300-word abstracts@: too much

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
13 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

300-word abstracts@: too much

Andy Mabbett-2
I'm drafting a couple of submissions for sessions at Wikimania, and
(having successfully made submissions for Wikimania 2012, for
Wikimedia UK AGMs, and for other conferences) have come to the
conclusion that 300 words is too much text to require.

What is the thinking behind this figure?

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 300-word abstracts@: too much

Thomas Morton

300 is quite a small requirement for a large conference really.

Generally the reason is to ensure that it's a serious/developed proposal (ie not an off the cuff idea) and to make sure the programme organisers have enough detail to get the talk into the right track.

But that's just my experience of other conferences, not this one!

Tom

On 29 Mar 2014 20:00, "Andy Mabbett" <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm drafting a couple of submissions for sessions at Wikimania, and
(having successfully made submissions for Wikimania 2012, for
Wikimedia UK AGMs, and for other conferences) have come to the
conclusion that 300 words is too much text to require.

What is the thinking behind this figure?

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 300-word abstracts@: too much

Andy Mabbett-2
I can see that argument.

But some of the best (un) conference sessions I've been in (and some
I've presented to good effect) have been off-the-cuff ideas!

On 29 March 2014 20:08, Thomas Morton <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 300 is quite a small requirement for a large conference really.
>
> Generally the reason is to ensure that it's a serious/developed proposal (ie
> not an off the cuff idea) and to make sure the programme organisers have
> enough detail to get the talk into the right track.
>
> But that's just my experience of other conferences, not this one!
>
> Tom
>
> On 29 Mar 2014 20:00, "Andy Mabbett" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> I'm drafting a couple of submissions for sessions at Wikimania, and
>> (having successfully made submissions for Wikimania 2012, for
>> Wikimedia UK AGMs, and for other conferences) have come to the
>> conclusion that 300 words is too much text to require.
>>
>> What is the thinking behind this figure?
>>
>> --
>> Andy Mabbett
>> @pigsonthewing
>> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimania-l mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>



--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 300-word abstracts@: too much

Steven Walling
In reply to this post by Andy Mabbett-2


On Saturday, March 29, 2014, Andy Mabbett <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm drafting a couple of submissions for sessions at Wikimania, and
(having successfully made submissions for Wikimania 2012, for
Wikimedia UK AGMs, and for other conferences) have come to the
conclusion that 300 words is too much text to require.

To be honest I always ignore this requirement. It's silly. A well-written proposal should be concise. 
 

What is the thinking behind this figure?

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, &#39;cvml&#39;, &#39;Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org&#39;)">Wikimania-l@...
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 300-word abstracts@: too much

Edward Saperia
The real reason was of course "we inherited the template from last year".

Sent from my iPhone

On 30 Mar 2014, at 08:52, Steven Walling <[hidden email]> wrote:



On Saturday, March 29, 2014, Andy Mabbett <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm drafting a couple of submissions for sessions at Wikimania, and
(having successfully made submissions for Wikimania 2012, for
Wikimedia UK AGMs, and for other conferences) have come to the
conclusion that 300 words is too much text to require.

To be honest I always ignore this requirement. It's silly. A well-written proposal should be concise. 
 

What is the thinking behind this figure?

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, 'cvml', 'Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org')">Wikimania-l@...
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 300-word abstracts@: too much

Andy Mabbett-2
In reply to this post by Steven Walling

I had visions of a big checklist with the first question being "300 words?" and a pile of rejected submissions with fewer than that.

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

On Mar 29, 2014 11:52 PM, "Steven Walling" <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Saturday, March 29, 2014, Andy Mabbett <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm drafting a couple of submissions for sessions at Wikimania, and
(having successfully made submissions for Wikimania 2012, for
Wikimedia UK AGMs, and for other conferences) have come to the
conclusion that 300 words is too much text to require.

To be honest I always ignore this requirement. It's silly. A well-written proposal should be concise. 
 

What is the thinking behind this figure?

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l


_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 300-word abstracts@: too much

Gordon Joly
In reply to this post by Edward Saperia
On 30/03/14 00:53, Ed Saperia wrote:
> The real reason was of course "we inherited the template from last year".



Re-use! Excellent!

Gordo


_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 300-word abstracts@: too much

Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia)
Could you please re-post the link to the page where submissions should be posted.

Thank you,
Newyorkbrad/IBM


On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 5:58 AM, Gordon Joly <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 30/03/14 00:53, Ed Saperia wrote:
> The real reason was of course "we inherited the template from last year".



Re-use! Excellent!

Gordo


_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l


_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 300-word abstracts@: too much

quiddity-2
https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions
:)

On 14-03-31 08:20 AM, Newyorkbrad wrote:

> Could you please re-post the link to the page where submissions should
> be posted.
>
> Thank you,
> Newyorkbrad/IBM
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 30, 2014 at 5:58 AM, Gordon Joly <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     On 30/03/14 00:53, Ed Saperia wrote:
>      > The real reason was of course "we inherited the template from
>     last year".
>
>
>
>     Re-use! Excellent!
>
>     Gordo
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Wikimania-l mailing list
>     [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>     https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
>


_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 300-word abstracts@: too much

Deryck Chan
In reply to this post by Edward Saperia
And that neatly introduces me to the lectern.

In 2011 and 2012 (and possibly earlier) there was only one "abstract" field with the instruction "min. 100 words". So, submission authors wrote at all kinds of lengths from 101 words to 1000+ words. This created two problems:
1. Judging was difficult because different authors give wildly different levels of detail.
2. Most of the abstracts are too long for the programme booklet. In 2011 they asked successful submitters to submit a 100-word tl;dr with a one-week time limit shortly before Wikimania itself, which was a bit hectic.

So in 2013, I split the "abstract" field into two: a tl;dr of "max. 100 words", and a "detailed proposal" of "min. 300 words". I put in comments that authors are encouraged to reuse material between the two fields as they see fit. I felt that it was useful to have 300+ words from every lecture proposal because that actually gives reviewers some more detail about the line of argument that the speaker would take.

Someone who's going to deliver a 25-min lecture should find no difficulty writing more than 300 words to give a taster of the lecture. The speaker will typically monologue for 17 minutes, which would be about 2000 words (assume typical English speeches in Wikimania). If you can speak 2000, you can write 300.

Of course the exception would be proposals for open discussions, which were introduced to the submission system after the 2013 submission template was made. So maybe Ed can make a note to say that purely open-floor sessions are exempt from the 300-word proposal.

Hope that helps.
Deryck


On 30 March 2014 08:53, Ed Saperia <[hidden email]> wrote:
The real reason was of course "we inherited the template from last year".

Sent from my iPhone

On 30 Mar 2014, at 08:52, Steven Walling <[hidden email]> wrote:



On Saturday, March 29, 2014, Andy Mabbett <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm drafting a couple of submissions for sessions at Wikimania, and
(having successfully made submissions for Wikimania 2012, for
Wikimedia UK AGMs, and for other conferences) have come to the
conclusion that 300 words is too much text to require.

To be honest I always ignore this requirement. It's silly. A well-written proposal should be concise. 
 

What is the thinking behind this figure?

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l



_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 300-word abstracts@: too much

Edward Saperia
Thanks Deryck, that's the kind of experience that would be really useful in the guidebook!

Sent from my iPhone

On 31 Mar 2014, at 17:11, Deryck Chan <[hidden email]> wrote:

And that neatly introduces me to the lectern.

In 2011 and 2012 (and possibly earlier) there was only one "abstract" field with the instruction "min. 100 words". So, submission authors wrote at all kinds of lengths from 101 words to 1000+ words. This created two problems:
1. Judging was difficult because different authors give wildly different levels of detail.
2. Most of the abstracts are too long for the programme booklet. In 2011 they asked successful submitters to submit a 100-word tl;dr with a one-week time limit shortly before Wikimania itself, which was a bit hectic.

So in 2013, I split the "abstract" field into two: a tl;dr of "max. 100 words", and a "detailed proposal" of "min. 300 words". I put in comments that authors are encouraged to reuse material between the two fields as they see fit. I felt that it was useful to have 300+ words from every lecture proposal because that actually gives reviewers some more detail about the line of argument that the speaker would take.

Someone who's going to deliver a 25-min lecture should find no difficulty writing more than 300 words to give a taster of the lecture. The speaker will typically monologue for 17 minutes, which would be about 2000 words (assume typical English speeches in Wikimania). If you can speak 2000, you can write 300.

Of course the exception would be proposals for open discussions, which were introduced to the submission system after the 2013 submission template was made. So maybe Ed can make a note to say that purely open-floor sessions are exempt from the 300-word proposal.

Hope that helps.
Deryck


On 30 March 2014 08:53, Ed Saperia <[hidden email]> wrote:
The real reason was of course "we inherited the template from last year".

Sent from my iPhone

On 30 Mar 2014, at 08:52, Steven Walling <[hidden email]> wrote:



On Saturday, March 29, 2014, Andy Mabbett <[hidden email]> wrote:
I'm drafting a couple of submissions for sessions at Wikimania, and
(having successfully made submissions for Wikimania 2012, for
Wikimedia UK AGMs, and for other conferences) have come to the
conclusion that 300 words is too much text to require.

To be honest I always ignore this requirement. It's silly. A well-written proposal should be concise. 
 

What is the thinking behind this figure?

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l


_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 300-word abstracts@: too much

Chris Keating-2
In reply to this post by Deryck Chan


Someone who's going to deliver a 25-min lecture should find no difficulty writing more than 300 words to give a taster of the lecture. The speaker will typically monologue for 17 minutes, which would be about 2000 words (assume typical English speeches in Wikimania). 

... but the audience will pay attention for 400 words and probably start checking their emails after 1,000!

Please treat this email as a cry for interactive sessions and not people reading from a Powerpoint!

Chris :-)

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 300-word abstracts@: too much

Andy Mabbett-2
In reply to this post by Steven Walling
On 29 March 2014 23:52, Steven Walling <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Saturday, March 29, 2014, Andy Mabbett <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> I'm drafting a couple of submissions for sessions at Wikimania, and
>> (having successfully made submissions for Wikimania 2012, for
>> Wikimedia UK AGMs, and for other conferences) have come to the
>> conclusion that 300 words is too much text to require.
>
>
> To be honest I always ignore this requirement. It's silly. A well-written
> proposal should be concise.

I note that on 23 March, James Forrester wrote to Wikimania-l and Wikimedia-l:

"Note that a complete submission is required, including an abstract of
300 words or more that explains to the Programme Committee why you
think your proposal should be accepted over others."

--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l