Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
45 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

praveenp
Hi,

I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1], 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?



Praveen Prakash

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

Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

LFaraone
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 <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1], 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?



Praveen Prakash

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




--
  -- Luke // LFaraone

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

Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

Samat-2
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 10:23 PM, LFaraone <[hidden email]> 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
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

Zana Strkovska
The same questions every year :)

Regards,
Zana

2017-05-19 22:25 GMT+02:00 Samat <[hidden email]>:
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 10:23 PM, LFaraone <[hidden email]> 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
[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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

praveenp
In reply to this post by LFaraone

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 <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1], 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?



Praveen Prakash

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




--
  -- Luke // LFaraone


_______________________________________________
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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

Gnangarra
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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1], 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?



Praveen Prakash

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




--
  -- Luke // LFaraone


_______________________________________________
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




--
GN.
President Wikimedia Australia
WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com


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

Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

cs
In reply to this post by praveenp
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 <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi,

I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1], 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?



Praveen Prakash
_______________________________________________
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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

Risker
In reply to this post by Gnangarra
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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1], 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?



Praveen Prakash

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




--
  -- Luke // LFaraone


_______________________________________________
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




--
GN.
President Wikimedia Australia
WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com


_______________________________________________
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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

Adrian Raddatz
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" <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1], 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?



Praveen Prakash

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




--
  -- Luke // LFaraone


_______________________________________________
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




--
GN.
President Wikimedia Australia
WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com


_______________________________________________
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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

praveenp
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 <<a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,&#39;cvml&#39;,&#39;ajraddatz@gmail.com&#39;);" target="_blank">ajraddatz@...> 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" <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1], 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?



Praveen Prakash

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




--
  -- Luke // LFaraone


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


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



_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]g
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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

Adrian Raddatz
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" <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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" <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1], 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?



Praveen Prakash

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




--
  -- Luke // LFaraone


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


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



_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]g
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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

Stephan Schulz

> On 20 May 2017, at 07:36, Adrian Raddatz <[hidden email]> 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 [hidden email] (Stephan Schulz)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------









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

signature.asc (211 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

Adrian Raddatz
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 <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 20 May 2017, at 07:36, Adrian Raddatz <[hidden email]> 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 [hidden email] (Stephan Schulz)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------









_______________________________________________
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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

praveenp
In reply to this post by Adrian Raddatz
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" <[hidden email]> 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" <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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" <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1], 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?



Praveen Prakash

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




--
  -- Luke // LFaraone


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


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



_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]g
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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

Michael Peel-2
In reply to this post by Adrian Raddatz
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 <[hidden email]> 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" <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1], 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?



Praveen Prakash

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




--
  -- Luke // LFaraone


_______________________________________________
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




--
GN.
President Wikimedia Australia
WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com


_______________________________________________
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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

ViswaPrabha (വിശ്വപ്രഭ)-2
In reply to this post by praveenp
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 <[hidden email]> 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" <[hidden email]> 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" <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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" <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1], 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?



Praveen Prakash

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




--
  -- Luke // LFaraone


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


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



_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]g
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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

praveenp

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 (വിശ്വപ്രഭ) 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 <[hidden email]> 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" <[hidden email]> 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" <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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" <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1], 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?



Praveen Prakash

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




--
  -- Luke // LFaraone


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


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



_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]g
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


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

Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

Andy Mabbett-2

On 20 May 2017 at 17:39, praveenp <[hidden email]> 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

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

Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

rupert THURNER-2
In reply to this post by Michael Peel-2
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" <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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" <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1], 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?



Praveen Prakash

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




--
  -- Luke // LFaraone


_______________________________________________
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




--
GN.
President Wikimedia Australia
WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com


_______________________________________________
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
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Granting Scholarship to same persons every year

phoebe ayers-3
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 <[hidden email]> 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" <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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" <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> 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 <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I have sent a similar email on 2015 [1], 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?



Praveen Prakash

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




--
  -- Luke // LFaraone


_______________________________________________
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




--
GN.
President Wikimedia Australia
WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com


_______________________________________________
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




--
* I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers <at> gmail.com *

_______________________________________________
Wikimania-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
123
Loading...