Mailing List Archive

Re: Update on Wikimania '18 [ In reply to ]
2018-05-31 21:31 GMT+02:00 Harry Mitchell <hjmwiki@gmail.com>:
> Since you raise chapter scholarships, it would be nice to see some of the
> other big chapters (and to some extent the WMF) spending more on
> scholarships for rank-and-file Wikimedians rather than staff and board
> members. That might help with the perception that Wikimania is the same old
> faces year in, year out.

Former WM-IT Board member here. Actually, Wikimedia Italia does host a
scholarship programme since 2011, open to both WM-IT associates and
Italian wikimedians. Depending on the destination, we always granted
every year 6 to 8 scholarships (plus up to 2 places for Board members,
and depending on staff availability, up to 2 places for them). In
2016, we actually handed out 10 full scholarships and 10 partial
scholarships ('cause travel expenses were more easy to cover).

From my experience, it's difficult to fill up the ranks sometimes with
new people. Our internal rules actually give preference to people who
never attended Wikimania, as well as to women - still, we were
"forced" to award scholarships to the same people sometimes, because
we were lacking other eligible people. In particular, most of the most
active Italian wikipedians DO NOT apply for a WM-IT scholarship (or
WMF, AFAIK).

This is yet another variable we're not considering enough, I think: if
new people do not apply, it's harder to award them a scholarship.

L.

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Re: Update on Wikimania '18 [ In reply to ]
> Applicants tend to forget that same people are likely to be selected
> if same people are applying.
I don't remember how many times I applied for scholarship, but I am sure
that I applied regularly since users started seriously doubting
scholarship granting process. In the year 2015 (I think) some users
thought, we were needed a more serious approach for scholarship
application and started helping each other. I received a compiled file
with answers specifically for me for scholarship form, in-case I would
apply. I've used those answers as a template for my application since
2015, without much tweaking, because it was better.

In 2015, I passed to Phase 2. Once the scholarship receiver's list was
published, I shared some doubts in Wikimania mailing list.

In 2016, failed in Phase 1, totally against  phase 1 criteria. My
queries to find whether that happened as a repercussion for questioning
the process in 2015 in public mailing list didn't get any answers.

In 2017, Passed to Phase2.

This year I didn;t apply for the scholarship. Partially because I was
immediately not able to find my template file, and partially because
there was no reason to spent some 30 minutes or more for just
substantiate an already proven point (atleast to us).

This year, I didn't participated any related discussion. I don't know
how many were applied, but it is safe to assume there were more users
applied.

Again I am using my username as an example. I am not in search of
scholarship. Even in local meet-ups, I attended only once (more than 10
years ago).

~user:Praveenp
Re: Update on Wikimania '18 [ In reply to ]
I would like to have some comments on the issue, first going to wikimania
is not of reward system for editing ( though to some extent it motivates a
lot of people)

Second, though many people get repeated scholarship, scholarships
committees are being changed almost every year, if different people are
choosing same people every year this definitely means these people are
offering a lot, way beyond editing wiki project.

In many countries we have core people are doing the chore and uphill
battle, these are people mostly getting repeated scholarships, I suggest
anyone who objects these issue to serve scholarships committee and pretty
you will be shocked to see you also chose very same people.


Every year we see new faces, i do trust the process.


Mardetanha

On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 3:50 PM praveenp <me.praveen@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Applicants tend to forget that same people are likely to be selected if
> same people are applying.
>
> I don't remember how many times I applied for scholarship, but I am sure
> that I applied regularly since users started seriously doubting scholarship
> granting process. In the year 2015 (I think) some users thought, we were
> needed a more serious approach for scholarship application and started
> helping each other. I received a compiled file with answers specifically
> for me for scholarship form, in-case I would apply. I've used those answers
> as a template for my application since 2015, without much tweaking, because
> it was better.
>
> In 2015, I passed to Phase 2. Once the scholarship receiver's list was
> published, I shared some doubts in Wikimania mailing list.
>
> In 2016, failed in Phase 1, totally against phase 1 criteria. My queries
> to find whether that happened as a repercussion for questioning the process
> in 2015 in public mailing list didn't get any answers.
>
> In 2017, Passed to Phase2.
>
> This year I didn;t apply for the scholarship. Partially because I was
> immediately not able to find my template file, and partially because there
> was no reason to spent some 30 minutes or more for just substantiate an
> already proven point (atleast to us).
>
> This year, I didn't participated any related discussion. I don't know how
> many were applied, but it is safe to assume there were more users applied.
>
> Again I am using my username as an example. I am not in search of
> scholarship. Even in local meet-ups, I attended only once (more than 10
> years ago).
>
> ~user:Praveenp
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
--
Sent from iphone using Gmail mobile
Re: Update on Wikimania '18 [ In reply to ]
Hi,
WMUA board member here. We usually award three scholarships per year, we run the program since 2016.

Out of 9 people having received a scholarship, we had 1 board member and 0 staff members. We do not have any priority to board members, they have to apply in the same way as others. At least one applicant each year attended Wikimania for the first time.

I am not sure if this is a perfect solution but it is feasible. The fact that all our board members are active Wikimedians themselves probably helps to make it feasible.

Best regards
Mykola (NickK)
Wikimedia Ukraine

--- ??????????? ???????????? ---
??? ????: "Luca Martinelli" <martinelliluca@gmail.com>
????: 1 ?????? 2018, 15:30:10

2018-05-31 21:31 GMT+02:00 Harry Mitchell <hjmwiki@gmail.com>:
> Since you raise chapter scholarships, it would be nice to see some of the
> other big chapters (and to some extent the WMF) spending more on
> scholarships for rank-and-file Wikimedians rather than staff and board
> members. That might help with the perception that Wikimania is the same old
> faces year in, year out.

Former WM-IT Board member here. Actually, Wikimedia Italia does host a
scholarship programme since 2011, open to both WM-IT associates and
Italian wikimedians. Depending on the destination, we always granted
every year 6 to 8 scholarships (plus up to 2 places for Board members,
and depending on staff availability, up to 2 places for them). In
2016, we actually handed out 10 full scholarships and 10 partial
scholarships ('cause travel expenses were more easy to cover).

From my experience, it's difficult to fill up the ranks sometimes with
new people. Our internal rules actually give preference to people who
never attended Wikimania, as well as to women - still, we were
"forced" to award scholarships to the same people sometimes, because
we were lacking other eligible people. In particular, most of the most
active Italian wikipedians DO NOT apply for a WM-IT scholarship (or
WMF, AFAIK).

This is yet another variable we're not considering enough, I think: if
new people do not apply, it's harder to award them a scholarship.

L.

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Re: Update on Wikimania '18 [ In reply to ]
The complaints in this thread have been reported in the Signpost, although
without any of the countering comments. In what I imagine is an oversight,
the co-author of the report in the Signpost (Kudpung) did not mention that
he raised many of the complaints here himself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2018-06-29/News_and_notes

~Nathan


On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 6:25 PM Mykola Kozlenko <mycola-k@ukr.net> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> WMUA board member here. We usually award three scholarships per year, we
> run the program since 2016.
>
> Out of 9 people having received a scholarship, we had 1 board member and 0
> staff members. We do not have any priority to board members, they have to
> apply in the same way as others. At least one applicant each year attended
> Wikimania for the first time.
>
> I am not sure if this is a perfect solution but it is feasible. The fact
> that all our board members are active Wikimedians themselves probably helps
> to make it feasible.
>
> Best regards
> Mykola (NickK)
> Wikimedia Ukraine
>
> --- ??????????? ???????????? ---
> ??? ????: "Luca Martinelli" <martinelliluca@gmail.com>
> ????: 1 ?????? 2018, 15:30:10
>
> 2018-05-31 21:31 GMT+02:00 Harry Mitchell <hjmwiki@gmail.com>:
> > Since you raise chapter scholarships, it would be nice to see some of the
> > other big chapters (and to some extent the WMF) spending more on
> > scholarships for rank-and-file Wikimedians rather than staff and board
> > members. That might help with the perception that Wikimania is the same old
> > faces year in, year out.
>
> Former WM-IT Board member here. Actually, Wikimedia Italia does host a
> scholarship programme since 2011, open to both WM-IT associates and
> Italian wikimedians. Depending on the destination, we always granted
> every year 6 to 8 scholarships (plus up to 2 places for Board members,
> and depending on staff availability, up to 2 places for them). In2016, we actually handed out 10 full scholarships and 10 partial
> scholarships ('cause travel expenses were more easy to cover).
>
> From my experience, it's difficult to fill up the ranks sometimes with
> new people. Our internal rules actually give preference to people who
> never attended Wikimania, as well as to women - still, we were
> "forced" to award scholarships to the same people sometimes, because
> we were lacking other eligible people. In particular, most of the most
> active Italian wikipedians DO NOT apply for a WM-IT scholarship (or
> WMF, AFAIK).
>
> This is yet another variable we're not considering enough, I think: if
> new people do not apply, it's harder to award them a scholarship.
>
> L.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Update on Wikimania '18 [ In reply to ]
No oversight, Nathan, and please don’t exaggerate. FWIW there is already an in-depth article in progress about Wikimania that was begun before that very short ‘In the news’ mention. It’s being written by another editor who first mentioned the mailing list and will be published in this month’s issue. Please remember that this is an open mailing list an any one is free to report on it or mention it anywhere whatever the scope. The newsroom discussions for The Signpost are equally transparent.

Thatr said, yes, I am indeed highly critical of some aspects of the organisation of each year’s conference.

Kudpung

> On 03, Jul2018, at 05:40, Nathan <nawrich@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The complaints in this thread have been reported in the Signpost, although without any of the countering comments. In what I imagine is an oversight, the co-author of the report in the Signpost (Kudpung) did not mention that he raised many of the complaints here himself.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2018-06-29/News_and_notes <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2018-06-29/News_and_notes>
>
> ~Nathan
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 6:25 PM Mykola Kozlenko <mycola-k@ukr.net <mailto:mycola-k@ukr.net>> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> WMUA board member here. We usually award three scholarships per year, we run the program since 2016.
>
> Out of 9 people having received a scholarship, we had 1 board member and 0 staff members. We do not have any priority to board members, they have to apply in the same way as others. At least one applicant each year attended Wikimania for the first time.
>
> I am not sure if this is a perfect solution but it is feasible. The fact that all our board members are active Wikimedians themselves probably helps to make it feasible.
>
> Best regards
> Mykola (NickK)
> Wikimedia Ukraine
>
> --- ??????????? ???????????? ---
> ??? ????: "Luca Martinelli" <martinelliluca@gmail.com <mailto:martinelliluca@gmail.com>>
> ????: 1 ?????? 2018, 15:30:10
>
> 2018-05-31 21:31 GMT+02:00 Harry Mitchell <hjmwiki@gmail.com <mailto:hjmwiki@gmail.com>>:
> > Since you raise chapter scholarships, it would be nice to see some of the
> > other big chapters (and to some extent the WMF) spending more on
> > scholarships for rank-and-file Wikimedians rather than staff and board
> > members. That might help with the perception that Wikimania is the same old
> > faces year in, year out.
>
> Former WM-IT Board member here. Actually, Wikimedia Italia does host a
> scholarship programme since 2011, open to both WM-IT associates and
> Italian wikimedians. Depending on the destination, we always granted
> every year 6 to 8 scholarships (plus up to 2 places for Board members,
> and depending on staff availability, up to 2 places for them). In
> 2016, we actually handed out 10 full scholarships and 10 partial
> scholarships ('cause travel expenses were more easy to cover).
>
> From my experience, it's difficult to fill up the ranks sometimes with
> new people. Our internal rules actually give preference to people who
> never attended Wikimania, as well as to women - still, we were
> "forced" to award scholarships to the same people sometimes, because
> we were lacking other eligible people. In particular, most of the most
> active Italian wikipedians DO NOT apply for a WM-IT scholarship (or
> WMF, AFAIK).
>
> This is yet another variable we're not considering enough, I think: if
> new people do not apply, it's harder to award them a scholarship.
>
> 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: Update on Wikimania '18 [ In reply to ]
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 9:31 PM, Pine W <wiki.pine@gmail.com> wrote:

> Harry, I recall hearing that there was a push a year or two back to alter
> the proportion of presentations at Wikimania so that there were fewer WMF
> presentations and more community presentations. I don't know if that was a
> one time event or if that's ongoing.
>

As a WMF presenter, I'd like to respond briefly. First: the WMF has an
internal budget as well, and its decisions about who goes/does not go to
Wikimania have their own troubles/nuances/benefits, etc.

In my own opinion, the WMF is employed to do development work for the
community. I feel that tipping the balance too much toward either WMF or
community presentations do both a disservice. If Wikimania were to be only
community presentations, surely the complaint would arise that WMF was
absent, does not know about all the good work the community is doing, isn't
adequately supporting them with its work, etc, and conversely WMF employees
would feel the community is left ignorant of the tools they are building on
the communities' behalf. And obviously if Wikimania were only WMF
presentations those employed to serve the community would be doing all our
time talking when we should be listening! A balance is needed (and we can
have a great debate on what the right balance should be; I didn't hear any
complaints from participants about the balance at Esino Lario, for example).

Wikimania is a great opportunity for communication between different facets
of our movement, both planned and unplanned. My own experience from
leading problem-solving teams in various capacities is that the unplanned
interactions are actually the most important. Generally, if you *know
already* that X is working on Y which is of interest to you, then you can
with more-or-less difficulty find X to exchange ideas about Y. But how do
you find people when you have no idea who they are or that they are working
on something of interest! That's the opportunity you get by gathering all
sorts of different Wikimedians in one place, and having them eat and
socialize together.

As such, my personal opinion is that purely "merit-based" participant
selection --- both of community members and internally at WMF (usually
based on having an accepted presentation) --- runs the danger of not
including enough folks who are there (a) to listen, not talk, (b) who would
be inspired by things they did not expect and could not have predicted on
an application.

If I were to make this a concrete suggestion, I'd suggest including some
number of "perfectly fair" random scholarships/participant selections, so
that even non-presenting WMF employees and first-time community
representatives get a chance to listen to each other, learn unexpected
things, and be inspired.
--scott

ps. Having a "report back" expectation also seems fine and useful.
Re: Update on Wikimania '18 [ In reply to ]
I mentioned about Esino Lario being top heavy on WMF presentations. Not everyone is likely to write in and make formal complaints on the lines they discussed personally with each other during the Wikimania conferences.
Furthermore, the configuration and timing of the many locations in Esino Lario for the presentations, meetings, and socialising (a very important aspect), was not conducive to much interaction.I assume this has been addressed in the selection of venues for later conferences.
The ’talking' is as important as the ‘listening’ - after all, the private and periferal discussions are all about Wikipedia/Wikimedia and are actually what in my opinion gets most achieved.
It is disappointing when meeting WMF employees during breaks and socialising opportunities to be simply told ‘Come to my presentation’, or ‘leave a message on my talk page'

Nobody is suggesting that scholarships should be accorded on a ‘merit’ basis - as far as I understand, the allocation of scholarships is not an ‘award' system.
Nobody is suggesting that Wikimania 'were to be only community presentations.’
Nobody is suggesting that Wikimania scholarships should only be accorded to those wishing to make presentations. I have suggested however, that there should be coordination between the scholarship and the program selection systems.

I have only attended four Wikimanias, which were all very different, but I belive my own observations and impressions are not without merit. Not everybody is inclined to post to this mailiing list.

Kudpung
> On 06, Jul2018, at 01:45, C. Scott Ananian <cananian@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 9:31 PM, Pine W <wiki.pine@gmail.com <mailto:wiki.pine@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Harry, I recall hearing that there was a push a year or two back to alter the proportion of presentations at Wikimania so that there were fewer WMF presentations and more community presentations. I don't know if that was a one time event or if that's ongoing.
>
> As a WMF presenter, I'd like to respond briefly. First: the WMF has an internal budget as well, and its decisions about who goes/does not go to Wikimania have their own troubles/nuances/benefits, etc.
>
> In my own opinion, the WMF is employed to do development work for the community. I feel that tipping the balance too much toward either WMF or community presentations do both a disservice. If Wikimania were to be only community presentations, surely the complaint would arise that WMF was absent, does not know about all the good work the community is doing, isn't adequately supporting them with its work, etc, and conversely WMF employees would feel the community is left ignorant of the tools they are building on the communities' behalf. And obviously if Wikimania were only WMF presentations those employed to serve the community would be doing all our time talking when we should be listening! A balance is needed (and we can have a great debate on what the right balance should be; I didn't hear any complaints from participants about the balance at Esino Lario, for example).
>
> Wikimania is a great opportunity for communication between different facets of our movement, both planned and unplanned. My own experience from leading problem-solving teams in various capacities is that the unplanned interactions are actually the most important. Generally, if you *know already* that X is working on Y which is of interest to you, then you can with more-or-less difficulty find X to exchange ideas about Y. But how do you find people when you have no idea who they are or that they are working on something of interest! That's the opportunity you get by gathering all sorts of different Wikimedians in one place, and having them eat and socialize together.
>
> As such, my personal opinion is that purely "merit-based" participant selection --- both of community members and internally at WMF (usually based on having an accepted presentation) --- runs the danger of not including enough folks who are there (a) to listen, not talk, (b) who would be inspired by things they did not expect and could not have predicted on an application.
>
> If I were to make this a concrete suggestion, I'd suggest including some number of "perfectly fair" random scholarships/participant selections, so that even non-presenting WMF employees and first-time community representatives get a chance to listen to each other, learn unexpected things, and be inspired.
> --scott
>
> ps. Having a "report back" expectation also seems fine and useful.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

1 2  View All