Practical suggestions for future Wikimanias (was: annually or?)

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

Practical suggestions for future Wikimanias (was: annually or?)

Deryck Chan

I think we do consider (1) and (2), but it's down to the scholarship team and local team to decide how they're implemented next year.

Deryck

On 11 Jul, 2016 1:06 pm, "Pine W" <[hidden email]> wrote:

A few other issues that may be worth examining:

1. Whether people who have not received a Wikimania scholarship within a certain number of years should get priority for scholarships.

2. Whether users who are from backgrounds that don't have a corresponding APG-funded affiliate that independently funds scholarships should have priority for WMF scholarships

3. What the scholarship self-reports from the past several years tell us about the benefits of Wikimania for scholarship recipients.

4. What Wikimetrics and qualitative measures tell us about Wikimania attenance for attendees as a whole and about scholarship recipients as a subgroup. For example, do we have data that demonstrates that (a) Wikimania attendees in general, and (b) scholarship recipients, were more active in the Wikimedia movement (measured quantitatively by edits and qualutatively in terms of leadership roles) after attending Wikimania for the first or second time? What can we learn from this data about the strengths and weaknesses of Wikimania as well as the current scholarship system?

Thanks,
Pine


_______________________________________________
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: Practical suggestions for future Wikimanias (was: annually or?)

Jonathan Cardy
We should give much more priority for scholarships to Wikimedians who have or will in future have visa difficulties. Ideally that means hosting Wikimania in relatively open countries at least every other year. But also we need to at least decide the venue 18 months ahead. That way if we know that someone won't be able to get a visa to the following year's Wikimania and couldn't to the most recent Wikimania but could get a visa to the upcoming Wikimania we can and should prioritise them for scholarships in the Wikimania where they have best chance of getting a visa.

Of course this is a sensitive issue, the most difficult countries to get visas for are also among the countries where we have hosted the largest Wikimanias. But an annual Wikimania for those of us with widely accepted passports could at least be a biannual Wikimania for Wikimedians from countries with less popular passports.

Remember we are unusual in our conference attendees. A global academic conference is going to have rather less difficulty getting visas for tenured professors than we are going to have getting visas for people from the same countries, especially for those wikimedians who don't have jobs.

WereSpielChequers



On 12 July 2016 at 22:59, Deryck Chan <[hidden email]> wrote:

I think we do consider (1) and (2), but it's down to the scholarship team and local team to decide how they're implemented next year.

Deryck

On 11 Jul, 2016 1:06 pm, "Pine W" <[hidden email]> wrote:

A few other issues that may be worth examining:

1. Whether people who have not received a Wikimania scholarship within a certain number of years should get priority for scholarships.

2. Whether users who are from backgrounds that don't have a corresponding APG-funded affiliate that independently funds scholarships should have priority for WMF scholarships

3. What the scholarship self-reports from the past several years tell us about the benefits of Wikimania for scholarship recipients.

4. What Wikimetrics and qualitative measures tell us about Wikimania attenance for attendees as a whole and about scholarship recipients as a subgroup. For example, do we have data that demonstrates that (a) Wikimania attendees in general, and (b) scholarship recipients, were more active in the Wikimedia movement (measured quantitatively by edits and qualutatively in terms of leadership roles) after attending Wikimania for the first or second time? What can we learn from this data about the strengths and weaknesses of Wikimania as well as the current scholarship system?

Thanks,
Pine


_______________________________________________
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
Loading...