Regards,

On May 19, 2017 7:56 PM, "Risker" <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:

> Gnangarra, you missed some possible reasons for repeated scholarships:
>
> - the successful repeat applicants are performing at a higher standard
> than others, year after year (I have seen people who make maybe 300 edits
> in a year complain that they weren't selected over someone who's made
> 10,000 on multiple projects during that same year)
> - the successful repeat applicants are identified with one or more
> specific demographics that otherwise have significant difficulty in
> attending (geographic, gender, sexual orientation, language group, etc.)
> - the successful repeat applicants are bringing something specific to
> Wikimania, such as excellent and well-attended presentations, knowledge of
> some specific area of interest (e.g., one or more sister projects,
> Wikidata), etc.
>
>
> Let's not assume that people who have received scholarships more than once
> have somehow gamed the system, or that there is a systemic error if someone
> gets a scholarship more than once.
>
>
> Risker/Anne (who received a partial scholarship once, long ago)
>
> On 19 May 2017 at 22:35, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If there is a general opinion based on facts that the some individuals
>> are the recipients of a regular scholarship, then that is something that
>> needs to be discussed. Unfortunately to prove the hypothesis that this is
>> happening there does need to be some presentation of what the basis for
>> that theory is and that means actually naming individuals otherwise it gets
>> dismissed as nonsense but in naming, providing the basis the person gets
>> told *"**sending emails like this one would certainly in-and-of-itself
>> be a reason against." *ensures that no one ever questions the
>> processes. Well I really dont care anymore if I dont get to go to another
>> Wikimania I'm going to challenge the process because its seen as having
>> flaws and that to me needs to addressed.
>>
>> What I see as the potential reasons for repeated scholarships for the
>> same person is that
>>
>> - they are active, they apply every year
>> - they are good communicators and self promoters
>> - they have the time capacity to attend every year
>> - previous years application arent tested against current
>> applications for repetitions
>> - each year the applications are judged in isolation that year,...
>> - theres no validation of what was claimed in previous reporting to
>> actual outcomes
>> - the same core group of people put their hand up to make the
>> selections every year
>> - the criteria isnt sufficiently dynamic between each wikimania to
>> draw new applicants to the top
>>
>>
>> We can dismiss it as jealousy or sour grapes or some other type of gripe.
>> Alternatively we can ask the questions, is there a basis for the perception
>> can we do things better...
>>
>> On 20 May 2017 at 09:48, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> So it is incredibly appropriate to grant scholarship to same person
>>> again and again? Usually applicant do not complain about this disparity
>>> because it would immediately branded as their desperation. If we could not
>>> speak about this, how could we ensure diversity and equality?
>>> On Saturday 20 May 2017 01:53 AM, LFaraone wrote:
>>>
>>> It would be incredibly inappropriate to discuss a specific person's
>>> eligibility in public like this.
>>>
>>> Simply put: people who get scholarships do so according to the published
>>> selection criteria. People who do not, did not qualify.
>>>
>>>
>>> In my opinion, sending emails like this one would
>>> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against.
>>>
>>>
>>> As a community, if questioning a process leads to disqualification, is
>>> not a good tendency. I was the only one sent mails in 2015. Why none of
>>> the other applicant gets scholarship?
>>>
>>> While discussing this without any name, it immediately rebutted as false
>>> argument. If we use any names, it is inappropriate!
>>>
>>>
>>> On 19 May 2017 at 18:36, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1]
>>>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>,
>>>> but I haven't got a clear answer there yet. I simply asked why certain
>>>> people get Wikimania Scholarship each year, while other applicants rejected
>>>> repeatedly. I have used a comparison of User:Viswaprabha and myself
>>>> (User:Praveenp) there.
>>>>
>>>> Please note that this email is not about someone going to Wikimanias
>>>> again and again, it is about granting Wikimania scholarships to same
>>>> persons again and again. This is not personal, I am just using
>>>> personalities and scholarships familiar to me. I am sure that, atleast
>>>> other Indian language communities facing similar problem. I occasionally
>>>> hear people from other communities mentioning scholarship by terms like
>>>> "Winkimania Scholarship" or "Wikimania Permanent Scholarship".
>>>>
>>>> From my home wiki community (Malayalam Language Community), only year I
>>>> remember that User:Viswaprabha didn't recieve the Wikimania scholarship was
>>>> 2016. I assume that was just because of the thread regarding this issue in
>>>> 2015. User:Netha Hussain, another user from our premises also get repeating
>>>> scholarships (not this year), but I am not sure that whether she represents
>>>> Malayalam Language Community. Frankly, I haven't seen any of these
>>>> scholarship receivers sharing anything to community in recent years. Then,
>>>> what is the advantage of selecting same persons again and again for
>>>> scholarship? Isn't it better to let more different people to share and
>>>> experience global community?
>>>>
>>>> I also wish to share a personal experience of intolerance. I raised the
>>>> issue in 2015 and then in 2016 I applied scholarship. I didn't even pass
>>>> "Selection Phase 1" yesteryear. According to Phase 1 criteria, every
>>>> serious application must pass to Phase 2. I asked about this to Ellie Young
>>>> in a reply, which I didn't get a response yet. Ironically, a very similar
>>>> application by me entered Phase 2 this year!
>>>>
>>>> Could someone clarify?
>>>>
>>>> [1] - https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-Jul
>>>> y/006921.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Praveen Prakash
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> -- Luke // LFaraone
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimania-l mailing listWikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> GN.
>> President Wikimedia Australia
>> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
>> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
From here at local language community, we don't see any "significant
contributions" from regular scholarship recievers. As I said they are not
anymore sharing their Wikimania experience to local language community.
Scholarship committee may be unbiased, in that case they are vulnerable to
manipulation. People are perfectly able to manipulate them because of their
massive experience with them. Or may be they befriended large number
people from global community from thier exposure and experience, and thus
cause incognizant bias.

I really don't want to raise usernames but user:viswaprabha get regular
scholarship atleast since last decade (2007?). It is recommendable in no
way, when most of other applicants never get the experience and exposure in
wikimania.

Please don't add more obscurity to an already dark process by
not informing people about their application status after phase 1. As I
said earlier, I was able to understand my 2016 application was okay but
rejected only because of this notification culture. Such a notification
will l help people retire early from planning and preparation also.

Praveen


On Saturday, 20 May 2017, Adrian Raddatz <ajraddatz@gmail.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','ajraddatz@gmail.com');>> wrote:

> Hi, I'm Adrian. I was one of the organizers of the scholarship committee
> this year. Obviously we cannot discuss the merits of specific applications
> in this forum, but I wanted to clear up a couple of things.
>
> First, what Risker said is largely true. Those who are repeatedly funded
> tend to bring something to the table, and need to prove to the reviewers
> that they have shared their past Wikimania experiences with their
> communities. If people are being repeatedly funded, then there is usually a
> reason for it. The scholarship committee is made up of mainly new people
> every year, and each application is reviewed by a minimum of three people.
> There isn't much room for unfairness or intentional bias in those
> circumstances. The people who are repeatedly funded tend to be highly
> active with the movement both on and off wiki, and write exceptional
> applications for their scholarships.
>
> That said, repeated funding of the same people is a concern. This year, we
> introduced a rule where those who had been funded in the past year would
> receive a point deduction on their score this year. This has leveled the
> playing field a bit, and may be magnified a bit next year, though I won't
> be one of the people making that decision. If you are very concerned with
> this, I would recommend doing your own calculation of the percentage of
> repeat winners each year, seeing if that has gone down this year, and then
> use those concrete numbers to express a problem rather than comparing
> yourself to someone who has received a scholarship.
>
> Wikimania scholarships are highly competitive. Only one is awarded for
> every 5-6 people that make it to phase 2, and every one of those
> applications is a serious one. Don't be discouraged if you aren't selected
> in any given year - there's always next year. Take a look at the reviewer's
> guide to see specifically how these are marked (<
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_schol
> ars/Reviewer%27s_guide>).
>
> Regards,
>
> On May 19, 2017 7:56 PM, "Risker" <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Gnangarra, you missed some possible reasons for repeated scholarships:
>>
>> - the successful repeat applicants are performing at a higher
>> standard than others, year after year (I have seen people who make maybe
>> 300 edits in a year complain that they weren't selected over someone who's
>> made 10,000 on multiple projects during that same year)
>> - the successful repeat applicants are identified with one or more
>> specific demographics that otherwise have significant difficulty in
>> attending (geographic, gender, sexual orientation, language group, etc.)
>> - the successful repeat applicants are bringing something specific to
>> Wikimania, such as excellent and well-attended presentations, knowledge of
>> some specific area of interest (e.g., one or more sister projects,
>> Wikidata), etc.
>>
>>
>> Let's not assume that people who have received scholarships more than
>> once have somehow gamed the system, or that there is a systemic error if
>> someone gets a scholarship more than once.
>>
>>
>> Risker/Anne (who received a partial scholarship once, long ago)
>>
>> On 19 May 2017 at 22:35, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> If there is a general opinion based on facts that the some individuals
>>> are the recipients of a regular scholarship, then that is something that
>>> needs to be discussed. Unfortunately to prove the hypothesis that this is
>>> happening there does need to be some presentation of what the basis for
>>> that theory is and that means actually naming individuals otherwise it gets
>>> dismissed as nonsense but in naming, providing the basis the person gets
>>> told *"**sending emails like this one would certainly in-and-of-itself
>>> be a reason against." *ensures that no one ever questions the
>>> processes. Well I really dont care anymore if I dont get to go to another
>>> Wikimania I'm going to challenge the process because its seen as having
>>> flaws and that to me needs to addressed.
>>>
>>> What I see as the potential reasons for repeated scholarships for the
>>> same person is that
>>>
>>> - they are active, they apply every year
>>> - they are good communicators and self promoters
>>> - they have the time capacity to attend every year
>>> - previous years application arent tested against current
>>> applications for repetitions
>>> - each year the applications are judged in isolation that year,...
>>> - theres no validation of what was claimed in previous reporting to
>>> actual outcomes
>>> - the same core group of people put their hand up to make the
>>> selections every year
>>> - the criteria isnt sufficiently dynamic between each wikimania to
>>> draw new applicants to the top
>>>
>>>
>>> We can dismiss it as jealousy or sour grapes or some other type of
>>> gripe. Alternatively we can ask the questions, is there a basis for the
>>> perception can we do things better...
>>>
>>> On 20 May 2017 at 09:48, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> So it is incredibly appropriate to grant scholarship to same person
>>>> again and again? Usually applicant do not complain about this disparity
>>>> because it would immediately branded as their desperation. If we could not
>>>> speak about this, how could we ensure diversity and equality?
>>>> On Saturday 20 May 2017 01:53 AM, LFaraone wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It would be incredibly inappropriate to discuss a specific person's
>>>> eligibility in public like this.
>>>>
>>>> Simply put: people who get scholarships do so according to the
>>>> published selection criteria. People who do not, did not qualify.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In my opinion, sending emails like this one would
>>>> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As a community, if questioning a process leads to disqualification, is
>>>> not a good tendency. I was the only one sent mails in 2015. Why none of
>>>> the other applicant gets scholarship?
>>>>
>>>> While discussing this without any name, it immediately rebutted as
>>>> false argument. If we use any names, it is inappropriate!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 19 May 2017 at 18:36, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1]
>>>>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>,
>>>>> but I haven't got a clear answer there yet. I simply asked why certain
>>>>> people get Wikimania Scholarship each year, while other applicants rejected
>>>>> repeatedly. I have used a comparison of User:Viswaprabha and myself
>>>>> (User:Praveenp) there.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please note that this email is not about someone going to Wikimanias
>>>>> again and again, it is about granting Wikimania scholarships to same
>>>>> persons again and again. This is not personal, I am just using
>>>>> personalities and scholarships familiar to me. I am sure that, atleast
>>>>> other Indian language communities facing similar problem. I occasionally
>>>>> hear people from other communities mentioning scholarship by terms like
>>>>> "Winkimania Scholarship" or "Wikimania Permanent Scholarship".
>>>>>
>>>>> From my home wiki community (Malayalam Language Community), only year
>>>>> I remember that User:Viswaprabha didn't recieve the Wikimania scholarship
>>>>> was 2016. I assume that was just because of the thread regarding this issue
>>>>> in 2015. User:Netha Hussain, another user from our premises also get
>>>>> repeating scholarships (not this year), but I am not sure that whether she
>>>>> represents Malayalam Language Community. Frankly, I haven't seen any of
>>>>> these scholarship receivers sharing anything to community in recent years.
>>>>> Then, what is the advantage of selecting same persons again and again for
>>>>> scholarship? Isn't it better to let more different people to share and
>>>>> experience global community?
>>>>>
>>>>> I also wish to share a personal experience of intolerance. I raised
>>>>> the issue in 2015 and then in 2016 I applied scholarship. I didn't even
>>>>> pass "Selection Phase 1" yesteryear. According to Phase 1 criteria, every
>>>>> serious application must pass to Phase 2. I asked about this to Ellie Young
>>>>> in a reply, which I didn't get a response yet. Ironically, a very similar
>>>>> application by me entered Phase 2 this year!
>>>>>
>>>>> Could someone clarify?
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] - https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-Jul
>>>>> y/006921.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Praveen Prakash
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> -- Luke // LFaraone
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimania-l mailing listWikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> GN.
>>> President Wikimedia Australia
>>> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
>>> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>
>>
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
There is no manipulation. The idea that someone could have befriended all
of their reviewers every year for a decade is quite silly. I'm sorry that
you didn't get a scholarship this year, but at this point there is not a
useful conversation being had here.

If you think there is a problem, volunteer for the scholarship committee
next year and help fix it!

On May 19, 2017 10:28 PM, "praveenp" <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:

> From here at local language community, we don't see any "significant
> contributions" from regular scholarship recievers. As I said they are not
> anymore sharing their Wikimania experience to local language community.
> Scholarship committee may be unbiased, in that case they are vulnerable to
> manipulation. People are perfectly able to manipulate them because of their
> massive experience with them. Or may be they befriended large number
> people from global community from thier exposure and experience, and thus
> cause incognizant bias.
>
> I really don't want to raise usernames but user:viswaprabha get regular
> scholarship atleast since last decade (2007?). It is recommendable in no
> way, when most of other applicants never get the experience and exposure in
> wikimania.
>
> Please don't add more obscurity to an already dark process by
> not informing people about their application status after phase 1. As I
> said earlier, I was able to understand my 2016 application was okay but
> rejected only because of this notification culture. Such a notification
> will l help people retire early from planning and preparation also.
>
> Praveen
>
>
> On Saturday, 20 May 2017, Adrian Raddatz <ajraddatz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi, I'm Adrian. I was one of the organizers of the scholarship committee
>> this year. Obviously we cannot discuss the merits of specific applications
>> in this forum, but I wanted to clear up a couple of things.
>>
>> First, what Risker said is largely true. Those who are repeatedly funded
>> tend to bring something to the table, and need to prove to the reviewers
>> that they have shared their past Wikimania experiences with their
>> communities. If people are being repeatedly funded, then there is usually a
>> reason for it. The scholarship committee is made up of mainly new people
>> every year, and each application is reviewed by a minimum of three people.
>> There isn't much room for unfairness or intentional bias in those
>> circumstances. The people who are repeatedly funded tend to be highly
>> active with the movement both on and off wiki, and write exceptional
>> applications for their scholarships.
>>
>> That said, repeated funding of the same people is a concern. This year,
>> we introduced a rule where those who had been funded in the past year would
>> receive a point deduction on their score this year. This has leveled the
>> playing field a bit, and may be magnified a bit next year, though I won't
>> be one of the people making that decision. If you are very concerned with
>> this, I would recommend doing your own calculation of the percentage of
>> repeat winners each year, seeing if that has gone down this year, and then
>> use those concrete numbers to express a problem rather than comparing
>> yourself to someone who has received a scholarship.
>>
>> Wikimania scholarships are highly competitive. Only one is awarded for
>> every 5-6 people that make it to phase 2, and every one of those
>> applications is a serious one. Don't be discouraged if you aren't selected
>> in any given year - there's always next year. Take a look at the reviewer's
>> guide to see specifically how these are marked (<
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_schol
>> ars/Reviewer%27s_guide>).
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> On May 19, 2017 7:56 PM, "Risker" <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Gnangarra, you missed some possible reasons for repeated scholarships:
>>>
>>> - the successful repeat applicants are performing at a higher
>>> standard than others, year after year (I have seen people who make maybe
>>> 300 edits in a year complain that they weren't selected over someone who's
>>> made 10,000 on multiple projects during that same year)
>>> - the successful repeat applicants are identified with one or more
>>> specific demographics that otherwise have significant difficulty in
>>> attending (geographic, gender, sexual orientation, language group, etc.)
>>> - the successful repeat applicants are bringing something specific
>>> to Wikimania, such as excellent and well-attended presentations, knowledge
>>> of some specific area of interest (e.g., one or more sister projects,
>>> Wikidata), etc.
>>>
>>>
>>> Let's not assume that people who have received scholarships more than
>>> once have somehow gamed the system, or that there is a systemic error if
>>> someone gets a scholarship more than once.
>>>
>>>
>>> Risker/Anne (who received a partial scholarship once, long ago)
>>>
>>> On 19 May 2017 at 22:35, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> If there is a general opinion based on facts that the some individuals
>>>> are the recipients of a regular scholarship, then that is something that
>>>> needs to be discussed. Unfortunately to prove the hypothesis that this is
>>>> happening there does need to be some presentation of what the basis for
>>>> that theory is and that means actually naming individuals otherwise it gets
>>>> dismissed as nonsense but in naming, providing the basis the person gets
>>>> told *"**sending emails like this one would
>>>> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against." *ensures that no one
>>>> ever questions the processes. Well I really dont care anymore if I dont
>>>> get to go to another Wikimania I'm going to challenge the process because
>>>> its seen as having flaws and that to me needs to addressed.
>>>>
>>>> What I see as the potential reasons for repeated scholarships for the
>>>> same person is that
>>>>
>>>> - they are active, they apply every year
>>>> - they are good communicators and self promoters
>>>> - they have the time capacity to attend every year
>>>> - previous years application arent tested against current
>>>> applications for repetitions
>>>> - each year the applications are judged in isolation that year,...
>>>> - theres no validation of what was claimed in previous reporting to
>>>> actual outcomes
>>>> - the same core group of people put their hand up to make the
>>>> selections every year
>>>> - the criteria isnt sufficiently dynamic between each wikimania to
>>>> draw new applicants to the top
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We can dismiss it as jealousy or sour grapes or some other type of
>>>> gripe. Alternatively we can ask the questions, is there a basis for the
>>>> perception can we do things better...
>>>>
>>>> On 20 May 2017 at 09:48, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> So it is incredibly appropriate to grant scholarship to same person
>>>>> again and again? Usually applicant do not complain about this disparity
>>>>> because it would immediately branded as their desperation. If we could not
>>>>> speak about this, how could we ensure diversity and equality?
>>>>> On Saturday 20 May 2017 01:53 AM, LFaraone wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be incredibly inappropriate to discuss a specific person's
>>>>> eligibility in public like this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Simply put: people who get scholarships do so according to the
>>>>> published selection criteria. People who do not, did not qualify.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In my opinion, sending emails like this one would
>>>>> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As a community, if questioning a process leads to disqualification, is
>>>>> not a good tendency. I was the only one sent mails in 2015. Why none of
>>>>> the other applicant gets scholarship?
>>>>>
>>>>> While discussing this without any name, it immediately rebutted as
>>>>> false argument. If we use any names, it is inappropriate!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 19 May 2017 at 18:36, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1]
>>>>>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>,
>>>>>> but I haven't got a clear answer there yet. I simply asked why certain
>>>>>> people get Wikimania Scholarship each year, while other applicants rejected
>>>>>> repeatedly. I have used a comparison of User:Viswaprabha and myself
>>>>>> (User:Praveenp) there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please note that this email is not about someone going to Wikimanias
>>>>>> again and again, it is about granting Wikimania scholarships to same
>>>>>> persons again and again. This is not personal, I am just using
>>>>>> personalities and scholarships familiar to me. I am sure that, atleast
>>>>>> other Indian language communities facing similar problem. I occasionally
>>>>>> hear people from other communities mentioning scholarship by terms like
>>>>>> "Winkimania Scholarship" or "Wikimania Permanent Scholarship".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From my home wiki community (Malayalam Language Community), only year
>>>>>> I remember that User:Viswaprabha didn't recieve the Wikimania scholarship
>>>>>> was 2016. I assume that was just because of the thread regarding this issue
>>>>>> in 2015. User:Netha Hussain, another user from our premises also get
>>>>>> repeating scholarships (not this year), but I am not sure that whether she
>>>>>> represents Malayalam Language Community. Frankly, I haven't seen any of
>>>>>> these scholarship receivers sharing anything to community in recent years.
>>>>>> Then, what is the advantage of selecting same persons again and again for
>>>>>> scholarship? Isn't it better to let more different people to share and
>>>>>> experience global community?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I also wish to share a personal experience of intolerance. I raised
>>>>>> the issue in 2015 and then in 2016 I applied scholarship. I didn't even
>>>>>> pass "Selection Phase 1" yesteryear. According to Phase 1 criteria, every
>>>>>> serious application must pass to Phase 2. I asked about this to Ellie Young
>>>>>> in a reply, which I didn't get a response yet. Ironically, a very similar
>>>>>> application by me entered Phase 2 this year!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could someone clarify?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] - https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-Jul
>>>>>> y/006921.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Praveen Prakash
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> -- Luke // LFaraone
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing listWikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> GN.
>>>> President Wikimedia Australia
>>>> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
>>>> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>
>>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
> On 20 May 2017, at 07:36, Adrian Raddatz <ajraddatz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> There is no manipulation. The idea that someone could have befriended all of their reviewers every year for a decade is quite silly. I'm sorry that you didn't get a scholarship this year, but at this point there is not a useful conversation being had here.
>
> If you think there is a problem, volunteer for the scholarship committee next year and help fix it!

There is, of course, a legitimate question if each committee blindly choses from
the current pool of applicant without looking into history, or if there is some
institutional memory that will ensure a wider spread of accepted applications.

In the first case, it is not unlikely that someone who wrote a good application once
and who otherwise fits the criteria will have a good chance one year later.

In the second case, one could give bonus points for first-time applicants, or forbid
application immediately after one success, or have an arbitrarily complex system of
awarding handicap scores based on recent successful applications.

I’m personally on the fence - a scholarship may be the only chance for some people
to attend, so spreading them widely seems to be fair. On the other hand, repeat
visits help to build more lasting relationships.

But I do think this is a question that should have an explicit answer either way.

Bye,

Stephan

--
------------------------------ It can be done! ---------------------------------
Please email me as schulz@eprover.org (Stephan Schulz)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
Hi Stephan, you're absolutely right. That's why the committee this year has
started penalizing repeat recipients on the points scoring - if they just
got one, then they will be less likely to get one in the next year. Their
reports from past years are also evaluated, and if they did not fill them
in well, then that will cause a serious points deduction for them. See the
guide I linked to a few emails up for specifics here.

I certainly don't mean to dismiss this entire subject. There is certainly a
question of whether we should do more to prevent repeat funding. But I
think that conversation needs to be had apart from specific cases, and with
a clear focus on the institutions of selection and what actual effects any
changes would bring.

Adrian Raddatz

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 10:48 PM, Stephan Schulz <schulz@eprover.org> wrote:

>
> > On 20 May 2017, at 07:36, Adrian Raddatz <ajraddatz@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > There is no manipulation. The idea that someone could have befriended
> all of their reviewers every year for a decade is quite silly. I'm sorry
> that you didn't get a scholarship this year, but at this point there is not
> a useful conversation being had here.
> >
> > If you think there is a problem, volunteer for the scholarship committee
> next year and help fix it!
>
> There is, of course, a legitimate question if each committee blindly
> choses from
> the current pool of applicant without looking into history, or if there is
> some
> institutional memory that will ensure a wider spread of accepted
> applications.
>
> In the first case, it is not unlikely that someone who wrote a good
> application once
> and who otherwise fits the criteria will have a good chance one year later.
>
> In the second case, one could give bonus points for first-time applicants,
> or forbid
> application immediately after one success, or have an arbitrarily complex
> system of
> awarding handicap scores based on recent successful applications.
>
> I’m personally on the fence - a scholarship may be the only chance for
> some people
> to attend, so spreading them widely seems to be fair. On the other hand,
> repeat
> visits help to build more lasting relationships.
>
> But I do think this is a question that should have an explicit answer
> either way.
>
> Bye,
>
> Stephan
>
> --
> ------------------------------ It can be done!
> ---------------------------------
> Please email me as schulz@eprover.org (Stephan Schulz)
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
So, it is easy to escape an issue by stamping it as a personal desperation.
People do not want to be known as desperate, jealous or failure. This type
of stamping hold back most people from challenging the system.

On 20 May 2017 11:06 am, "Adrian Raddatz" <ajraddatz@gmail.com> wrote:

There is no manipulation. The idea that someone could have befriended all
of their reviewers every year for a decade is quite silly.


How do we know? You are saying so, others never been there.

I'm sorry that you didn't get a scholarship this year


Thank you for your sympathy. But I would love to see anybody else other
than regular scholarship recievers attending wikimania more than sympathy.
Could you read the thread again?


, but at this point there is not a useful conversation being had here.


If you think there is a problem, volunteer for the scholarship committee
next year and help fix it!


Sigh :-( Why it is not okay to start from here? Why should I wait until
next scholarship committee?


On May 19, 2017 10:28 PM, "praveenp" <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:

> From here at local language community, we don't see any "significant
> contributions" from regular scholarship recievers. As I said they are not
> anymore sharing their Wikimania experience to local language community.
> Scholarship committee may be unbiased, in that case they are vulnerable to
> manipulation. People are perfectly able to manipulate them because of their
> massive experience with them. Or may be they befriended large number
> people from global community from thier exposure and experience, and thus
> cause incognizant bias.
>
> I really don't want to raise usernames but user:viswaprabha get regular
> scholarship atleast since last decade (2007?). It is recommendable in no
> way, when most of other applicants never get the experience and exposure in
> wikimania.
>
> Please don't add more obscurity to an already dark process by
> not informing people about their application status after phase 1. As I
> said earlier, I was able to understand my 2016 application was okay but
> rejected only because of this notification culture. Such a notification
> will l help people retire early from planning and preparation also.
>
> Praveen
>
>
> On Saturday, 20 May 2017, Adrian Raddatz <ajraddatz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi, I'm Adrian. I was one of the organizers of the scholarship committee
>> this year. Obviously we cannot discuss the merits of specific applications
>> in this forum, but I wanted to clear up a couple of things.
>>
>> First, what Risker said is largely true. Those who are repeatedly funded
>> tend to bring something to the table, and need to prove to the reviewers
>> that they have shared their past Wikimania experiences with their
>> communities. If people are being repeatedly funded, then there is usually a
>> reason for it. The scholarship committee is made up of mainly new people
>> every year, and each application is reviewed by a minimum of three people.
>> There isn't much room for unfairness or intentional bias in those
>> circumstances. The people who are repeatedly funded tend to be highly
>> active with the movement both on and off wiki, and write exceptional
>> applications for their scholarships.
>>
>> That said, repeated funding of the same people is a concern. This year,
>> we introduced a rule where those who had been funded in the past year would
>> receive a point deduction on their score this year. This has leveled the
>> playing field a bit, and may be magnified a bit next year, though I won't
>> be one of the people making that decision. If you are very concerned with
>> this, I would recommend doing your own calculation of the percentage of
>> repeat winners each year, seeing if that has gone down this year, and then
>> use those concrete numbers to express a problem rather than comparing
>> yourself to someone who has received a scholarship.
>>
>> Wikimania scholarships are highly competitive. Only one is awarded for
>> every 5-6 people that make it to phase 2, and every one of those
>> applications is a serious one. Don't be discouraged if you aren't selected
>> in any given year - there's always next year. Take a look at the reviewer's
>> guide to see specifically how these are marked (<
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_schol
>> ars/Reviewer%27s_guide>).
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> On May 19, 2017 7:56 PM, "Risker" <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Gnangarra, you missed some possible reasons for repeated scholarships:
>>>
>>> - the successful repeat applicants are performing at a higher
>>> standard than others, year after year (I have seen people who make maybe
>>> 300 edits in a year complain that they weren't selected over someone who's
>>> made 10,000 on multiple projects during that same year)
>>> - the successful repeat applicants are identified with one or more
>>> specific demographics that otherwise have significant difficulty in
>>> attending (geographic, gender, sexual orientation, language group, etc.)
>>> - the successful repeat applicants are bringing something specific
>>> to Wikimania, such as excellent and well-attended presentations, knowledge
>>> of some specific area of interest (e.g., one or more sister projects,
>>> Wikidata), etc.
>>>
>>>
>>> Let's not assume that people who have received scholarships more than
>>> once have somehow gamed the system, or that there is a systemic error if
>>> someone gets a scholarship more than once.
>>>
>>>
>>> Risker/Anne (who received a partial scholarship once, long ago)
>>>
>>> On 19 May 2017 at 22:35, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> If there is a general opinion based on facts that the some individuals
>>>> are the recipients of a regular scholarship, then that is something that
>>>> needs to be discussed. Unfortunately to prove the hypothesis that this is
>>>> happening there does need to be some presentation of what the basis for
>>>> that theory is and that means actually naming individuals otherwise it gets
>>>> dismissed as nonsense but in naming, providing the basis the person gets
>>>> told *"**sending emails like this one would
>>>> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against." *ensures that no one
>>>> ever questions the processes. Well I really dont care anymore if I dont
>>>> get to go to another Wikimania I'm going to challenge the process because
>>>> its seen as having flaws and that to me needs to addressed.
>>>>
>>>> What I see as the potential reasons for repeated scholarships for the
>>>> same person is that
>>>>
>>>> - they are active, they apply every year
>>>> - they are good communicators and self promoters
>>>> - they have the time capacity to attend every year
>>>> - previous years application arent tested against current
>>>> applications for repetitions
>>>> - each year the applications are judged in isolation that year,...
>>>> - theres no validation of what was claimed in previous reporting to
>>>> actual outcomes
>>>> - the same core group of people put their hand up to make the
>>>> selections every year
>>>> - the criteria isnt sufficiently dynamic between each wikimania to
>>>> draw new applicants to the top
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We can dismiss it as jealousy or sour grapes or some other type of
>>>> gripe. Alternatively we can ask the questions, is there a basis for the
>>>> perception can we do things better...
>>>>
>>>> On 20 May 2017 at 09:48, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> So it is incredibly appropriate to grant scholarship to same person
>>>>> again and again? Usually applicant do not complain about this disparity
>>>>> because it would immediately branded as their desperation. If we could not
>>>>> speak about this, how could we ensure diversity and equality?
>>>>> On Saturday 20 May 2017 01:53 AM, LFaraone wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be incredibly inappropriate to discuss a specific person's
>>>>> eligibility in public like this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Simply put: people who get scholarships do so according to the
>>>>> published selection criteria. People who do not, did not qualify.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In my opinion, sending emails like this one would
>>>>> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As a community, if questioning a process leads to disqualification, is
>>>>> not a good tendency. I was the only one sent mails in 2015. Why none of
>>>>> the other applicant gets scholarship?
>>>>>
>>>>> While discussing this without any name, it immediately rebutted as
>>>>> false argument. If we use any names, it is inappropriate!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 19 May 2017 at 18:36, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1]
>>>>>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>,
>>>>>> but I haven't got a clear answer there yet. I simply asked why certain
>>>>>> people get Wikimania Scholarship each year, while other applicants rejected
>>>>>> repeatedly. I have used a comparison of User:Viswaprabha and myself
>>>>>> (User:Praveenp) there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please note that this email is not about someone going to Wikimanias
>>>>>> again and again, it is about granting Wikimania scholarships to same
>>>>>> persons again and again. This is not personal, I am just using
>>>>>> personalities and scholarships familiar to me. I am sure that, atleast
>>>>>> other Indian language communities facing similar problem. I occasionally
>>>>>> hear people from other communities mentioning scholarship by terms like
>>>>>> "Winkimania Scholarship" or "Wikimania Permanent Scholarship".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From my home wiki community (Malayalam Language Community), only year
>>>>>> I remember that User:Viswaprabha didn't recieve the Wikimania scholarship
>>>>>> was 2016. I assume that was just because of the thread regarding this issue
>>>>>> in 2015. User:Netha Hussain, another user from our premises also get
>>>>>> repeating scholarships (not this year), but I am not sure that whether she
>>>>>> represents Malayalam Language Community. Frankly, I haven't seen any of
>>>>>> these scholarship receivers sharing anything to community in recent years.
>>>>>> Then, what is the advantage of selecting same persons again and again for
>>>>>> scholarship? Isn't it better to let more different people to share and
>>>>>> experience global community?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I also wish to share a personal experience of intolerance. I raised
>>>>>> the issue in 2015 and then in 2016 I applied scholarship. I didn't even
>>>>>> pass "Selection Phase 1" yesteryear. According to Phase 1 criteria, every
>>>>>> serious application must pass to Phase 2. I asked about this to Ellie Young
>>>>>> in a reply, which I didn't get a response yet. Ironically, a very similar
>>>>>> application by me entered Phase 2 this year!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could someone clarify?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] - https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-Jul
>>>>>> y/006921.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Praveen Prakash
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> -- Luke // LFaraone
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing listWikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> GN.
>>>> President Wikimedia Australia
>>>> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
>>>> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>
>>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
To put this into perspective with some numbers: in 2014-17, out of 378 people awarded scholarships, 309 people have been awarded one scholarship, 55 have been awarded two, 14 have been awarded three, and 0 have been awarded four. Caveat that this is solely from the WMF lists on meta, so isn't including other scholarships/funding methods that aren't listed.

Thanks,
Mike

> On 20 May 2017, at 04:07, Adrian Raddatz <ajraddatz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi, I'm Adrian. I was one of the organizers of the scholarship committee this year. Obviously we cannot discuss the merits of specific applications in this forum, but I wanted to clear up a couple of things.
>
> First, what Risker said is largely true. Those who are repeatedly funded tend to bring something to the table, and need to prove to the reviewers that they have shared their past Wikimania experiences with their communities. If people are being repeatedly funded, then there is usually a reason for it. The scholarship committee is made up of mainly new people every year, and each application is reviewed by a minimum of three people. There isn't much room for unfairness or intentional bias in those circumstances. The people who are repeatedly funded tend to be highly active with the movement both on and off wiki, and write exceptional applications for their scholarships.
>
> That said, repeated funding of the same people is a concern. This year, we introduced a rule where those who had been funded in the past year would receive a point deduction on their score this year. This has leveled the playing field a bit, and may be magnified a bit next year, though I won't be one of the people making that decision. If you are very concerned with this, I would recommend doing your own calculation of the percentage of repeat winners each year, seeing if that has gone down this year, and then use those concrete numbers to express a problem rather than comparing yourself to someone who has received a scholarship.
>
> Wikimania scholarships are highly competitive. Only one is awarded for every 5-6 people that make it to phase 2, and every one of those applications is a serious one. Don't be discouraged if you aren't selected in any given year - there's always next year. Take a look at the reviewer's guide to see specifically how these are marked (<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_scholars/Reviewer%27s_guide <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_scholars/Reviewer%27s_guide>>).
>
> Regards,
>
> On May 19, 2017 7:56 PM, "Risker" <risker.wp@gmail.com <mailto:risker.wp@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Gnangarra, you missed some possible reasons for repeated scholarships:
> the successful repeat applicants are performing at a higher standard than others, year after year (I have seen people who make maybe 300 edits in a year complain that they weren't selected over someone who's made 10,000 on multiple projects during that same year)
> the successful repeat applicants are identified with one or more specific demographics that otherwise have significant difficulty in attending (geographic, gender, sexual orientation, language group, etc.)
> the successful repeat applicants are bringing something specific to Wikimania, such as excellent and well-attended presentations, knowledge of some specific area of interest (e.g., one or more sister projects, Wikidata), etc.
>
>
> Let's not assume that people who have received scholarships more than once have somehow gamed the system, or that there is a systemic error if someone gets a scholarship more than once.
>
>
>
> Risker/Anne (who received a partial scholarship once, long ago)
>
>
> On 19 May 2017 at 22:35, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com <mailto:gnangarra@gmail.com>> wrote:
> If there is a general opinion based on facts that the some individuals are the recipients of a regular scholarship, then that is something that needs to be discussed. Unfortunately to prove the hypothesis that this is happening there does need to be some presentation of what the basis for that theory is and that means actually naming individuals otherwise it gets dismissed as nonsense but in naming, providing the basis the person gets told "sending emails like this one would certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against." ensures that no one ever questions the processes. Well I really dont care anymore if I dont get to go to another Wikimania I'm going to challenge the process because its seen as having flaws and that to me needs to addressed.
>
> What I see as the potential reasons for repeated scholarships for the same person is that
> they are active, they apply every year
> they are good communicators and self promoters
> they have the time capacity to attend every year
> previous years application arent tested against current applications for repetitions
> each year the applications are judged in isolation that year,...
> theres no validation of what was claimed in previous reporting to actual outcomes
> the same core group of people put their hand up to make the selections every year
> the criteria isnt sufficiently dynamic between each wikimania to draw new applicants to the top
>
> We can dismiss it as jealousy or sour grapes or some other type of gripe. Alternatively we can ask the questions, is there a basis for the perception can we do things better...
>
> On 20 May 2017 at 09:48, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com <mailto:me.praveen@gmail.com>> wrote:
> So it is incredibly appropriate to grant scholarship to same person again and again? Usually applicant do not complain about this disparity because it would immediately branded as their desperation. If we could not speak about this, how could we ensure diversity and equality?
>
> On Saturday 20 May 2017 01:53 AM, LFaraone wrote:
>> It would be incredibly inappropriate to discuss a specific person's eligibility in public like this.
>>
>> Simply put: people who get scholarships do so according to the published selection criteria. People who do not, did not qualify.
>>
>> In my opinion, sending emails like this one would certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against.
>
> As a community, if questioning a process leads to disqualification, is not a good tendency. I was the only one sent mails in 2015. Why none of the other applicant gets scholarship?
>
> While discussing this without any name, it immediately rebutted as false argument. If we use any names, it is inappropriate!
>
>>
>> On 19 May 2017 at 18:36, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com <mailto:me.praveen@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1] <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>, but I haven't got a clear answer there yet. I simply asked why certain people get Wikimania Scholarship each year, while other applicants rejected repeatedly. I have used a comparison of User:Viswaprabha and myself (User:Praveenp) there.
>>
>> Please note that this email is not about someone going to Wikimanias again and again, it is about granting Wikimania scholarships to same persons again and again. This is not personal, I am just using personalities and scholarships familiar to me. I am sure that, atleast other Indian language communities facing similar problem. I occasionally hear people from other communities mentioning scholarship by terms like "Winkimania Scholarship" or "Wikimania Permanent Scholarship".
>>
>> From my home wiki community (Malayalam Language Community), only year I remember that User:Viswaprabha didn't recieve the Wikimania scholarship was 2016. I assume that was just because of the thread regarding this issue in 2015. User:Netha Hussain, another user from our premises also get repeating scholarships (not this year), but I am not sure that whether she represents Malayalam Language Community. Frankly, I haven't seen any of these scholarship receivers sharing anything to community in recent years. Then, what is the advantage of selecting same persons again and again for scholarship? Isn't it better to let more different people to share and experience global community?
>>
>> I also wish to share a personal experience of intolerance. I raised the issue in 2015 and then in 2016 I applied scholarship. I didn't even pass "Selection Phase 1" yesteryear. According to Phase 1 criteria, every serious application must pass to Phase 2. I asked about this to Ellie Young in a reply, which I didn't get a response yet. Ironically, a very similar application by me entered Phase 2 this year!
>>
>> Could someone clarify?
>>
>> [1] - https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>
>>
>>
>> Praveen Prakash
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> -- Luke // LFaraone
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l>
>
>
>
>
> --
> GN.
> President Wikimedia Australia
> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra <http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra>
> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com <http://gnangarra.redbubble.com/>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
Dear All,

I am not sure if I should respond to this thread. However, it may be
important for me to come forward and mention the following points for
clarity:

1. I have previously attended 2012, 2014 and 2015 Wikimanias (Three in
total). I believe I have earnestly deserved those scholarships due to
various criteria as demanded by the system. I would not want to boast
myself what noteworthy accomplishments I have been achieving all these
years.
2. I am not an e-mail generator (as referred by an earlier e-mail (2015) by
the same user and on the same topic). You may find hardly a dozen or two of
e-mails, those too on absolutely essential occasions, I have ever written
to the WM threads since the beginning of cosmos.
3. I do not befriend or manipulate anyone inside or outside the awarding
committees ever. In fact, I have never even cared or known who are those
committee members.
4. The person who has raised this point is one of the earliest and
consistent users among that particular community. I have great respect to
him as an anonymous but highly responsible user. I also believe that he
should have been one of the recipient of Wikimania scholarship at some
point of time. However, I do not know him as a person and whether his
efforts match with all the selection criteria that the Wikimania adapts
regularly.
5. Despite my being selected for the scholarships (for three out of
probably ten application attempts), I myself had raised this point about
measurable selection criteria of scholarship candidates in several physical
meet-up occasions. I had also humbly suggested some kind of community
endorsement as another score point for the selection.
6. I am sad that my name is quoted in a mail like this with such implied
meanings that may create untrue impressions about me among the grand and
honorable crowd of Wikimedia mission for ever.

Thanks and regards,
User:Viswaprabha


On 20 May 2017 at 11:38, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:

> So, it is easy to escape an issue by stamping it as a personal
> desperation. People do not want to be known as desperate, jealous or
> failure. This type of stamping hold back most people from challenging the
> system.
>
> On 20 May 2017 11:06 am, "Adrian Raddatz" <ajraddatz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> There is no manipulation. The idea that someone could have befriended all
> of their reviewers every year for a decade is quite silly.
>
>
> How do we know? You are saying so, others never been there.
>
> I'm sorry that you didn't get a scholarship this year
>
>
> Thank you for your sympathy. But I would love to see anybody else other
> than regular scholarship recievers attending wikimania more than sympathy.
> Could you read the thread again?
>
>
> , but at this point there is not a useful conversation being had here.
>
>
> If you think there is a problem, volunteer for the scholarship committee
> next year and help fix it!
>
>
> Sigh :-( Why it is not okay to start from here? Why should I wait until
> next scholarship committee?
>
>
> On May 19, 2017 10:28 PM, "praveenp" <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> From here at local language community, we don't see any "significant
>> contributions" from regular scholarship recievers. As I said they are not
>> anymore sharing their Wikimania experience to local language community.
>> Scholarship committee may be unbiased, in that case they are vulnerable to
>> manipulation. People are perfectly able to manipulate them because of their
>> massive experience with them. Or may be they befriended large number
>> people from global community from thier exposure and experience, and thus
>> cause incognizant bias.
>>
>> I really don't want to raise usernames but user:viswaprabha get regular
>> scholarship atleast since last decade (2007?). It is recommendable in no
>> way, when most of other applicants never get the experience and exposure in
>> wikimania.
>>
>> Please don't add more obscurity to an already dark process by
>> not informing people about their application status after phase 1. As I
>> said earlier, I was able to understand my 2016 application was okay but
>> rejected only because of this notification culture. Such a notification
>> will l help people retire early from planning and preparation also.
>>
>> Praveen
>>
>>
>> On Saturday, 20 May 2017, Adrian Raddatz <ajraddatz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, I'm Adrian. I was one of the organizers of the scholarship committee
>>> this year. Obviously we cannot discuss the merits of specific applications
>>> in this forum, but I wanted to clear up a couple of things.
>>>
>>> First, what Risker said is largely true. Those who are repeatedly funded
>>> tend to bring something to the table, and need to prove to the reviewers
>>> that they have shared their past Wikimania experiences with their
>>> communities. If people are being repeatedly funded, then there is usually a
>>> reason for it. The scholarship committee is made up of mainly new people
>>> every year, and each application is reviewed by a minimum of three people.
>>> There isn't much room for unfairness or intentional bias in those
>>> circumstances. The people who are repeatedly funded tend to be highly
>>> active with the movement both on and off wiki, and write exceptional
>>> applications for their scholarships.
>>>
>>> That said, repeated funding of the same people is a concern. This year,
>>> we introduced a rule where those who had been funded in the past year would
>>> receive a point deduction on their score this year. This has leveled the
>>> playing field a bit, and may be magnified a bit next year, though I won't
>>> be one of the people making that decision. If you are very concerned with
>>> this, I would recommend doing your own calculation of the percentage of
>>> repeat winners each year, seeing if that has gone down this year, and then
>>> use those concrete numbers to express a problem rather than comparing
>>> yourself to someone who has received a scholarship.
>>>
>>> Wikimania scholarships are highly competitive. Only one is awarded for
>>> every 5-6 people that make it to phase 2, and every one of those
>>> applications is a serious one. Don't be discouraged if you aren't selected
>>> in any given year - there's always next year. Take a look at the reviewer's
>>> guide to see specifically how these are marked (<
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_schol
>>> ars/Reviewer%27s_guide>).
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> On May 19, 2017 7:56 PM, "Risker" <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Gnangarra, you missed some possible reasons for repeated scholarships:
>>>>
>>>> - the successful repeat applicants are performing at a higher
>>>> standard than others, year after year (I have seen people who make maybe
>>>> 300 edits in a year complain that they weren't selected over someone who's
>>>> made 10,000 on multiple projects during that same year)
>>>> - the successful repeat applicants are identified with one or more
>>>> specific demographics that otherwise have significant difficulty in
>>>> attending (geographic, gender, sexual orientation, language group, etc.)
>>>> - the successful repeat applicants are bringing something specific
>>>> to Wikimania, such as excellent and well-attended presentations, knowledge
>>>> of some specific area of interest (e.g., one or more sister projects,
>>>> Wikidata), etc.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Let's not assume that people who have received scholarships more than
>>>> once have somehow gamed the system, or that there is a systemic error if
>>>> someone gets a scholarship more than once.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Risker/Anne (who received a partial scholarship once, long ago)
>>>>
>>>> On 19 May 2017 at 22:35, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If there is a general opinion based on facts that the some individuals
>>>>> are the recipients of a regular scholarship, then that is something that
>>>>> needs to be discussed. Unfortunately to prove the hypothesis that this is
>>>>> happening there does need to be some presentation of what the basis for
>>>>> that theory is and that means actually naming individuals otherwise it gets
>>>>> dismissed as nonsense but in naming, providing the basis the person gets
>>>>> told *"**sending emails like this one would
>>>>> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against." *ensures that no
>>>>> one ever questions the processes. Well I really dont care anymore if I
>>>>> dont get to go to another Wikimania I'm going to challenge the process
>>>>> because its seen as having flaws and that to me needs to addressed.
>>>>>
>>>>> What I see as the potential reasons for repeated scholarships for the
>>>>> same person is that
>>>>>
>>>>> - they are active, they apply every year
>>>>> - they are good communicators and self promoters
>>>>> - they have the time capacity to attend every year
>>>>> - previous years application arent tested against current
>>>>> applications for repetitions
>>>>> - each year the applications are judged in isolation that year,...
>>>>> - theres no validation of what was claimed in previous reporting
>>>>> to actual outcomes
>>>>> - the same core group of people put their hand up to make the
>>>>> selections every year
>>>>> - the criteria isnt sufficiently dynamic between each wikimania to
>>>>> draw new applicants to the top
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We can dismiss it as jealousy or sour grapes or some other type of
>>>>> gripe. Alternatively we can ask the questions, is there a basis for the
>>>>> perception can we do things better...
>>>>>
>>>>> On 20 May 2017 at 09:48, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> So it is incredibly appropriate to grant scholarship to same person
>>>>>> again and again? Usually applicant do not complain about this disparity
>>>>>> because it would immediately branded as their desperation. If we could not
>>>>>> speak about this, how could we ensure diversity and equality?
>>>>>> On Saturday 20 May 2017 01:53 AM, LFaraone wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would be incredibly inappropriate to discuss a specific person's
>>>>>> eligibility in public like this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Simply put: people who get scholarships do so according to the
>>>>>> published selection criteria. People who do not, did not qualify.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In my opinion, sending emails like this one would
>>>>>> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As a community, if questioning a process leads to disqualification,
>>>>>> is not a good tendency. I was the only one sent mails in 2015. Why none of
>>>>>> the other applicant gets scholarship?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While discussing this without any name, it immediately rebutted as
>>>>>> false argument. If we use any names, it is inappropriate!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 19 May 2017 at 18:36, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1]
>>>>>>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>,
>>>>>>> but I haven't got a clear answer there yet. I simply asked why certain
>>>>>>> people get Wikimania Scholarship each year, while other applicants rejected
>>>>>>> repeatedly. I have used a comparison of User:Viswaprabha and myself
>>>>>>> (User:Praveenp) there.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please note that this email is not about someone going to Wikimanias
>>>>>>> again and again, it is about granting Wikimania scholarships to same
>>>>>>> persons again and again. This is not personal, I am just using
>>>>>>> personalities and scholarships familiar to me. I am sure that, atleast
>>>>>>> other Indian language communities facing similar problem. I occasionally
>>>>>>> hear people from other communities mentioning scholarship by terms like
>>>>>>> "Winkimania Scholarship" or "Wikimania Permanent Scholarship".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From my home wiki community (Malayalam Language Community), only
>>>>>>> year I remember that User:Viswaprabha didn't recieve the Wikimania
>>>>>>> scholarship was 2016. I assume that was just because of the thread
>>>>>>> regarding this issue in 2015. User:Netha Hussain, another user from our
>>>>>>> premises also get repeating scholarships (not this year), but I am not sure
>>>>>>> that whether she represents Malayalam Language Community. Frankly, I
>>>>>>> haven't seen any of these scholarship receivers sharing anything to
>>>>>>> community in recent years. Then, what is the advantage of selecting same
>>>>>>> persons again and again for scholarship? Isn't it better to let more
>>>>>>> different people to share and experience global community?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I also wish to share a personal experience of intolerance. I raised
>>>>>>> the issue in 2015 and then in 2016 I applied scholarship. I didn't even
>>>>>>> pass "Selection Phase 1" yesteryear. According to Phase 1 criteria, every
>>>>>>> serious application must pass to Phase 2. I asked about this to Ellie Young
>>>>>>> in a reply, which I didn't get a response yet. Ironically, a very similar
>>>>>>> application by me entered Phase 2 this year!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Could someone clarify?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [1] - https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-Jul
>>>>>>> y/006921.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Praveen Prakash
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> -- Luke // LFaraone
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing listWikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> GN.
>>>>> President Wikimedia Australia
>>>>> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
>>>>> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>
>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
I was wrong that viswaprabha get scholarship since last decade, I didn't
check the statement personally. But he got 4 scholarship (including this
time) since 2012. Someone else doubted above in this thread that this
might be a case of 10000 edits vs 300 edits disproportion issue, edit
counters says it is not. He himself claiming that he is rarely sending
emails. To local language community, no body shares their experience
from Wikimania. Active users always feel they are avoided and kept in dark.

All kind of discouraging arguments including, threat of rejection from
next scholarship arises, when someone complain (that happened last year,
this year someone said it openly). In a friendly conversation, I was
even told last year that my translatewiki contributions to mediawiki
were not that important because I was translating to "Malayalam
language". Even here I cannot give examples of other users because they
don't want to be portrayed as incompetent or desperate.

I hope this system will be changed and different users will get
scholarship in different years so that diversity can prosper.

Regards,

Praveen


On Saturday 20 May 2017 12:17 PM, ViswaPrabha (?????????) wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I am not sure if I should respond to this thread. However, it may be
> important for me to come forward and mention the following points for
> clarity:
>
> 1. I have previously attended 2012, 2014 and 2015 Wikimanias (Three in
> total). I believe I have earnestly deserved those scholarships due to
> various criteria as demanded by the system. I would not want to boast
> myself what noteworthy accomplishments I have been achieving all
> these years.
> 2. I am not an e-mail generator (as referred by an earlier e-mail
> (2015) by the same user and on the same topic). You may find hardly a
> dozen or two of e-mails, those too on absolutely essential occasions,
> I have ever written to the WM threads since the beginning of cosmos.
> 3. I do not befriend or manipulate anyone inside or outside the
> awarding committees ever. In fact, I have never even cared or known
> who are those committee members.
> 4. The person who has raised this point is one of the earliest and
> consistent users among that particular community. I have great respect
> to him as an anonymous but highly responsible user. I also believe
> that he should have been one of the recipient of Wikimania scholarship
> at some point of time. However, I do not know him as a person and
> whether his efforts match with all the selection criteria that the
> Wikimania adapts regularly.
> 5. Despite my being selected for the scholarships (for three out of
> probably ten application attempts), I myself had raised this point
> about measurable selection criteria of scholarship candidates in
> several physical meet-up occasions. I had also humbly suggested some
> kind of community endorsement as another score point for the selection.
> 6. I am sad that my name is quoted in a mail like this with such
> implied meanings that may create untrue impressions about me among the
> grand and honorable crowd of Wikimedia mission for ever.
>
> Thanks and regards,
> User:Viswaprabha
>
>
> On 20 May 2017 at 11:38, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com
> <mailto:me.praveen@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> So, it is easy to escape an issue by stamping it as a personal
> desperation. People do not want to be known as desperate, jealous
> or failure. This type of stamping hold back most people from
> challenging the system.
>
> On 20 May 2017 11:06 am, "Adrian Raddatz" <ajraddatz@gmail.com
> <mailto:ajraddatz@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> There is no manipulation. The idea that someone could have
> befriended all of their reviewers every year for a decade is
> quite silly.
>
>
> How do we know? You are saying so, others never been there.
>
> I'm sorry that you didn't get a scholarship this year
>
>
> Thank you for your sympathy. But I would love to see anybody else
> other than regular scholarship recievers attending wikimania more
> than sympathy. Could you read the thread again?
>
>
> , but at this point there is not a useful conversation being
> had here.
>
>
> If you think there is a problem, volunteer for the scholarship
> committee next year and help fix it!
>
>
> Sigh :-( Why it is not okay to start from here? Why should I wait
> until next scholarship committee?
>
>
> On May 19, 2017 10:28 PM, "praveenp" <me.praveen@gmail.com
> <mailto:me.praveen@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> From here at local language community, we don't see any
> "significant contributions" from regular scholarship
> recievers. As I said they are not anymore sharing their
> Wikimania experience to local language community.
> Scholarship committee may be unbiased, in that case they
> are vulnerable to manipulation. People are perfectly able
> to manipulate them because of their massive experience
> with them. Or may be they befriended large number people
> from global community from thier exposure and experience,
> and thus cause incognizant bias.
>
> I really don't want to raise usernames but
> user:viswaprabha get regular scholarship atleast since
> last decade (2007?). It is recommendable in no way, when
> most of other applicants never get the experience and
> exposure in wikimania.
>
> Please don't add more obscurity to an already dark
> process by not informing people about their application
> status after phase 1. As I said earlier, I was able to
> understand my 2016 application was okay but rejected only
> because of this notification culture. Such a notification
> will l help people retire early from planning and
> preparation also.
>
> Praveen
>
>
> On Saturday, 20 May 2017, Adrian Raddatz
> <ajraddatz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi, I'm Adrian. I was one of the organizers of the
> scholarship committee this year. Obviously we cannot
> discuss the merits of specific applications in this
> forum, but I wanted to clear up a couple of things.
>
> First, what Risker said is largely true. Those who are
> repeatedly funded tend to bring something to the
> table, and need to prove to the reviewers that they
> have shared their past Wikimania experiences with
> their communities. If people are being repeatedly
> funded, then there is usually a reason for it. The
> scholarship committee is made up of mainly new people
> every year, and each application is reviewed by a
> minimum of three people. There isn't much room for
> unfairness or intentional bias in those circumstances.
> The people who are repeatedly funded tend to be highly
> active with the movement both on and off wiki, and
> write exceptional applications for their scholarships.
>
> That said, repeated funding of the same people is a
> concern. This year, we introduced a rule where those
> who had been funded in the past year would receive a
> point deduction on their score this year. This has
> leveled the playing field a bit, and may be magnified
> a bit next year, though I won't be one of the people
> making that decision. If you are very concerned with
> this, I would recommend doing your own calculation of
> the percentage of repeat winners each year, seeing if
> that has gone down this year, and then use those
> concrete numbers to express a problem rather than
> comparing yourself to someone who has received a
> scholarship.
>
> Wikimania scholarships are highly competitive. Only
> one is awarded for every 5-6 people that make it to
> phase 2, and every one of those applications is a
> serious one. Don't be discouraged if you aren't
> selected in any given year - there's always next year.
> Take a look at the reviewer's guide to see
> specifically how these are marked
> (<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_scholars/Reviewer%27s_guide
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_scholars/Reviewer%27s_guide>>).
>
> Regards,
>
> On May 19, 2017 7:56 PM, "Risker"
> <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Gnangarra, you missed some possible reasons for
> repeated scholarships:
>
> * the successful repeat applicants are
> performing at a higher standard than others,
> year after year (I have seen people who make
> maybe 300 edits in a year complain that they
> weren't selected over someone who's made
> 10,000 on multiple projects during that same year)
> * the successful repeat applicants are
> identified with one or more specific
> demographics that otherwise have significant
> difficulty in attending (geographic, gender,
> sexual orientation, language group, etc.)
> * the successful repeat applicants are bringing
> something specific to Wikimania, such as
> excellent and well-attended presentations,
> knowledge of some specific area of interest
> (e.g., one or more sister projects, Wikidata),
> etc.
>
>
> Let's not assume that people who have received
> scholarships more than once have somehow gamed the
> system, or that there is a systemic error if
> someone gets a scholarship more than once.
>
>
> Risker/Anne (who received a partial scholarship
> once, long ago)
>
>
> On 19 May 2017 at 22:35, Gnangarra
> <gnangarra@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If there is a general opinion based on facts
> that the some individuals are the recipients
> of a regular scholarship, then that is
> something that needs to be discussed.
> Unfortunately to prove the hypothesis that
> this is happening there does need to be some
> presentation of what the basis for that theory
> is and that means actually naming individuals
> otherwise it gets dismissed as nonsense but in
> naming, providing the basis the person gets
> told /"//sending emails like this one would
> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason
> against." /ensures that no one ever questions
> the processes. Well I really dont care anymore
> if I dont get to go to another Wikimania I'm
> going to challenge the process because its
> seen as having flaws and that to me needs to
> addressed.
>
> What I see as the potential reasons for
> repeated scholarships for the same person is that
>
> * they are active, they apply every year
> * they are good communicators and self promoters
> * they have the time capacity to attend
> every year
> * previous years application arent tested
> against current applications for repetitions
> * each year the applications are judged in
> isolation that year,...
> * theres no validation of what was claimed
> in previous reporting to actual outcomes
> * the same core group of people put their
> hand up to make the selections every year
> * the criteria isnt sufficiently dynamic
> between each wikimania to draw new
> applicants to the top
>
>
> We can dismiss it as jealousy or sour grapes
> or some other type of gripe. Alternatively we
> can ask the questions, is there a basis for
> the perception can we do things better...
>
> On 20 May 2017 at 09:48, praveenp
> <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> So it is incredibly appropriate to grant
> scholarship to same person again and
> again? Usually applicant do not complain
> about this disparity because it would
> immediately branded as their desperation.
> If we could not speak about this, how
> could we ensure diversity and equality?
>
> On Saturday 20 May 2017 01:53 AM, LFaraone
> wrote:
>> It would be incredibly inappropriate to
>> discuss a specific person's eligibility
>> in public like this.
>>
>> Simply put: people who get scholarships
>> do so according to the published
>> selection criteria. People who do not,
>> did not qualify.
>>
>> In my opinion, sending emails like this
>> one would certainly in-and-of-itself be a
>> reason against.
>
> As a community, if questioning a process
> leads to disqualification, is not a good
> tendency. I was the only one sent mails
> in 2015. Why none of the other applicant
> gets scholarship?
>
> While discussing this without any name, it
> immediately rebutted as false argument. If
> we use any names, it is inappropriate!
>
>>
>> On 19 May 2017 at 18:36, praveenp
>> <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have sent a similar email on 2015
>> [1]
>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>,
>> but I haven't got a clear answer
>> there yet. I simply asked why certain
>> people get Wikimania Scholarship each
>> year, while other applicants rejected
>> repeatedly. I have used a comparison
>> of User:Viswaprabha and myself
>> (User:Praveenp) there.
>>
>> Please note that this email is not
>> about someone going to Wikimanias
>> again and again, it is about granting
>> Wikimania scholarships to same
>> persons again and again. This is not
>> personal, I am just using
>> personalities and scholarships
>> familiar to me. I am sure that,
>> atleast other Indian language
>> communities facing similar problem. I
>> occasionally hear people from other
>> communities mentioning scholarship by
>> terms like "Winkimania Scholarship"
>> or "Wikimania Permanent Scholarship".
>>
>> From my home wiki community
>> (Malayalam Language Community), only
>> year I remember that User:Viswaprabha
>> didn't recieve the Wikimania
>> scholarship was 2016. I assume that
>> was just because of the thread
>> regarding this issue in 2015.
>> User:Netha Hussain, another user from
>> our premises also get repeating
>> scholarships (not this year), but I
>> am not sure that whether she
>> represents Malayalam Language
>> Community. Frankly, I haven't seen
>> any of these scholarship receivers
>> sharing anything to community in
>> recent years. Then, what is the
>> advantage of selecting same persons
>> again and again for scholarship?
>> Isn't it better to let more different
>> people to share and experience global
>> community?
>>
>> I also wish to share a personal
>> experience of intolerance. I raised
>> the issue in 2015 and then in 2016 I
>> applied scholarship. I didn't even
>> pass "Selection Phase 1" yesteryear.
>> According to Phase 1 criteria, every
>> serious application must pass to
>> Phase 2. I asked about this to Ellie
>> Young in a reply, which I didn't get
>> a response yet. Ironically, a very
>> similar application by me entered
>> Phase 2 this year!
>>
>> Could someone clarify?
>>
>> [1] -
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html
>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>
>>
>>
>> Praveen Prakash
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> -- Luke // LFaraone
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l>
>
>
>
>
> --
> GN.
> President Wikimedia Australia
> WMAU:
> http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> <http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra>
> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> <mailto:Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> <mailto:Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> <mailto:Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
On 20 May 2017 at 17:39, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:


> I was wrong that [redacted] get scholarship since last decade
>

You have already been told "It would be incredibly inappropriate to discuss
a specific person's eligibility in public like this", but persist in doing
so.

Without wanting to comment on the merits or otherwise of your general
points, if you persist in naming individuals in this context - especially
as you have now admitted making false claims about individuals - then I
suggest that your posts should be placed on moderation.

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
Thanks for the numbers Mike! Do you have a statistic how many people were
paid to attend by other means? How many people did apply and how many edits
did they make? Because Risker seems to underestimate the effect of a
wikimania to rather new editors. And overestimate the effect on somebody
going often even if this person has a great bureaucracy talent and fills
out forms and reports nobody reads afterwards...

Rupert

On May 20, 2017 08:30, "Michael Peel" <email@mikepeel.net> wrote:

To put this into perspective with some numbers: in 2014-17, out of 378
people awarded scholarships, 309 people have been awarded one scholarship,
55 have been awarded two, 14 have been awarded three, and 0 have been
awarded four. Caveat that this is solely from the WMF lists on meta, so
isn't including other scholarships/funding methods that aren't listed.

Thanks,
Mike

On 20 May 2017, at 04:07, Adrian Raddatz <ajraddatz@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi, I'm Adrian. I was one of the organizers of the scholarship committee
this year. Obviously we cannot discuss the merits of specific applications
in this forum, but I wanted to clear up a couple of things.

First, what Risker said is largely true. Those who are repeatedly funded
tend to bring something to the table, and need to prove to the reviewers
that they have shared their past Wikimania experiences with their
communities. If people are being repeatedly funded, then there is usually a
reason for it. The scholarship committee is made up of mainly new people
every year, and each application is reviewed by a minimum of three people.
There isn't much room for unfairness or intentional bias in those
circumstances. The people who are repeatedly funded tend to be highly
active with the movement both on and off wiki, and write exceptional
applications for their scholarships.

That said, repeated funding of the same people is a concern. This year, we
introduced a rule where those who had been funded in the past year would
receive a point deduction on their score this year. This has leveled the
playing field a bit, and may be magnified a bit next year, though I won't
be one of the people making that decision. If you are very concerned with
this, I would recommend doing your own calculation of the percentage of
repeat winners each year, seeing if that has gone down this year, and then
use those concrete numbers to express a problem rather than comparing
yourself to someone who has received a scholarship.

Wikimania scholarships are highly competitive. Only one is awarded for
every 5-6 people that make it to phase 2, and every one of those
applications is a serious one. Don't be discouraged if you aren't selected
in any given year - there's always next year. Take a look at the reviewer's
guide to see specifically how these are marked (<https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_scholars/Reviewer%27s_guide>).

Regards,

On May 19, 2017 7:56 PM, "Risker" <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:

> Gnangarra, you missed some possible reasons for repeated scholarships:
>
> - the successful repeat applicants are performing at a higher standard
> than others, year after year (I have seen people who make maybe 300 edits
> in a year complain that they weren't selected over someone who's made
> 10,000 on multiple projects during that same year)
> - the successful repeat applicants are identified with one or more
> specific demographics that otherwise have significant difficulty in
> attending (geographic, gender, sexual orientation, language group, etc.)
> - the successful repeat applicants are bringing something specific to
> Wikimania, such as excellent and well-attended presentations, knowledge of
> some specific area of interest (e.g., one or more sister projects,
> Wikidata), etc.
>
>
> Let's not assume that people who have received scholarships more than once
> have somehow gamed the system, or that there is a systemic error if someone
> gets a scholarship more than once.
>
>
> Risker/Anne (who received a partial scholarship once, long ago)
>
> On 19 May 2017 at 22:35, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If there is a general opinion based on facts that the some individuals
>> are the recipients of a regular scholarship, then that is something that
>> needs to be discussed. Unfortunately to prove the hypothesis that this is
>> happening there does need to be some presentation of what the basis for
>> that theory is and that means actually naming individuals otherwise it gets
>> dismissed as nonsense but in naming, providing the basis the person gets
>> told *"**sending emails like this one would certainly in-and-of-itself
>> be a reason against." *ensures that no one ever questions the
>> processes. Well I really dont care anymore if I dont get to go to another
>> Wikimania I'm going to challenge the process because its seen as having
>> flaws and that to me needs to addressed.
>>
>> What I see as the potential reasons for repeated scholarships for the
>> same person is that
>>
>> - they are active, they apply every year
>> - they are good communicators and self promoters
>> - they have the time capacity to attend every year
>> - previous years application arent tested against current
>> applications for repetitions
>> - each year the applications are judged in isolation that year,...
>> - theres no validation of what was claimed in previous reporting to
>> actual outcomes
>> - the same core group of people put their hand up to make the
>> selections every year
>> - the criteria isnt sufficiently dynamic between each wikimania to
>> draw new applicants to the top
>>
>>
>> We can dismiss it as jealousy or sour grapes or some other type of gripe.
>> Alternatively we can ask the questions, is there a basis for the perception
>> can we do things better...
>>
>> On 20 May 2017 at 09:48, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> So it is incredibly appropriate to grant scholarship to same person
>>> again and again? Usually applicant do not complain about this disparity
>>> because it would immediately branded as their desperation. If we could not
>>> speak about this, how could we ensure diversity and equality?
>>> On Saturday 20 May 2017 01:53 AM, LFaraone wrote:
>>>
>>> It would be incredibly inappropriate to discuss a specific person's
>>> eligibility in public like this.
>>>
>>> Simply put: people who get scholarships do so according to the published
>>> selection criteria. People who do not, did not qualify.
>>>
>>>
>>> In my opinion, sending emails like this one would
>>> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against.
>>>
>>>
>>> As a community, if questioning a process leads to disqualification, is
>>> not a good tendency. I was the only one sent mails in 2015. Why none of
>>> the other applicant gets scholarship?
>>>
>>> While discussing this without any name, it immediately rebutted as false
>>> argument. If we use any names, it is inappropriate!
>>>
>>>
>>> On 19 May 2017 at 18:36, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1]
>>>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>,
>>>> but I haven't got a clear answer there yet. I simply asked why certain
>>>> people get Wikimania Scholarship each year, while other applicants rejected
>>>> repeatedly. I have used a comparison of User:Viswaprabha and myself
>>>> (User:Praveenp) there.
>>>>
>>>> Please note that this email is not about someone going to Wikimanias
>>>> again and again, it is about granting Wikimania scholarships to same
>>>> persons again and again. This is not personal, I am just using
>>>> personalities and scholarships familiar to me. I am sure that, atleast
>>>> other Indian language communities facing similar problem. I occasionally
>>>> hear people from other communities mentioning scholarship by terms like
>>>> "Winkimania Scholarship" or "Wikimania Permanent Scholarship".
>>>>
>>>> From my home wiki community (Malayalam Language Community), only year I
>>>> remember that User:Viswaprabha didn't recieve the Wikimania scholarship was
>>>> 2016. I assume that was just because of the thread regarding this issue in
>>>> 2015. User:Netha Hussain, another user from our premises also get repeating
>>>> scholarships (not this year), but I am not sure that whether she represents
>>>> Malayalam Language Community. Frankly, I haven't seen any of these
>>>> scholarship receivers sharing anything to community in recent years. Then,
>>>> what is the advantage of selecting same persons again and again for
>>>> scholarship? Isn't it better to let more different people to share and
>>>> experience global community?
>>>>
>>>> I also wish to share a personal experience of intolerance. I raised the
>>>> issue in 2015 and then in 2016 I applied scholarship. I didn't even pass
>>>> "Selection Phase 1" yesteryear. According to Phase 1 criteria, every
>>>> serious application must pass to Phase 2. I asked about this to Ellie Young
>>>> in a reply, which I didn't get a response yet. Ironically, a very similar
>>>> application by me entered Phase 2 this year!
>>>>
>>>> Could someone clarify?
>>>>
>>>> [1] - https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-Jul
>>>> y/006921.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Praveen Prakash
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> -- Luke // LFaraone
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimania-l mailing listWikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> GN.
>> President Wikimedia Australia
>> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
>> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
> _______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l



_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
Over the years, people have gotten funded to go to Wikimania in the
following ways:
- by the WMF, as staff or board
- by the WMF, as scholarship recipients
- by various chapter grant programs
- by various private special grant programs for scholarships, often
administered by chapters or the WMF
- by outside "sister' organizations, like WikiEdu
- by outside employers, eg academic faculty who use their university travel
funding to attend
- out of pocket

I don't have a sense of what the exact proportions are, but there is always
a mix of people funded in all of these ways at all of the Wikimanias, and
people do switch back and forth between funding models: for instance, I've
never gotten a scholarship, but I was funded by the WMF while I was on the
board, and the rest I paid out of pocket or by my university.

IMO, the scholarship program should balance between taking people working
on interesting projects around the globe and long-time participants. It's a
really tough job - it's very hard to tell what someone will bring to the
conference and bring back from a scholarship application, and there are
always many more wonderful applicants than there are funds for (and always
applicants we want to have who can't get visas in time, too).

I'd be glad to hear ideas for how to make a fairer, better process. We've
experimented with lots of things over the years, and it sounds like the
current committee really tried to be thoughtful.

best,
phoebe


On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 1:55 PM, rupert THURNER <rupert.thurner@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Thanks for the numbers Mike! Do you have a statistic how many people were
> paid to attend by other means? How many people did apply and how many edits
> did they make? Because Risker seems to underestimate the effect of a
> wikimania to rather new editors. And overestimate the effect on somebody
> going often even if this person has a great bureaucracy talent and fills
> out forms and reports nobody reads afterwards...
>
> Rupert
>
> On May 20, 2017 08:30, "Michael Peel" <email@mikepeel.net> wrote:
>
> To put this into perspective with some numbers: in 2014-17, out of 378
> people awarded scholarships, 309 people have been awarded one scholarship,
> 55 have been awarded two, 14 have been awarded three, and 0 have been
> awarded four. Caveat that this is solely from the WMF lists on meta, so
> isn't including other scholarships/funding methods that aren't listed.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
> On 20 May 2017, at 04:07, Adrian Raddatz <ajraddatz@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi, I'm Adrian. I was one of the organizers of the scholarship committee
> this year. Obviously we cannot discuss the merits of specific applications
> in this forum, but I wanted to clear up a couple of things.
>
> First, what Risker said is largely true. Those who are repeatedly funded
> tend to bring something to the table, and need to prove to the reviewers
> that they have shared their past Wikimania experiences with their
> communities. If people are being repeatedly funded, then there is usually a
> reason for it. The scholarship committee is made up of mainly new people
> every year, and each application is reviewed by a minimum of three people.
> There isn't much room for unfairness or intentional bias in those
> circumstances. The people who are repeatedly funded tend to be highly
> active with the movement both on and off wiki, and write exceptional
> applications for their scholarships.
>
> That said, repeated funding of the same people is a concern. This year, we
> introduced a rule where those who had been funded in the past year would
> receive a point deduction on their score this year. This has leveled the
> playing field a bit, and may be magnified a bit next year, though I won't
> be one of the people making that decision. If you are very concerned with
> this, I would recommend doing your own calculation of the percentage of
> repeat winners each year, seeing if that has gone down this year, and then
> use those concrete numbers to express a problem rather than comparing
> yourself to someone who has received a scholarship.
>
> Wikimania scholarships are highly competitive. Only one is awarded for
> every 5-6 people that make it to phase 2, and every one of those
> applications is a serious one. Don't be discouraged if you aren't selected
> in any given year - there's always next year. Take a look at the reviewer's
> guide to see specifically how these are marked (<
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_schol
> ars/Reviewer%27s_guide>).
>
> Regards,
>
> On May 19, 2017 7:56 PM, "Risker" <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Gnangarra, you missed some possible reasons for repeated scholarships:
>>
>> - the successful repeat applicants are performing at a higher
>> standard than others, year after year (I have seen people who make maybe
>> 300 edits in a year complain that they weren't selected over someone who's
>> made 10,000 on multiple projects during that same year)
>> - the successful repeat applicants are identified with one or more
>> specific demographics that otherwise have significant difficulty in
>> attending (geographic, gender, sexual orientation, language group, etc.)
>> - the successful repeat applicants are bringing something specific to
>> Wikimania, such as excellent and well-attended presentations, knowledge of
>> some specific area of interest (e.g., one or more sister projects,
>> Wikidata), etc.
>>
>>
>> Let's not assume that people who have received scholarships more than
>> once have somehow gamed the system, or that there is a systemic error if
>> someone gets a scholarship more than once.
>>
>>
>> Risker/Anne (who received a partial scholarship once, long ago)
>>
>> On 19 May 2017 at 22:35, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> If there is a general opinion based on facts that the some individuals
>>> are the recipients of a regular scholarship, then that is something that
>>> needs to be discussed. Unfortunately to prove the hypothesis that this is
>>> happening there does need to be some presentation of what the basis for
>>> that theory is and that means actually naming individuals otherwise it gets
>>> dismissed as nonsense but in naming, providing the basis the person gets
>>> told *"**sending emails like this one would certainly in-and-of-itself
>>> be a reason against." *ensures that no one ever questions the
>>> processes. Well I really dont care anymore if I dont get to go to another
>>> Wikimania I'm going to challenge the process because its seen as having
>>> flaws and that to me needs to addressed.
>>>
>>> What I see as the potential reasons for repeated scholarships for the
>>> same person is that
>>>
>>> - they are active, they apply every year
>>> - they are good communicators and self promoters
>>> - they have the time capacity to attend every year
>>> - previous years application arent tested against current
>>> applications for repetitions
>>> - each year the applications are judged in isolation that year,...
>>> - theres no validation of what was claimed in previous reporting to
>>> actual outcomes
>>> - the same core group of people put their hand up to make the
>>> selections every year
>>> - the criteria isnt sufficiently dynamic between each wikimania to
>>> draw new applicants to the top
>>>
>>>
>>> We can dismiss it as jealousy or sour grapes or some other type of
>>> gripe. Alternatively we can ask the questions, is there a basis for the
>>> perception can we do things better...
>>>
>>> On 20 May 2017 at 09:48, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> So it is incredibly appropriate to grant scholarship to same person
>>>> again and again? Usually applicant do not complain about this disparity
>>>> because it would immediately branded as their desperation. If we could not
>>>> speak about this, how could we ensure diversity and equality?
>>>> On Saturday 20 May 2017 01:53 AM, LFaraone wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It would be incredibly inappropriate to discuss a specific person's
>>>> eligibility in public like this.
>>>>
>>>> Simply put: people who get scholarships do so according to the
>>>> published selection criteria. People who do not, did not qualify.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In my opinion, sending emails like this one would
>>>> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As a community, if questioning a process leads to disqualification, is
>>>> not a good tendency. I was the only one sent mails in 2015. Why none of
>>>> the other applicant gets scholarship?
>>>>
>>>> While discussing this without any name, it immediately rebutted as
>>>> false argument. If we use any names, it is inappropriate!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 19 May 2017 at 18:36, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1]
>>>>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>,
>>>>> but I haven't got a clear answer there yet. I simply asked why certain
>>>>> people get Wikimania Scholarship each year, while other applicants rejected
>>>>> repeatedly. I have used a comparison of User:Viswaprabha and myself
>>>>> (User:Praveenp) there.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please note that this email is not about someone going to Wikimanias
>>>>> again and again, it is about granting Wikimania scholarships to same
>>>>> persons again and again. This is not personal, I am just using
>>>>> personalities and scholarships familiar to me. I am sure that, atleast
>>>>> other Indian language communities facing similar problem. I occasionally
>>>>> hear people from other communities mentioning scholarship by terms like
>>>>> "Winkimania Scholarship" or "Wikimania Permanent Scholarship".
>>>>>
>>>>> From my home wiki community (Malayalam Language Community), only year
>>>>> I remember that User:Viswaprabha didn't recieve the Wikimania scholarship
>>>>> was 2016. I assume that was just because of the thread regarding this issue
>>>>> in 2015. User:Netha Hussain, another user from our premises also get
>>>>> repeating scholarships (not this year), but I am not sure that whether she
>>>>> represents Malayalam Language Community. Frankly, I haven't seen any of
>>>>> these scholarship receivers sharing anything to community in recent years.
>>>>> Then, what is the advantage of selecting same persons again and again for
>>>>> scholarship? Isn't it better to let more different people to share and
>>>>> experience global community?
>>>>>
>>>>> I also wish to share a personal experience of intolerance. I raised
>>>>> the issue in 2015 and then in 2016 I applied scholarship. I didn't even
>>>>> pass "Selection Phase 1" yesteryear. According to Phase 1 criteria, every
>>>>> serious application must pass to Phase 2. I asked about this to Ellie Young
>>>>> in a reply, which I didn't get a response yet. Ironically, a very similar
>>>>> application by me entered Phase 2 this year!
>>>>>
>>>>> Could someone clarify?
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] - https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-Jul
>>>>> y/006921.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Praveen Prakash
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> -- Luke // LFaraone
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimania-l mailing listWikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> GN.
>>> President Wikimedia Australia
>>> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
>>> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>


--
* I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers <at>
gmail.com *
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
(Also, one big way to increase scholarship availability is to raise money
for scholarships from outside donors -- every Wikimania could use more
people to help with fundraising and sponsorship efforts, both locally and
around the globe. We've had luck in the past with raising special
scholarship funds, but it takes a lot of work.).

-- phoebe

On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 2:08 PM, phoebe ayers <phoebe.wiki@gmail.com> wrote:

> Over the years, people have gotten funded to go to Wikimania in the
> following ways:
> - by the WMF, as staff or board
> - by the WMF, as scholarship recipients
> - by various chapter grant programs
> - by various private special grant programs for scholarships, often
> administered by chapters or the WMF
> - by outside "sister' organizations, like WikiEdu
> - by outside employers, eg academic faculty who use their university
> travel funding to attend
> - out of pocket
>
> I don't have a sense of what the exact proportions are, but there is
> always a mix of people funded in all of these ways at all of the
> Wikimanias, and people do switch back and forth between funding models: for
> instance, I've never gotten a scholarship, but I was funded by the WMF
> while I was on the board, and the rest I paid out of pocket or by my
> university.
>
> IMO, the scholarship program should balance between taking people working
> on interesting projects around the globe and long-time participants. It's a
> really tough job - it's very hard to tell what someone will bring to the
> conference and bring back from a scholarship application, and there are
> always many more wonderful applicants than there are funds for (and always
> applicants we want to have who can't get visas in time, too).
>
> I'd be glad to hear ideas for how to make a fairer, better process. We've
> experimented with lots of things over the years, and it sounds like the
> current committee really tried to be thoughtful.
>
> best,
> phoebe
>
>
> On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 1:55 PM, rupert THURNER <rupert.thurner@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the numbers Mike! Do you have a statistic how many people were
>> paid to attend by other means? How many people did apply and how many edits
>> did they make? Because Risker seems to underestimate the effect of a
>> wikimania to rather new editors. And overestimate the effect on somebody
>> going often even if this person has a great bureaucracy talent and fills
>> out forms and reports nobody reads afterwards...
>>
>> Rupert
>>
>> On May 20, 2017 08:30, "Michael Peel" <email@mikepeel.net> wrote:
>>
>> To put this into perspective with some numbers: in 2014-17, out of 378
>> people awarded scholarships, 309 people have been awarded one scholarship,
>> 55 have been awarded two, 14 have been awarded three, and 0 have been
>> awarded four. Caveat that this is solely from the WMF lists on meta, so
>> isn't including other scholarships/funding methods that aren't listed.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mike
>>
>> On 20 May 2017, at 04:07, Adrian Raddatz <ajraddatz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi, I'm Adrian. I was one of the organizers of the scholarship committee
>> this year. Obviously we cannot discuss the merits of specific applications
>> in this forum, but I wanted to clear up a couple of things.
>>
>> First, what Risker said is largely true. Those who are repeatedly funded
>> tend to bring something to the table, and need to prove to the reviewers
>> that they have shared their past Wikimania experiences with their
>> communities. If people are being repeatedly funded, then there is usually a
>> reason for it. The scholarship committee is made up of mainly new people
>> every year, and each application is reviewed by a minimum of three people.
>> There isn't much room for unfairness or intentional bias in those
>> circumstances. The people who are repeatedly funded tend to be highly
>> active with the movement both on and off wiki, and write exceptional
>> applications for their scholarships.
>>
>> That said, repeated funding of the same people is a concern. This year,
>> we introduced a rule where those who had been funded in the past year would
>> receive a point deduction on their score this year. This has leveled the
>> playing field a bit, and may be magnified a bit next year, though I won't
>> be one of the people making that decision. If you are very concerned with
>> this, I would recommend doing your own calculation of the percentage of
>> repeat winners each year, seeing if that has gone down this year, and then
>> use those concrete numbers to express a problem rather than comparing
>> yourself to someone who has received a scholarship.
>>
>> Wikimania scholarships are highly competitive. Only one is awarded for
>> every 5-6 people that make it to phase 2, and every one of those
>> applications is a serious one. Don't be discouraged if you aren't selected
>> in any given year - there's always next year. Take a look at the reviewer's
>> guide to see specifically how these are marked (<
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_schol
>> ars/Reviewer%27s_guide>).
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> On May 19, 2017 7:56 PM, "Risker" <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Gnangarra, you missed some possible reasons for repeated scholarships:
>>>
>>> - the successful repeat applicants are performing at a higher
>>> standard than others, year after year (I have seen people who make maybe
>>> 300 edits in a year complain that they weren't selected over someone who's
>>> made 10,000 on multiple projects during that same year)
>>> - the successful repeat applicants are identified with one or more
>>> specific demographics that otherwise have significant difficulty in
>>> attending (geographic, gender, sexual orientation, language group, etc.)
>>> - the successful repeat applicants are bringing something specific
>>> to Wikimania, such as excellent and well-attended presentations, knowledge
>>> of some specific area of interest (e.g., one or more sister projects,
>>> Wikidata), etc.
>>>
>>>
>>> Let's not assume that people who have received scholarships more than
>>> once have somehow gamed the system, or that there is a systemic error if
>>> someone gets a scholarship more than once.
>>>
>>>
>>> Risker/Anne (who received a partial scholarship once, long ago)
>>>
>>> On 19 May 2017 at 22:35, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> If there is a general opinion based on facts that the some individuals
>>>> are the recipients of a regular scholarship, then that is something that
>>>> needs to be discussed. Unfortunately to prove the hypothesis that this is
>>>> happening there does need to be some presentation of what the basis for
>>>> that theory is and that means actually naming individuals otherwise it gets
>>>> dismissed as nonsense but in naming, providing the basis the person gets
>>>> told *"**sending emails like this one would
>>>> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against." *ensures that no one
>>>> ever questions the processes. Well I really dont care anymore if I dont
>>>> get to go to another Wikimania I'm going to challenge the process because
>>>> its seen as having flaws and that to me needs to addressed.
>>>>
>>>> What I see as the potential reasons for repeated scholarships for the
>>>> same person is that
>>>>
>>>> - they are active, they apply every year
>>>> - they are good communicators and self promoters
>>>> - they have the time capacity to attend every year
>>>> - previous years application arent tested against current
>>>> applications for repetitions
>>>> - each year the applications are judged in isolation that year,...
>>>> - theres no validation of what was claimed in previous reporting to
>>>> actual outcomes
>>>> - the same core group of people put their hand up to make the
>>>> selections every year
>>>> - the criteria isnt sufficiently dynamic between each wikimania to
>>>> draw new applicants to the top
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We can dismiss it as jealousy or sour grapes or some other type of
>>>> gripe. Alternatively we can ask the questions, is there a basis for the
>>>> perception can we do things better...
>>>>
>>>> On 20 May 2017 at 09:48, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> So it is incredibly appropriate to grant scholarship to same person
>>>>> again and again? Usually applicant do not complain about this disparity
>>>>> because it would immediately branded as their desperation. If we could not
>>>>> speak about this, how could we ensure diversity and equality?
>>>>> On Saturday 20 May 2017 01:53 AM, LFaraone wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be incredibly inappropriate to discuss a specific person's
>>>>> eligibility in public like this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Simply put: people who get scholarships do so according to the
>>>>> published selection criteria. People who do not, did not qualify.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In my opinion, sending emails like this one would
>>>>> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As a community, if questioning a process leads to disqualification, is
>>>>> not a good tendency. I was the only one sent mails in 2015. Why none of
>>>>> the other applicant gets scholarship?
>>>>>
>>>>> While discussing this without any name, it immediately rebutted as
>>>>> false argument. If we use any names, it is inappropriate!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 19 May 2017 at 18:36, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1]
>>>>>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>,
>>>>>> but I haven't got a clear answer there yet. I simply asked why certain
>>>>>> people get Wikimania Scholarship each year, while other applicants rejected
>>>>>> repeatedly. I have used a comparison of User:Viswaprabha and myself
>>>>>> (User:Praveenp) there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please note that this email is not about someone going to Wikimanias
>>>>>> again and again, it is about granting Wikimania scholarships to same
>>>>>> persons again and again. This is not personal, I am just using
>>>>>> personalities and scholarships familiar to me. I am sure that, atleast
>>>>>> other Indian language communities facing similar problem. I occasionally
>>>>>> hear people from other communities mentioning scholarship by terms like
>>>>>> "Winkimania Scholarship" or "Wikimania Permanent Scholarship".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From my home wiki community (Malayalam Language Community), only year
>>>>>> I remember that User:Viswaprabha didn't recieve the Wikimania scholarship
>>>>>> was 2016. I assume that was just because of the thread regarding this issue
>>>>>> in 2015. User:Netha Hussain, another user from our premises also get
>>>>>> repeating scholarships (not this year), but I am not sure that whether she
>>>>>> represents Malayalam Language Community. Frankly, I haven't seen any of
>>>>>> these scholarship receivers sharing anything to community in recent years.
>>>>>> Then, what is the advantage of selecting same persons again and again for
>>>>>> scholarship? Isn't it better to let more different people to share and
>>>>>> experience global community?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I also wish to share a personal experience of intolerance. I raised
>>>>>> the issue in 2015 and then in 2016 I applied scholarship. I didn't even
>>>>>> pass "Selection Phase 1" yesteryear. According to Phase 1 criteria, every
>>>>>> serious application must pass to Phase 2. I asked about this to Ellie Young
>>>>>> in a reply, which I didn't get a response yet. Ironically, a very similar
>>>>>> application by me entered Phase 2 this year!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could someone clarify?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] - https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-Jul
>>>>>> y/006921.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Praveen Prakash
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> -- Luke // LFaraone
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing listWikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> GN.
>>>> President Wikimedia Australia
>>>> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
>>>> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers
> <at> gmail.com *
>



--
* I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers <at>
gmail.com *
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
One of my persistent suggestions to this dilemma has always been to involve
some kind of community endorsement into the selection process.

Crude Methodology:
All applicants from the particular communit(y/ies) may enlist themselves at
their community village pump. All active users in that / those communities
may or may not support his application. This will be considered as a score
point with a suitable weightage among the broad list of criteria by the
award committee.


However, this step may have some inherent negative aspects:

1. Identity of applicants (both successful and unsuccessful) will be
compromised unless some mechanism is involved to limit access to such
endorsement pages.

But then, instead of village pump, it could be an endorsement vote system
submitted by community members directly to a destination visible only to
the award committee.

2. There is a chance for nepotism, especially working against those serious
editors who may be actually doing a good job of adding unbiased neutral
content against the wish of a majority with biased editing culture.

What I propose is only an idea in its crude form. We may discuss the
feasibility of this at length and with appropriate corrections, incorporate
such terms to the next Wikimania onwards.

-User:Viswaprabha



On 20 May 2017 at 23:38, phoebe ayers <phoebe.wiki@gmail.com> wrote:

> Over the years, people have gotten funded to go to Wikimania in the
> following ways:
> - by the WMF, as staff or board
> - by the WMF, as scholarship recipients
> - by various chapter grant programs
> - by various private special grant programs for scholarships, often
> administered by chapters or the WMF
> - by outside "sister' organizations, like WikiEdu
> - by outside employers, eg academic faculty who use their university
> travel funding to attend
> - out of pocket
>
> I don't have a sense of what the exact proportions are, but there is
> always a mix of people funded in all of these ways at all of the
> Wikimanias, and people do switch back and forth between funding models: for
> instance, I've never gotten a scholarship, but I was funded by the WMF
> while I was on the board, and the rest I paid out of pocket or by my
> university.
>
> IMO, the scholarship program should balance between taking people working
> on interesting projects around the globe and long-time participants. It's a
> really tough job - it's very hard to tell what someone will bring to the
> conference and bring back from a scholarship application, and there are
> always many more wonderful applicants than there are funds for (and always
> applicants we want to have who can't get visas in time, too).
>
> I'd be glad to hear ideas for how to make a fairer, better process. We've
> experimented with lots of things over the years, and it sounds like the
> current committee really tried to be thoughtful.
>
> best,
> phoebe
>
>
> On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 1:55 PM, rupert THURNER <rupert.thurner@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the numbers Mike! Do you have a statistic how many people were
>> paid to attend by other means? How many people did apply and how many edits
>> did they make? Because Risker seems to underestimate the effect of a
>> wikimania to rather new editors. And overestimate the effect on somebody
>> going often even if this person has a great bureaucracy talent and fills
>> out forms and reports nobody reads afterwards...
>>
>> Rupert
>>
>> On May 20, 2017 08:30, "Michael Peel" <email@mikepeel.net> wrote:
>>
>> To put this into perspective with some numbers: in 2014-17, out of 378
>> people awarded scholarships, 309 people have been awarded one scholarship,
>> 55 have been awarded two, 14 have been awarded three, and 0 have been
>> awarded four. Caveat that this is solely from the WMF lists on meta, so
>> isn't including other scholarships/funding methods that aren't listed.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mike
>>
>> On 20 May 2017, at 04:07, Adrian Raddatz <ajraddatz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi, I'm Adrian. I was one of the organizers of the scholarship committee
>> this year. Obviously we cannot discuss the merits of specific applications
>> in this forum, but I wanted to clear up a couple of things.
>>
>> First, what Risker said is largely true. Those who are repeatedly funded
>> tend to bring something to the table, and need to prove to the reviewers
>> that they have shared their past Wikimania experiences with their
>> communities. If people are being repeatedly funded, then there is usually a
>> reason for it. The scholarship committee is made up of mainly new people
>> every year, and each application is reviewed by a minimum of three people.
>> There isn't much room for unfairness or intentional bias in those
>> circumstances. The people who are repeatedly funded tend to be highly
>> active with the movement both on and off wiki, and write exceptional
>> applications for their scholarships.
>>
>> That said, repeated funding of the same people is a concern. This year,
>> we introduced a rule where those who had been funded in the past year would
>> receive a point deduction on their score this year. This has leveled the
>> playing field a bit, and may be magnified a bit next year, though I won't
>> be one of the people making that decision. If you are very concerned with
>> this, I would recommend doing your own calculation of the percentage of
>> repeat winners each year, seeing if that has gone down this year, and then
>> use those concrete numbers to express a problem rather than comparing
>> yourself to someone who has received a scholarship.
>>
>> Wikimania scholarships are highly competitive. Only one is awarded for
>> every 5-6 people that make it to phase 2, and every one of those
>> applications is a serious one. Don't be discouraged if you aren't selected
>> in any given year - there's always next year. Take a look at the reviewer's
>> guide to see specifically how these are marked (<
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_schol
>> ars/Reviewer%27s_guide>).
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> On May 19, 2017 7:56 PM, "Risker" <risker.wp@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Gnangarra, you missed some possible reasons for repeated scholarships:
>>>
>>> - the successful repeat applicants are performing at a higher
>>> standard than others, year after year (I have seen people who make maybe
>>> 300 edits in a year complain that they weren't selected over someone who's
>>> made 10,000 on multiple projects during that same year)
>>> - the successful repeat applicants are identified with one or more
>>> specific demographics that otherwise have significant difficulty in
>>> attending (geographic, gender, sexual orientation, language group, etc.)
>>> - the successful repeat applicants are bringing something specific
>>> to Wikimania, such as excellent and well-attended presentations, knowledge
>>> of some specific area of interest (e.g., one or more sister projects,
>>> Wikidata), etc.
>>>
>>>
>>> Let's not assume that people who have received scholarships more than
>>> once have somehow gamed the system, or that there is a systemic error if
>>> someone gets a scholarship more than once.
>>>
>>>
>>> Risker/Anne (who received a partial scholarship once, long ago)
>>>
>>> On 19 May 2017 at 22:35, Gnangarra <gnangarra@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> If there is a general opinion based on facts that the some individuals
>>>> are the recipients of a regular scholarship, then that is something that
>>>> needs to be discussed. Unfortunately to prove the hypothesis that this is
>>>> happening there does need to be some presentation of what the basis for
>>>> that theory is and that means actually naming individuals otherwise it gets
>>>> dismissed as nonsense but in naming, providing the basis the person gets
>>>> told *"**sending emails like this one would
>>>> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against." *ensures that no one
>>>> ever questions the processes. Well I really dont care anymore if I dont
>>>> get to go to another Wikimania I'm going to challenge the process because
>>>> its seen as having flaws and that to me needs to addressed.
>>>>
>>>> What I see as the potential reasons for repeated scholarships for the
>>>> same person is that
>>>>
>>>> - they are active, they apply every year
>>>> - they are good communicators and self promoters
>>>> - they have the time capacity to attend every year
>>>> - previous years application arent tested against current
>>>> applications for repetitions
>>>> - each year the applications are judged in isolation that year,...
>>>> - theres no validation of what was claimed in previous reporting to
>>>> actual outcomes
>>>> - the same core group of people put their hand up to make the
>>>> selections every year
>>>> - the criteria isnt sufficiently dynamic between each wikimania to
>>>> draw new applicants to the top
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We can dismiss it as jealousy or sour grapes or some other type of
>>>> gripe. Alternatively we can ask the questions, is there a basis for the
>>>> perception can we do things better...
>>>>
>>>> On 20 May 2017 at 09:48, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> So it is incredibly appropriate to grant scholarship to same person
>>>>> again and again? Usually applicant do not complain about this disparity
>>>>> because it would immediately branded as their desperation. If we could not
>>>>> speak about this, how could we ensure diversity and equality?
>>>>> On Saturday 20 May 2017 01:53 AM, LFaraone wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> It would be incredibly inappropriate to discuss a specific person's
>>>>> eligibility in public like this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Simply put: people who get scholarships do so according to the
>>>>> published selection criteria. People who do not, did not qualify.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In my opinion, sending emails like this one would
>>>>> certainly in-and-of-itself be a reason against.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As a community, if questioning a process leads to disqualification, is
>>>>> not a good tendency. I was the only one sent mails in 2015. Why none of
>>>>> the other applicant gets scholarship?
>>>>>
>>>>> While discussing this without any name, it immediately rebutted as
>>>>> false argument. If we use any names, it is inappropriate!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 19 May 2017 at 18:36, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1]
>>>>>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-July/006921.html>,
>>>>>> but I haven't got a clear answer there yet. I simply asked why certain
>>>>>> people get Wikimania Scholarship each year, while other applicants rejected
>>>>>> repeatedly. I have used a comparison of User:Viswaprabha and myself
>>>>>> (User:Praveenp) there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please note that this email is not about someone going to Wikimanias
>>>>>> again and again, it is about granting Wikimania scholarships to same
>>>>>> persons again and again. This is not personal, I am just using
>>>>>> personalities and scholarships familiar to me. I am sure that, atleast
>>>>>> other Indian language communities facing similar problem. I occasionally
>>>>>> hear people from other communities mentioning scholarship by terms like
>>>>>> "Winkimania Scholarship" or "Wikimania Permanent Scholarship".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From my home wiki community (Malayalam Language Community), only year
>>>>>> I remember that User:Viswaprabha didn't recieve the Wikimania scholarship
>>>>>> was 2016. I assume that was just because of the thread regarding this issue
>>>>>> in 2015. User:Netha Hussain, another user from our premises also get
>>>>>> repeating scholarships (not this year), but I am not sure that whether she
>>>>>> represents Malayalam Language Community. Frankly, I haven't seen any of
>>>>>> these scholarship receivers sharing anything to community in recent years.
>>>>>> Then, what is the advantage of selecting same persons again and again for
>>>>>> scholarship? Isn't it better to let more different people to share and
>>>>>> experience global community?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I also wish to share a personal experience of intolerance. I raised
>>>>>> the issue in 2015 and then in 2016 I applied scholarship. I didn't even
>>>>>> pass "Selection Phase 1" yesteryear. According to Phase 1 criteria, every
>>>>>> serious application must pass to Phase 2. I asked about this to Ellie Young
>>>>>> in a reply, which I didn't get a response yet. Ironically, a very similar
>>>>>> application by me entered Phase 2 this year!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could someone clarify?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] - https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimania-l/2015-Jul
>>>>>> y/006921.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Praveen Prakash
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> -- Luke // LFaraone
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing listWikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> GN.
>>>> President Wikimedia Australia
>>>> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
>>>> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers
> <at> gmail.com *
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
On Saturday 20 May 2017 10:24 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote:
>
> On 20 May 2017 at 17:39, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com
> <mailto:me.praveen@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> I was wrong that [redacted] get scholarship since last decade
>
>
> You have already been told "It would be incredibly inappropriate to
> discuss a specific person's eligibility in public like this", but
> persist in doing so.

Last decade was 2010! It was just two years. There are people in this
same thread trying to make intentional misdirection hinting edit
counts. Someone implies that my future applications will be
invalidated. Why are you not going after them? Why don't you get the
whole picture? If wikimania mailing list is not the right platform to
tell that we as a community don't get any advantage from wikimania,
kindly show us the right place!!

I would love to see some explanation instead of harassment and threats :-(

>
> Without wanting to comment on the merits or otherwise of your general
> points, if you persist in naming individuals in this context -
> especially as you have now admitted making false claims about
> individuals - then I suggest that your posts should be placed on
> moderation.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
Hi Praveen,

This thread is getting out of hand since the very first message. I tried to
keep quiet, but it's getting on my nerves, sorry.

If you want to discuss the general merits of a scholarship system, of the
goals and the criteria that belong to it - great! Then do that. You could
ask the scholarship committee what criteria they used, and ask them kindly
to explain to you how they applied them. You could give some thought to
what a scholarship system should aim to accomplish, and then consider how
those two match. Might it be that you subconsciously assume different goals
for the program than others do?

By the way you frame this discussion, you get very much across as mosly
being jealous and that your primary goal here is that you get a scholarship
next year - and that you're more than happy to drag colleagues through the
mud to accomplish that. Maybe this is the case, and maybe this is just an
unfortunate interpretation.

Either way, the result is that you end up only discussing primarily
personal circumstances.

I suggest we stop this discussion for now, let it cool down, and that you
try again in a more structured and constructive approach in a month or so -
keeping the talking points above (or others, as long as they are strategic)
in mind. In the mean time I would kindly ask the moderators of this list to
take action.

Kind regards,

Lodewijk
(Disclosure: I received a scholarship this year from the WMF)

On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 8:46 PM, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Saturday 20 May 2017 10:24 PM, Andy Mabbett wrote:
>
>
> On 20 May 2017 at 17:39, praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> I was wrong that [redacted] get scholarship since last decade
>>
>
> You have already been told "It would be incredibly inappropriate to
> discuss a specific person's eligibility in public like this", but persist
> in doing so.
>
>
> Last decade was 2010! It was just two years. There are people in this same
> thread trying to make intentional misdirection hinting edit counts.
> Someone implies that my future applications will be invalidated. Why are
> you not going after them? Why don't you get the whole picture? If wikimania
> mailing list is not the right platform to tell that we as a community don't
> get any advantage from wikimania, kindly show us the right place!!
>
> I would love to see some explanation instead of harassment and threats :-(
>
>
> Without wanting to comment on the merits or otherwise of your general
> points, if you persist in naming individuals in this context - especially
> as you have now admitted making false claims about individuals - then I
> suggest that your posts should be placed on moderation.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing listWikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year [ In reply to ]
I'm pretty surprised at the number of censors in this thread. It seems more
people are interested in telling Praveen to be quiet than in discussing the
facially legitimate questions he has raised. I'm sure everyone has great
advice - ask passive questions, compliment the scholarship committee, wait
to raise the topic for a year where you don't apply for a scholarship, etc.
But one effective way to point to a disparate effect of scholarship
criteria is to use specific examples, as uncomfortable as that might be for
some. Praveen may be wrong; it would be great if the committee of telling
people to be quiet could engage with that possibility instead.

1 2  View All