Wiki (not) Mania?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
49 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

Galileo Vidoni
Just to subscribe what Mike says. It has always been awkward to approach academics or any potential extra-Wikimedia speaker/attendee and having to explain that despite its name Wikimania tries to be a serious conference (I remember for instance when we organized Wikimania 2009 in Buenos Aires, but not only). I've always thought that it was too much of a subtle and secondary topic to raise it, but seeing that many people share the same concerns perhaps it's something the Wikimania Committee could consider.

Best,

Galileo

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 8:00 PM, Michael Peel <[hidden email]> wrote:
There is now the Wikimania Committee:
Perhaps a decision/formal consultation on a name change could come from them, if they feel it's appropriate?

Personally, I've always been a bit uneasy with '-mania' for the reasons that Gordon identified - plus getting academics to take you seriously when you're saying you'll be attending a conference called 'Wikimania' is always a bit tricky (first there's the 'wiki' part, then the 'mania' part, then there's both combined!). So I think it's worth rethinking the name at some point.

BTW, "periods of great excitement, euphoria, delusions, and overactivity" probably describes quite a few Wikimedians!

Thanks,
Mike

On 4 Nov 2016, at 20:37, Asaf Bartov <[hidden email]> wrote:

A word on process:

quite apart from the fact we've had this conversation before (it's fine to have it again, as Lodewijk says), what bothers me is that there is *no clear way it could have a result*.  There is no identified group or person empowered with deciding on a name change, so however persuasive your arguments might be, on either side, this conversation is doomed to end the way all the others had: with zero change.

It seems to me that the only way the name would ever change is if some year's *hosting team* were to decide to change it.  They would be able to de-facto determine the name of the conference and literally effect it, in branding, merchandise, etc.  It follows that if you want change, you should focus on advocating to the Montreal team, or to a future year's team, once determined.

    A.

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:40 PM Nicholas Michael Bashour <[hidden email]> wrote:
From Wikipedia article about Beatlemania:

"The use of the word mania to describe fandom pre-dates the Beatles by more than 100 years. Beginning in 1841, fans of Hungarian pianist and composer Franz Liszt showed a level of fanaticism similar to the Beatles. Poet Heinrich Heine coined the word "Lisztomania" to describe this...The term later became the name of various tribute bands dedicated to singing the songs of the Beatles, many with impersonators of the group.[19][20] The term has had a number of derivatives with the suffix "mania", usually short-lived, to describe a similar phenomenon toward other bands, such as "Rollermania"[21] in the early 1970s for the Scottish band Bay City Rollers, "Menudomanía" in the 1980s to describe frenzy across Latin America for the boyband Menudo, "Spicemania" in the 1990s[22][23] for the Spice Girls and "Jedwardmania" in the 2010s for Jedward. More recently, the "mania" suffix is often placed at the end of sports figures' names when they acquire sudden popularity, such as Hulkamania during the professional wrestling career of Hulk Hogan, or "Tebowmania" for football player Tim Tebow in 2011. It is also used to describe the following of other public figures, such as politician Jeremy Corbyn - Corbynmania - at the height of his popularity, as well as actor Leonardo DiCaprio - Leomania - in the period following his breakthrough performance in the hit film Titanic.[24]"


2016-11-04 17:37 GMT-04:00 Daniel Kinzler <[hidden email]>:
Am 04.11.2016 um 22:34 schrieb Nkansah Rexford:
> Mania: "mental illness marked by periods of great excitement, euphoria,
> delusions, and overactivity."

Second meaning: "extreme enthusiasm for something that is usually shared by many
people". -- http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mania

Sounds about right to me...


--
Daniel Kinzler
Senior Software Developer

Wikimedia Deutschland
Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.

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

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


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



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

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

Gordon Joly
In reply to this post by Luca Martinelli
On 04/11/16 21:20, Luca Martinelli wrote:
> I respectfully disagree. The "-mania" suffix is used in tons of
> non-medical situations to describe a frenzy, a buzz about something,
> it's a well established metaphor. Think of "Beatlesmania": nobody will
> think of it as a *real* disease, though some old-fashioned columnist
> would have thought it to be so.

Yes, I understand your point. But the Wikimedia movement does have the
aim of veracity at the core.

Gordo



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

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

Gordon Joly
In reply to this post by Nkansah Rexford
On 04/11/16 21:34, Nkansah Rexford wrote:

> Just did a quick google search for the word 'Mania'. The definition I
> got is interesting.
>
> I think with such a definition, it is REALLY worth it having a
> conversation relating to the name.
>
> Wiki-mental-illness? Like seriously? All these years? For someone like
> myself who the word 'mania' never crossed the mind to find the meaning,
> the term 'Wikimania' didn't mean anything except a conference for
> Wikimedians around the world in general.
>
> But looking up the word paints a whole new picture. Like seriously?
>
> Mania: "mental illness marked by periods of great excitement, euphoria,
> delusions, and overactivity."
>
> Woow.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mania

Seems quite complex?

Gordo


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

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

Gordon Joly
In reply to this post by Daniel Kinzler-2
On 04/11/16 21:37, Daniel Kinzler wrote:
> Am 04.11.2016 um 22:34 schrieb Nkansah Rexford:
>> > Mania: "mental illness marked by periods of great excitement, euphoria,
>> > delusions, and overactivity."
> Second meaning: "extreme enthusiasm for something that is usually shared by many
> people". -- http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mania
>
> Sounds about right to me...
>

This where we came in?

:-)

Gordo


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

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

Gordon Joly
In reply to this post by Luca Martinelli



There is a project on "Mental health within the community"

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/Mental_health_within_the_community

Wonder if there is any crossover.

Gordo



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

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

Edward Saperia
In reply to this post by Andrew Lih-2
Agree with Andrew - when I was organising it in 2014 I usually called it "The Global Wikipedia Summit" because Wikimania doesn't sound important.
 
2. On first glance, the name isn’t very professional sounding. So it may be hard to convince one’s boss or academic head to fund travel or time off to attend the premier conference for the Wikimedia community.


On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Gordon Joly <[hidden email]> wrote:


Is it proper and correct to use the term "mania"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mania

Would we say "WikiMad" or WikiCrazy"?

Gordo

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


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



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

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

Luca Martinelli

OK, now this is more of an argument I can consider as compelling.

Now the 1 million dollar/euro/pound/yen/yuan/rupee/peso/shekel/$you_name_it question (which unsurprisingly Asaf already posed): to whom do we address the task of eventually solving this?

L.


Il 07 nov 2016 15:05, "Edward Saperia" <[hidden email]> ha scritto:
Agree with Andrew - when I was organising it in 2014 I usually called it "The Global Wikipedia Summit" because Wikimania doesn't sound important.
 
2. On first glance, the name isn’t very professional sounding. So it may be hard to convince one’s boss or academic head to fund travel or time off to attend the premier conference for the Wikimedia community.


On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Gordon Joly <[hidden email]> wrote:


Is it proper and correct to use the term "mania"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mania

Would we say "WikiMad" or WikiCrazy"?

Gordo

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


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



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



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

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

Lodewijk
The question would also be:
- is this a significant problem
- Do we wánt to solve this problem (what is our targeted audience)
- Are there other ways to achieve the same (When I had to pitch Wikimania as a conference with potential partners in the Amsterdam 2010 bid, we always used a subtitle - which worked fine. People actually appreciated a more unique brand/name)
- finally, are there any benefits to keeping Wikimania as a name

I see how one can make a case - but without addressing all these questions, such case is imho not complete. 

Lodewijk

2016-11-07 15:08 GMT+01:00 Luca Martinelli <[hidden email]>:

OK, now this is more of an argument I can consider as compelling.

Now the 1 million dollar/euro/pound/yen/yuan/rupee/peso/shekel/$you_name_it question (which unsurprisingly Asaf already posed): to whom do we address the task of eventually solving this?

L.


Il 07 nov 2016 15:05, "Edward Saperia" <[hidden email]> ha scritto:
Agree with Andrew - when I was organising it in 2014 I usually called it "The Global Wikipedia Summit" because Wikimania doesn't sound important.
 
2. On first glance, the name isn’t very professional sounding. So it may be hard to convince one’s boss or academic head to fund travel or time off to attend the premier conference for the Wikimedia community.


On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Gordon Joly <[hidden email]> wrote:


Is it proper and correct to use the term "mania"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mania

Would we say "WikiMad" or WikiCrazy"?

Gordo

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


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



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



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



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

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

Ellie Young
I concur with Asaf and Lodewijk's emails.

For the past few years when I have had to 'pitch' Wikimania to potential sponsors and also when dealing with hotel, convention centers, tourism boards and the like, I have always emphasized that Wikimania (which is pretty puzzling for most outsiders...) is the international conference for the Wikipedia/wikimedia community.  That always seems to satisfy/clarify it for most people (and a chuckle  ...)

Not to change the subject ;-), but I get more questions about the Wikimedia Conference (which probably should have the word affiliate in it) as people are confused about it being Wikimania, how does it differ,  that it is by invitation, etc.  I know we've tried in the past to get some traction about changing its name, but that doesn't seem to go anywhere....

Ellie




On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 6:50 AM, Lodewijk <[hidden email]> wrote:
The question would also be:
- is this a significant problem
- Do we wánt to solve this problem (what is our targeted audience)
- Are there other ways to achieve the same (When I had to pitch Wikimania as a conference with potential partners in the Amsterdam 2010 bid, we always used a subtitle - which worked fine. People actually appreciated a more unique brand/name)
- finally, are there any benefits to keeping Wikimania as a name

I see how one can make a case - but without addressing all these questions, such case is imho not complete. 

Lodewijk

2016-11-07 15:08 GMT+01:00 Luca Martinelli <[hidden email]>:

OK, now this is more of an argument I can consider as compelling.

Now the 1 million dollar/euro/pound/yen/yuan/rupee/peso/shekel/$you_name_it question (which unsurprisingly Asaf already posed): to whom do we address the task of eventually solving this?

L.


Il 07 nov 2016 15:05, "Edward Saperia" <[hidden email]> ha scritto:
Agree with Andrew - when I was organising it in 2014 I usually called it "The Global Wikipedia Summit" because Wikimania doesn't sound important.
 
2. On first glance, the name isn’t very professional sounding. So it may be hard to convince one’s boss or academic head to fund travel or time off to attend the premier conference for the Wikimedia community.


On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Gordon Joly <[hidden email]> wrote:


Is it proper and correct to use the term "mania"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mania

Would we say "WikiMad" or WikiCrazy"?

Gordo

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


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



_______________________________________________
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




--
Ellie Young
Events Manager
Wikimedia Foundation
c. 510 701 8649

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

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

Béria Lima
In reply to this post by Luca Martinelli
Now the 1 million dollar (...) question: to whom do we address the task of eventually solving this?

​Well, might not be the easiest answer, but: Why not run a vote?

Have some period of "submissions of name", and an after vote open to all community on it (with bots, sitenotice and etc to advertise it.) and let the community decide.
_____
Béria L
​. de Rodríguez


Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho.

2016-11-07 12:08 GMT-02:00 Luca Martinelli <[hidden email]>:

OK, now this is more of an argument I can consider as compelling.

​​
Now the 1 million dollar/euro/pound/yen/yuan/rupee/peso/shekel/$you_name_it question (which unsurprisingly Asaf already posed): to whom do we address the task of eventually solving this?

L.


Il 07 nov 2016 15:05, "Edward Saperia" <[hidden email]> ha scritto:
Agree with Andrew - when I was organising it in 2014 I usually called it "The Global Wikipedia Summit" because Wikimania doesn't sound important.
 
2. On first glance, the name isn’t very professional sounding. So it may be hard to convince one’s boss or academic head to fund travel or time off to attend the premier conference for the Wikimedia community.


On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Gordon Joly <[hidden email]> wrote:


Is it proper and correct to use the term "mania"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mania

Would we say "WikiMad" or WikiCrazy"?

Gordo

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


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



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



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



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

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

Andrew Lih-2
Hi all,

- The Wikimania Committee with Ellie Young would be the most likely entity that could facilitate a process if we wanted to consider a name change. Full disclosure: I’m on the committee, but it may be getting a revamp in the near future.

- We tend to not like voting on anything like this, especially since we don’t have very good findings of fact, or even a good sampling of anecdotes around the name.

-Andrew


-Andrew Lih
Associate professor of journalism, American University
Email: [hidden email]
WEB: http://www.andrewlih.com
BOOK: The Wikipedia Revolution: http://www.wikipediarevolution.com
PROJECT: Wiki Makes Video http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wiki_Makes_Video

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Béria Lima <[hidden email]> wrote:
Now the 1 million dollar (...) question: to whom do we address the task of eventually solving this?

​Well, might not be the easiest answer, but: Why not run a vote?

Have some period of "submissions of name", and an after vote open to all community on it (with bots, sitenotice and etc to advertise it.) and let the community decide.
_____
Béria L
​. de Rodríguez


Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho.

2016-11-07 12:08 GMT-02:00 Luca Martinelli <[hidden email]>:

OK, now this is more of an argument I can consider as compelling.

​​
Now the 1 million dollar/euro/pound/yen/yuan/rupee/peso/shekel/$you_name_it question (which unsurprisingly Asaf already posed): to whom do we address the task of eventually solving this?

L.


Il 07 nov 2016 15:05, "Edward Saperia" <[hidden email]> ha scritto:
Agree with Andrew - when I was organising it in 2014 I usually called it "The Global Wikipedia Summit" because Wikimania doesn't sound important.
 
2. On first glance, the name isn’t very professional sounding. So it may be hard to convince one’s boss or academic head to fund travel or time off to attend the premier conference for the Wikimedia community.


On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Gordon Joly <[hidden email]> wrote:


Is it proper and correct to use the term "mania"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mania

Would we say "WikiMad" or WikiCrazy"?

Gordo

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


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



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



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



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



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

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

C. Scott Ananian
I apologize if this is a bit of a hand grenade in the discussion, but:

If we are really concerned with third parties understanding what our conference is about, we should really use "Wikipedia" in the title and avoid the use of "Wikimedia".  The general public really has no clue what Wikimedia means.  If you just use "Wiki-" they think "Wikileaks".  That's just the place we are at right now.

I have no idea how to concisely include all the "Wikimedia projects" and still mention "Wikipedia" in the title... which suggests perhaps that Ed's version ("Wikimania: the global wikipedia summit") or whatever subtitle Lodewijk used isn't too far off.

I suspect that it's just plain hard to come up with a short name which captures the entire intended scope of the conference (the "Wikipedia and Related Projects Conference"?), and so a short name that tries instead of capture the "fun" aspect (which is what -mania connotes to most of us) is a reasonable alternative.
  --scott

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Andrew Lih <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,

- The Wikimania Committee with Ellie Young would be the most likely entity that could facilitate a process if we wanted to consider a name change. Full disclosure: I’m on the committee, but it may be getting a revamp in the near future.

- We tend to not like voting on anything like this, especially since we don’t have very good findings of fact, or even a good sampling of anecdotes around the name.

-Andrew


-Andrew Lih
Associate professor of journalism, American University
Email: [hidden email]
WEB: http://www.andrewlih.com
BOOK: The Wikipedia Revolution: http://www.wikipediarevolution.com
PROJECT: Wiki Makes Video http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wiki_Makes_Video

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Béria Lima <[hidden email]> wrote:
Now the 1 million dollar (...) question: to whom do we address the task of eventually solving this?

​Well, might not be the easiest answer, but: Why not run a vote?

Have some period of "submissions of name", and an after vote open to all community on it (with bots, sitenotice and etc to advertise it.) and let the community decide.
_____
Béria L
​. de Rodríguez


Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho.

2016-11-07 12:08 GMT-02:00 Luca Martinelli <[hidden email]>:

OK, now this is more of an argument I can consider as compelling.

​​
Now the 1 million dollar/euro/pound/yen/yuan/rupee/peso/shekel/$you_name_it question (which unsurprisingly Asaf already posed): to whom do we address the task of eventually solving this?

L.


Il 07 nov 2016 15:05, "Edward Saperia" <[hidden email]> ha scritto:
Agree with Andrew - when I was organising it in 2014 I usually called it "The Global Wikipedia Summit" because Wikimania doesn't sound important.
 
2. On first glance, the name isn’t very professional sounding. So it may be hard to convince one’s boss or academic head to fund travel or time off to attend the premier conference for the Wikimedia community.


On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Gordon Joly <[hidden email]> wrote:


Is it proper and correct to use the term "mania"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mania

Would we say "WikiMad" or WikiCrazy"?

Gordo

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


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



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



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



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



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




--

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

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

Pine W
Pinging Zach in WMF Communications to ask for comment about branding in general, and Wikipedia vs Wikimedia in particular.

Pine


On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 10:57 AM, C. Scott Ananian <[hidden email]> wrote:
I apologize if this is a bit of a hand grenade in the discussion, but:

If we are really concerned with third parties understanding what our conference is about, we should really use "Wikipedia" in the title and avoid the use of "Wikimedia".  The general public really has no clue what Wikimedia means.  If you just use "Wiki-" they think "Wikileaks".  That's just the place we are at right now.

I have no idea how to concisely include all the "Wikimedia projects" and still mention "Wikipedia" in the title... which suggests perhaps that Ed's version ("Wikimania: the global wikipedia summit") or whatever subtitle Lodewijk used isn't too far off.

I suspect that it's just plain hard to come up with a short name which captures the entire intended scope of the conference (the "Wikipedia and Related Projects Conference"?), and so a short name that tries instead of capture the "fun" aspect (which is what -mania connotes to most of us) is a reasonable alternative.
  --scott

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Andrew Lih <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi all,

- The Wikimania Committee with Ellie Young would be the most likely entity that could facilitate a process if we wanted to consider a name change. Full disclosure: I’m on the committee, but it may be getting a revamp in the near future.

- We tend to not like voting on anything like this, especially since we don’t have very good findings of fact, or even a good sampling of anecdotes around the name.

-Andrew


-Andrew Lih
Associate professor of journalism, American University
Email: [hidden email]
WEB: http://www.andrewlih.com
BOOK: The Wikipedia Revolution: http://www.wikipediarevolution.com
PROJECT: Wiki Makes Video http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wiki_Makes_Video

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Béria Lima <[hidden email]> wrote:
Now the 1 million dollar (...) question: to whom do we address the task of eventually solving this?

​Well, might not be the easiest answer, but: Why not run a vote?

Have some period of "submissions of name", and an after vote open to all community on it (with bots, sitenotice and etc to advertise it.) and let the community decide.
_____
Béria L
​. de Rodríguez


Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a construir esse sonho.

2016-11-07 12:08 GMT-02:00 Luca Martinelli <[hidden email]>:

OK, now this is more of an argument I can consider as compelling.

​​
Now the 1 million dollar/euro/pound/yen/yuan/rupee/peso/shekel/$you_name_it question (which unsurprisingly Asaf already posed): to whom do we address the task of eventually solving this?

L.


Il 07 nov 2016 15:05, "Edward Saperia" <[hidden email]> ha scritto:
Agree with Andrew - when I was organising it in 2014 I usually called it "The Global Wikipedia Summit" because Wikimania doesn't sound important.
 
2. On first glance, the name isn’t very professional sounding. So it may be hard to convince one’s boss or academic head to fund travel or time off to attend the premier conference for the Wikimedia community.


On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Gordon Joly <[hidden email]> wrote:


Is it proper and correct to use the term "mania"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mania

Would we say "WikiMad" or WikiCrazy"?

Gordo

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


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



_______________________________________________
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



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

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

Isaac Olatunde
One might argue that Wikimedia is more appropriate considering the fact that the conference is not only about Wikipedia but the truth is, non-Wikipedians (my employer for example) have no idea of what Wikimedia means. Thus, it would be more appropriate to use a title known to the general public.

Best,

Isaac
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless handheld from Glo Mobile.

-----Original Message-----
From: Pine W <[hidden email]>
Sender: "Wikimania-l" <[hidden email]>Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 11:00:26
To: Wikimania general list (open subscription)<[hidden email]>; Zachary McCune<[hidden email]>
Reply-To: "Wikimania general list \(open subscription\)"
 <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [Wikimania-l] Wiki (not) Mania?

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

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

Federico Leva (Nemo)
Olatunde Isaac, 07/11/2016 21:47:
> Thus, it would be more appropriate to use a title known to the general public.

Like... a title that contains "wiki" plus some other catchy suffix? ;-)

Nemo

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

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

Isaac Olatunde
Perhaps something like "WikiConference 2017".

Best,

Isaac

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 10:13 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <[hidden email]> wrote:
Olatunde Isaac, 07/11/2016 21:47:
Thus, it would be more appropriate to use a title known to the general public.

Like... a title that contains "wiki" plus some other catchy suffix? ;-)

Nemo


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

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

C. Scott Ananian
Again, "Wiki" means "wikileaks" to many folks these days.  "Wikiconference" isn't enough to distinguish wikipedia from wikileaks.   And there are plenty of examples of wiki software other than mediawiki...

If we're going to change the name (or add an official subtitle), IMNSHO "Wikipedia" needs to be somewhere in there, spelled out in full.  That's what we're most known for.
  --scott

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 4:23 PM, olatunde olalekan isaac <[hidden email]> wrote:
Perhaps something like "WikiConference 2017".

Best,

Isaac

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 10:13 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <[hidden email]> wrote:
Olatunde Isaac, 07/11/2016 21:47:
Thus, it would be more appropriate to use a title known to the general public.

Like... a title that contains "wiki" plus some other catchy suffix? ;-)

Nemo


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




--

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

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

Gnangarra
To quote C. Scott Ananian
I have no idea how to concisely include all the "Wikimedia projects" and still mention "Wikipedia" in the title... which suggests perhaps that Ed's version ("Wikimania: the global wikipedia summit") or whatever subtitle Lodewijk used isn't too far off.

maybe we are missing the target altogether, Wikipedia is our most identifiable brand, its what started the whole game and every other project in someway supports it. The bulk of all talks at Wikimanias are focused on Wikipedia activity.  It could it be that when talk about reducing the size of Wikimania we could look in an alternative direction and focus on individual projects, the hack-a-thon has become a separate identity already, wikisource has held it own. This isnt saying that the conference wouldnt cover or cater for other projects as it already does but it would give us something broader to sell to the sponsors, venues etc by calling it the Wikipedia Conference it could then focus on the 300 languages, the work in the incubator, it would also create a greater immediate impact externally and encourage more people to come learn more and get involved, it'd be sellable to GLAM and media alike... Every one would have the ability to focus on the local language as a key platform

The Wikimedia Conference could then remain maybe even be expanded to enable more attendees focused as it already is on the movement

A Commons conference would be media based looking more at copyright, personality rights even equipment which would open us to whole new world of sponsors  Imagine the people who could be a Key note speaker at a Commons conference that would otherwise bore the pants off every other attendee at a Wikimania. 

each and every conference would run at its own rate annually, bi-annually, even one in four years choose locations that suit its own aims with scholarships for those that the community would really benefit from attending 

Every conference would have cross over streams as no one project is isolated from any other, it would expand the focus and diverisfy the funding/sponsorship opportunities while addressing some of the key issues about the size of Wikimania, the way some sections of the community are lost and allow greater return on the brand identities of each project.  

On 8 November 2016 at 07:04, C. Scott Ananian <[hidden email]> wrote:
Again, "Wiki" means "wikileaks" to many folks these days.  "Wikiconference" isn't enough to distinguish wikipedia from wikileaks.   And there are plenty of examples of wiki software other than mediawiki...

If we're going to change the name (or add an official subtitle), IMNSHO "Wikipedia" needs to be somewhere in there, spelled out in full.  That's what we're most known for.
  --scott

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 4:23 PM, olatunde olalekan isaac <[hidden email]> wrote:
Perhaps something like "WikiConference 2017".

Best,

Isaac

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 10:13 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <[hidden email]> wrote:
Olatunde Isaac, 07/11/2016 21:47:
Thus, it would be more appropriate to use a title known to the general public.

Like... a title that contains "wiki" plus some other catchy suffix? ;-)

Nemo


_______________________________________________
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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

Hélène Pedrosa-Masson-3

Hello!

I would be very sad if Wikimania was to become only a Wikipedia Conference. I enjoyed the 2 Wikimanias I went to, because I could hear about different projects and imagine interactions between them. I think that Wikimedia projects can thrieve with help of the others and hope that we won't build more barriers betwen them as there already are!

As for the name, "Wikimania" doesn't seem offensive to me, but English is not my maternal language (French is). Perhaps it isn't descriptive enough for outsiders, but do we really want a lot of non-wikimedians at Wikimania? I presume this will be one of the questions that are to be discussed concerning Wikimania's future and goals.

Best regards,

--

Edhral


Le 08/11/2016 à 01:07, Gnangarra a écrit :
To quote C. Scott Ananian
I have no idea how to concisely include all the "Wikimedia projects" and still mention "Wikipedia" in the title... which suggests perhaps that Ed's version ("Wikimania: the global wikipedia summit") or whatever subtitle Lodewijk used isn't too far off.

maybe we are missing the target altogether, Wikipedia is our most identifiable brand, its what started the whole game and every other project in someway supports it. The bulk of all talks at Wikimanias are focused on Wikipedia activity.  It could it be that when talk about reducing the size of Wikimania we could look in an alternative direction and focus on individual projects, the hack-a-thon has become a separate identity already, wikisource has held it own. This isnt saying that the conference wouldnt cover or cater for other projects as it already does but it would give us something broader to sell to the sponsors, venues etc by calling it the Wikipedia Conference it could then focus on the 300 languages, the work in the incubator, it would also create a greater immediate impact externally and encourage more people to come learn more and get involved, it'd be sellable to GLAM and media alike... Every one would have the ability to focus on the local language as a key platform

The Wikimedia Conference could then remain maybe even be expanded to enable more attendees focused as it already is on the movement

A Commons conference would be media based looking more at copyright, personality rights even equipment which would open us to whole new world of sponsors  Imagine the people who could be a Key note speaker at a Commons conference that would otherwise bore the pants off every other attendee at a Wikimania. 

each and every conference would run at its own rate annually, bi-annually, even one in four years choose locations that suit its own aims with scholarships for those that the community would really benefit from attending 

Every conference would have cross over streams as no one project is isolated from any other, it would expand the focus and diverisfy the funding/sponsorship opportunities while addressing some of the key issues about the size of Wikimania, the way some sections of the community are lost and allow greater return on the brand identities of each project.  



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

Re: Wiki (not) Mania?

Andrew Lih-2
In reply to this post by Gnangarra
GN,

While I understand where you are coming from (ie. Wikipedia as the more recognizable name to the public) it would seem to be a poor time to portray the gathering as just Wikipedia-centric, especially with the rise of Wikidata as a major force in more things we are doing, such as Wikimedia Commons.

The best solution may be somewhere in the middle, where conference adopts a subtitle that includes “Wikipedia” prominently, in order to make it more SEO friendly. 

-Andrew


-Andrew Lih
Associate professor of journalism, American University
Email: [hidden email]
WEB: http://www.andrewlih.com
BOOK: The Wikipedia Revolution: http://www.wikipediarevolution.com
PROJECT: Wiki Makes Video http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wiki_Makes_Video

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Gnangarra <[hidden email]> wrote:
To quote C. Scott Ananian
I have no idea how to concisely include all the "Wikimedia projects" and still mention "Wikipedia" in the title... which suggests perhaps that Ed's version ("Wikimania: the global wikipedia summit") or whatever subtitle Lodewijk used isn't too far off.

maybe we are missing the target altogether, Wikipedia is our most identifiable brand, its what started the whole game and every other project in someway supports it. The bulk of all talks at Wikimanias are focused on Wikipedia activity.  It could it be that when talk about reducing the size of Wikimania we could look in an alternative direction and focus on individual projects, the hack-a-thon has become a separate identity already, wikisource has held it own. This isnt saying that the conference wouldnt cover or cater for other projects as it already does but it would give us something broader to sell to the sponsors, venues etc by calling it the Wikipedia Conference it could then focus on the 300 languages, the work in the incubator, it would also create a greater immediate impact externally and encourage more people to come learn more and get involved, it'd be sellable to GLAM and media alike... Every one would have the ability to focus on the local language as a key platform

The Wikimedia Conference could then remain maybe even be expanded to enable more attendees focused as it already is on the movement

A Commons conference would be media based looking more at copyright, personality rights even equipment which would open us to whole new world of sponsors  Imagine the people who could be a Key note speaker at a Commons conference that would otherwise bore the pants off every other attendee at a Wikimania. 

each and every conference would run at its own rate annually, bi-annually, even one in four years choose locations that suit its own aims with scholarships for those that the community would really benefit from attending 

Every conference would have cross over streams as no one project is isolated from any other, it would expand the focus and diverisfy the funding/sponsorship opportunities while addressing some of the key issues about the size of Wikimania, the way some sections of the community are lost and allow greater return on the brand identities of each project.  

On 8 November 2016 at 07:04, C. Scott Ananian <[hidden email]> wrote:
Again, "Wiki" means "wikileaks" to many folks these days.  "Wikiconference" isn't enough to distinguish wikipedia from wikileaks.   And there are plenty of examples of wiki software other than mediawiki...

If we're going to change the name (or add an official subtitle), IMNSHO "Wikipedia" needs to be somewhere in there, spelled out in full.  That's what we're most known for.
  --scott

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 4:23 PM, olatunde olalekan isaac <[hidden email]> wrote:
Perhaps something like "WikiConference 2017".

Best,

Isaac

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 10:13 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <[hidden email]> wrote:
Olatunde Isaac, 07/11/2016 21:47:
Thus, it would be more appropriate to use a title known to the general public.

Like... a title that contains "wiki" plus some other catchy suffix? ;-)

Nemo


_______________________________________________
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
123