Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason
Thanks for the details Siko! Going back to the original message in this thread - I would indeed be concerned if the WMF was shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no good reason. However that's not really what's happening. It's more that non-urgent grantmaking is being postponed; and there is a good rationale for it (one more about wanting to experiment with grantmaking styles, than about the gender gap being a special case). Makes sense to me. Chris On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:59 AM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: Actually, the experiment is whether such a campaign would drive more successful grants, as I understand it. It works from the assumption that such grants would have a positive impact. I'm happy to go with that assumption though. I still strongly disagree with this initiative, but especially the way it is executed. I'm glad to hear that all time-sensitive requests can still apply during this period - that would probably be quite a few requests. I'm still in the dark as to why this has to be a three month program (that is a very long period of time to put everything on hold for an experiment) and not just 2-4 weeks. Then you could actually commit to quicker run-through times in the program, etc. Reducing the time frame would reduce the damaging side effect significantly. Lodewijk On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net wrote: Did you not see the bit about experimental? Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Bjoern Hoehrmann Sent: 06 January 2015 05:48 AM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason * Siko Bouterse wrote: Why the gender gap? Although we’ve committed to supporting and increasing gender diversity, so far these kinds of projects haven’t emerged organically at any meaningful scale. In the first half of this year, IEG and PEG have spent only 9% of funds on projects aiming to directly impact this gap and less than ? of our grantee project leaders have been women. Without taking time to focus on increasing gender diversity in our content and contributors, this trend is likely to continue. What evidence is there that spending more on gender gap will have any measurable impact on gender gap? I also note that you say projects have not emerged. That sounds like people do not actually have ideas how to impact gender gap with money. Could you identify a couple of projects that would have considerable impact on gender gap but that have been refused funding in the past due to a lack of focus on gen- der gap? -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjo...@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de D-10243 Berlin · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de Available for hire in Berlin (early 2015) · http://www.websitedev.de/ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2015.0.5577 / Virus Database: 4257/8874 - Release Date: 01/05/15 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason
Thanks Siko, also from me. I do hope that you use this time to really learn of the dynamics of grants/impact, by following up of earlier experience and also in defining expectations targets etc in a specific area For me an eyeopener was a program run in Sweden by WMSE to get more female contributors. It was funded from outside WMF and primary involved workshops for Wikipedia writing, in a form we are all familiar with. The workshops was run in different middlesized towns and got a very limited attendance, 3-15 persons, whereof only a tiny fraction stayed on as Wikipedians after the workshop. I got annoyed at first noticing it cost something like 100-200 dollar per participant, and 20 times as much to get the one among them who stayed on but only making some 50-100 edits. I saw it as a truly waste of money (not WMF though). But then I learned that those activities attracted more media attention than any other program having been run by WMSE, there must now be between 30-50 coverages in local and nationwide papers and radio stations. And the funding body saw this as a thundering success, and has given even more funding for a second year. And then something happened as a result from this media coverage, more female editors has now a year later turned up! Anders Chris Keating skrev den 2015-01-06 10:53: Thanks for the details Siko! Going back to the original message in this thread - I would indeed be concerned if the WMF was shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no good reason. However that's not really what's happening. It's more that non-urgent grantmaking is being postponed; and there is a good rationale for it (one more about wanting to experiment with grantmaking styles, than about the gender gap being a special case). Makes sense to me. Chris On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:59 AM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: Actually, the experiment is whether such a campaign would drive more successful grants, as I understand it. It works from the assumption that such grants would have a positive impact. I'm happy to go with that assumption though. I still strongly disagree with this initiative, but especially the way it is executed. I'm glad to hear that all time-sensitive requests can still apply during this period - that would probably be quite a few requests. I'm still in the dark as to why this has to be a three month program (that is a very long period of time to put everything on hold for an experiment) and not just 2-4 weeks. Then you could actually commit to quicker run-through times in the program, etc. Reducing the time frame would reduce the damaging side effect significantly. Lodewijk On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net wrote: Did you not see the bit about experimental? Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Bjoern Hoehrmann Sent: 06 January 2015 05:48 AM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason * Siko Bouterse wrote: Why the gender gap? Although we’ve committed to supporting and increasing gender diversity, so far these kinds of projects haven’t emerged organically at any meaningful scale. In the first half of this year, IEG and PEG have spent only 9% of funds on projects aiming to directly impact this gap and less than ? of our grantee project leaders have been women. Without taking time to focus on increasing gender diversity in our content and contributors, this trend is likely to continue. What evidence is there that spending more on gender gap will have any measurable impact on gender gap? I also note that you say projects have not emerged. That sounds like people do not actually have ideas how to impact gender gap with money. Could you identify a couple of projects that would have considerable impact on gender gap but that have been refused funding in the past due to a lack of focus on gen- der gap? -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjo...@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de D-10243 Berlin · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de Available for hire in Berlin (early 2015) · http://www.websitedev.de/ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2015.0.5577 / Virus Database: 4257/8874 - Release Date: 01/05/15 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason
At the opposite I consider that the limited time cannot produce long-time effect, it's not rare that some good grants proceed to submit a second phase to have a larger impact. The best would be to check afterwards the impact of the solution of promotion of a specific area and a specific topic. A program needs longer support, this is also the lesson learned by WLM (the discussion is started because the WLM team considers that few months cannot support a bigger program). The grantmaking team is doing what the WLM team did some years ago: supporting a specific topic. WLM has been successful, probably would have created a lesser impact if someone suggested to reduce the organization of the event to 2-4 weeks. Anyway the best is to check the feedback from the community in terms of projects submitted to the grantmaking team. There is no reason at the moment to say that there will be damaging effects. If there are a bad results, the best wold be to analyze the reasons and to proceed to learn a lesson and to check what can be set to have a better process. At the moment the experiemnt is focused to give more opportunities to a specific area, I don't see nothing strange on that. Regards On 06.01.2015 07:59, Lodewijk wrote: I'm still in the dark as to why this has to be a three month program (that is a very long period of time to put everything on hold for an experiment) and not just 2-4 weeks. Then you could actually commit to quicker run-through times in the program, etc. Reducing the time frame would reduce the damaging side effect significantly. Lodewijk -- Ilario Valdelli Wikimedia CH Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera Switzerland - 8008 Zürich Tel: +41764821371 http://www.wikimedia.ch ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Is there some Wikimedia project to host contents based on original research?
On 2015-01-05 14:56, Andrea Zanni wrote: IMHO, this issue will get bigger and bigger over the years, and there could be room for another Wikimedia project that would allow open access, collaborative peer review and editing of original research. It could be a sort of new environment between academic publishing and Wikipedia (which now are quite distant for several reasons). Aubrey Whereas there might be some materials which are best hosted at this (not yet in existence) Wikiproject, I am afraid it has a lot of potential to attract conspiracy theorists and all king of adepts of marginal views, so that I am not sure such project should be created (or at least not under the umbrella of WMF). Cheers Yaroslav ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason
Hi Anders, my 2 cents. A project has a budget, this budget can be financed externally but there are some countries which have more opportunities than others. In addition (it's my personal point of view) the external funding introduces a bigger complexity to the projects in terms of management of sponsors and external funders (matching the strategies of WMF and to apply for WMF funds is not the same to find a compromise with the strategies and the accountability of the external funders). In my opinion the external funds generate the request to have some additional skills in the team of the project and probably longer time to setup the project. In the other hand it would be easier to find external funds if a program/project has already generated some good results. In your example you say that the second year the project received more funds, but you have been lucky to find someone trusting on you the first year. For this reason I can apply your example more to WLM than to gender gap because WLM has already a well established history and very good results to attract external funds, instead of some other new projects requiring to be incubated more. Regards On 06.01.2015 11:37, Anders Wennersten wrote: Thanks Siko, also from me. I do hope that you use this time to really learn of the dynamics of grants/impact, by following up of earlier experience and also in defining expectations targets etc in a specific area For me an eyeopener was a program run in Sweden by WMSE to get more female contributors. It was funded from outside WMF and primary involved workshops for Wikipedia writing, in a form we are all familiar with. The workshops was run in different middlesized towns and got a very limited attendance, 3-15 persons, whereof only a tiny fraction stayed on as Wikipedians after the workshop. I got annoyed at first noticing it cost something like 100-200 dollar per participant, and 20 times as much to get the one among them who stayed on but only making some 50-100 edits. I saw it as a truly waste of money (not WMF though). But then I learned that those activities attracted more media attention than any other program having been run by WMSE, there must now be between 30-50 coverages in local and nationwide papers and radio stations. And the funding body saw this as a thundering success, and has given even more funding for a second year. And then something happened as a result from this media coverage, more female editors has now a year later turned up! Anders -- Ilario Valdelli Wikimedia CH Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera Switzerland - 8008 Zürich Tel: +41764821371 http://www.wikimedia.ch ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason
Ilario, My point is rather that while WLM has a clear-cut dynamic, put in resources-get photos in Commons, I believe that in the area of gender-gap the dynamic could be more complex (as in my example). And if WMF only want to see a direct link between effort and impact, they could miss out other dynamics. And in my example I think the funding body never even asked it the number of female editors in Wikipedia increased, for them the media coverage was a more concrete and satisfying result (I wonder if this would be true for WMF grantmaking?) Anders Ilario Valdelli skrev den 2015-01-06 12:00: Hi Anders, my 2 cents. A project has a budget, this budget can be financed externally but there are some countries which have more opportunities than others. In addition (it's my personal point of view) the external funding introduces a bigger complexity to the projects in terms of management of sponsors and external funders (matching the strategies of WMF and to apply for WMF funds is not the same to find a compromise with the strategies and the accountability of the external funders). In my opinion the external funds generate the request to have some additional skills in the team of the project and probably longer time to setup the project. In the other hand it would be easier to find external funds if a program/project has already generated some good results. In your example you say that the second year the project received more funds, but you have been lucky to find someone trusting on you the first year. For this reason I can apply your example more to WLM than to gender gap because WLM has already a well established history and very good results to attract external funds, instead of some other new projects requiring to be incubated more. Regards On 06.01.2015 11:37, Anders Wennersten wrote: Thanks Siko, also from me. I do hope that you use this time to really learn of the dynamics of grants/impact, by following up of earlier experience and also in defining expectations targets etc in a specific area For me an eyeopener was a program run in Sweden by WMSE to get more female contributors. It was funded from outside WMF and primary involved workshops for Wikipedia writing, in a form we are all familiar with. The workshops was run in different middlesized towns and got a very limited attendance, 3-15 persons, whereof only a tiny fraction stayed on as Wikipedians after the workshop. I got annoyed at first noticing it cost something like 100-200 dollar per participant, and 20 times as much to get the one among them who stayed on but only making some 50-100 edits. I saw it as a truly waste of money (not WMF though). But then I learned that those activities attracted more media attention than any other program having been run by WMSE, there must now be between 30-50 coverages in local and nationwide papers and radio stations. And the funding body saw this as a thundering success, and has given even more funding for a second year. And then something happened as a result from this media coverage, more female editors has now a year later turned up! Anders ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason
It's also my point considering that to get external funds probably a team (like WLM) can bu pushed to find a stronger impact outside Wikimedia movement in order to get more external funds. The Gender gap has a stronger potentiality because is more flexible to be adapted to external funds, but my expectation is that the teams submitting the request of grants can also learn the ability to setup a good project and good reports and to reach a maturity consisting in the capacity to design interesting projects for external funds (also for the global South). Basically to build a best practice in these terms: someting that enable organizations to deliver benefits, return on investment, and value on investment through a sustained approach (ITIL definition). In my opinion the experience of WM SWE can become a best practice but for mature teams. regards On 06.01.2015 12:26, Anders Wennersten wrote: Ilario, My point is rather that while WLM has a clear-cut dynamic, put in resources-get photos in Commons, I believe that in the area of gender-gap the dynamic could be more complex (as in my example). And if WMF only want to see a direct link between effort and impact, they could miss out other dynamics. And in my example I think the funding body never even asked it the number of female editors in Wikipedia increased, for them the media coverage was a more concrete and satisfying result (I wonder if this would be true for WMF grantmaking?) Anders -- Ilario Valdelli Wikimedia CH Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera Switzerland - 8008 Zürich Tel: +41764821371 http://www.wikimedia.ch ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason
Anders Wennersten, 06/01/2015 12:26: I believe that in the area of gender-gap the dynamic could be more complex (as in my example). And if WMF only want to see a direct link between effort and impact, they could miss out other dynamics. I think this is always a good point to remind ourselves, thanks for your example (and self-criticism). Nemo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason
Sorry if this was already answered and I overlooked it, but will there be something like a special form of advertising this campaign in order to attract many requests that propose to do something about the Gender Gap? 2015-01-06 21:11 GMT+01:00 Siko Bouterse sboute...@wikimedia.org: On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 2:37 AM, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: Thanks Siko, also from me. I do hope that you use this time to really learn of the dynamics of grants/impact, by following up of earlier experience and also in defining expectations targets etc in a specific area For me an eyeopener was a program run in Sweden by WMSE to get more female contributors. It was funded from outside WMF and primary involved workshops for Wikipedia writing, in a form we are all familiar with. The workshops was run in different middlesized towns and got a very limited attendance, 3-15 persons, whereof only a tiny fraction stayed on as Wikipedians after the workshop. I got annoyed at first noticing it cost something like 100-200 dollar per participant, and 20 times as much to get the one among them who stayed on but only making some 50-100 edits. I saw it as a truly waste of money (not WMF though). But then I learned that those activities attracted more media attention than any other program having been run by WMSE, there must now be between 30-50 coverages in local and nationwide papers and radio stations. And the funding body saw this as a thundering success, and has given even more funding for a second year. And then something happened as a result from this media coverage, more female editors has now a year later turned up! Anders Thanks for sharing this example, Anders. We're definitely going to learn a lot from this experiment, as I am from this discussion, and will be sharing back findings too :) Your point about media interest as well as longer term impact is super important. While we do need to be able to demonstrate some short-term impact, I also think that for many of the grants we make the impact can really only seen much more clearly in the longer term. So following up well after the pilot is over will also be important. I don't usually think that media coverage alone = thundering success (like you, I'd probably have been disappointed at first with the early outcomes you mentioned). But I do see that one possible outcome for campaigns like this is increased media coverage which in turn could result in longer term impact by bringing in more people to the projects. Will be on the lookout for this - glad you mentioned it! Siko Chris Keating skrev den 2015-01-06 10:53: Thanks for the details Siko! Going back to the original message in this thread - I would indeed be concerned if the WMF was shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no good reason. However that's not really what's happening. It's more that non-urgent grantmaking is being postponed; and there is a good rationale for it (one more about wanting to experiment with grantmaking styles, than about the gender gap being a special case). Makes sense to me. Chris On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:59 AM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: Actually, the experiment is whether such a campaign would drive more successful grants, as I understand it. It works from the assumption that such grants would have a positive impact. I'm happy to go with that assumption though. I still strongly disagree with this initiative, but especially the way it is executed. I'm glad to hear that all time-sensitive requests can still apply during this period - that would probably be quite a few requests. I'm still in the dark as to why this has to be a three month program (that is a very long period of time to put everything on hold for an experiment) and not just 2-4 weeks. Then you could actually commit to quicker run-through times in the program, etc. Reducing the time frame would reduce the damaging side effect significantly. Lodewijk On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net wrote: Did you not see the bit about experimental? Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Bjoern Hoehrmann Sent: 06 January 2015 05:48 AM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason * Siko Bouterse wrote: Why the gender gap? Although we’ve committed to supporting and increasing gender diversity, so far these kinds of projects haven’t emerged organically at any meaningful scale. In the first half of this year, IEG and PEG have spent only 9% of funds on projects aiming to directly impact this gap and less than ? of our grantee project
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 10:59 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: Actually, the experiment is whether such a campaign would drive more successful grants, as I understand it. It works from the assumption that such grants would have a positive impact. I'm happy to go with that assumption though. I still strongly disagree with this initiative, but especially the way it is executed. I'm glad to hear that all time-sensitive requests can still apply during this period - that would probably be quite a few requests. I'm still in the dark as to why this has to be a three month program (that is a very long period of time to put everything on hold for an experiment) and not just 2-4 weeks. Then you could actually commit to quicker run-through times in the program, etc. Reducing the time frame would reduce the damaging side effect significantly. The campaign itself will only run for a month - in my experience with past open calls for IEG, you really do need more than 2 weeks to get the word out and get new ideas not only started but also developed w/ enough community input that we rely on to assess which grants should move forward. But in addition to the actual campaign itself, we need to bake in enough time to prepare for it beforehand and get funded projects started afterwards. There is significant staff effort behind the scenes for any grantmaking we do, and in my experience even quick pilots take time to prep and wrapup. I'm hearing your concerns loud and clear, still, and agree it will be interesting to see how many truly time-sensitive requests will come up during this period. If the campaign is deemed a success worth repeating and we also find we're over-stretching those involved (staff and volunteers) because many non-theme focused projects need to be concurrently considered (this is a big concern for me, and something we'll be keeping a close eye on), that could be data-driven rationale for resourcing grantmaking differently in next year's annual plan. Siko Lodewijk On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net wrote: Did you not see the bit about experimental? Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Bjoern Hoehrmann Sent: 06 January 2015 05:48 AM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason * Siko Bouterse wrote: Why the gender gap? Although we’ve committed to supporting and increasing gender diversity, so far these kinds of projects haven’t emerged organically at any meaningful scale. In the first half of this year, IEG and PEG have spent only 9% of funds on projects aiming to directly impact this gap and less than ? of our grantee project leaders have been women. Without taking time to focus on increasing gender diversity in our content and contributors, this trend is likely to continue. What evidence is there that spending more on gender gap will have any measurable impact on gender gap? I also note that you say projects have not emerged. That sounds like people do not actually have ideas how to impact gender gap with money. Could you identify a couple of projects that would have considerable impact on gender gap but that have been refused funding in the past due to a lack of focus on gen- der gap? -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjo...@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de D-10243 Berlin · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de Available for hire in Berlin (early 2015) · http://www.websitedev.de/ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2015.0.5577 / Virus Database: 4257/8874 - Release Date: 01/05/15 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Siko Bouterse Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. sboute...@wikimedia.org *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 2:37 AM, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: Thanks Siko, also from me. I do hope that you use this time to really learn of the dynamics of grants/impact, by following up of earlier experience and also in defining expectations targets etc in a specific area For me an eyeopener was a program run in Sweden by WMSE to get more female contributors. It was funded from outside WMF and primary involved workshops for Wikipedia writing, in a form we are all familiar with. The workshops was run in different middlesized towns and got a very limited attendance, 3-15 persons, whereof only a tiny fraction stayed on as Wikipedians after the workshop. I got annoyed at first noticing it cost something like 100-200 dollar per participant, and 20 times as much to get the one among them who stayed on but only making some 50-100 edits. I saw it as a truly waste of money (not WMF though). But then I learned that those activities attracted more media attention than any other program having been run by WMSE, there must now be between 30-50 coverages in local and nationwide papers and radio stations. And the funding body saw this as a thundering success, and has given even more funding for a second year. And then something happened as a result from this media coverage, more female editors has now a year later turned up! Anders Thanks for sharing this example, Anders. We're definitely going to learn a lot from this experiment, as I am from this discussion, and will be sharing back findings too :) Your point about media interest as well as longer term impact is super important. While we do need to be able to demonstrate some short-term impact, I also think that for many of the grants we make the impact can really only seen much more clearly in the longer term. So following up well after the pilot is over will also be important. I don't usually think that media coverage alone = thundering success (like you, I'd probably have been disappointed at first with the early outcomes you mentioned). But I do see that one possible outcome for campaigns like this is increased media coverage which in turn could result in longer term impact by bringing in more people to the projects. Will be on the lookout for this - glad you mentioned it! Siko Chris Keating skrev den 2015-01-06 10:53: Thanks for the details Siko! Going back to the original message in this thread - I would indeed be concerned if the WMF was shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no good reason. However that's not really what's happening. It's more that non-urgent grantmaking is being postponed; and there is a good rationale for it (one more about wanting to experiment with grantmaking styles, than about the gender gap being a special case). Makes sense to me. Chris On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:59 AM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: Actually, the experiment is whether such a campaign would drive more successful grants, as I understand it. It works from the assumption that such grants would have a positive impact. I'm happy to go with that assumption though. I still strongly disagree with this initiative, but especially the way it is executed. I'm glad to hear that all time-sensitive requests can still apply during this period - that would probably be quite a few requests. I'm still in the dark as to why this has to be a three month program (that is a very long period of time to put everything on hold for an experiment) and not just 2-4 weeks. Then you could actually commit to quicker run-through times in the program, etc. Reducing the time frame would reduce the damaging side effect significantly. Lodewijk On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:47 AM, Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net wrote: Did you not see the bit about experimental? Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Bjoern Hoehrmann Sent: 06 January 2015 05:48 AM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason * Siko Bouterse wrote: Why the gender gap? Although we’ve committed to supporting and increasing gender diversity, so far these kinds of projects haven’t emerged organically at any meaningful scale. In the first half of this year, IEG and PEG have spent only 9% of funds on projects aiming to directly impact this gap and less than ? of our grantee project leaders have been women. Without taking time to focus on increasing gender diversity in our content and contributors, this trend is likely to continue. What evidence is there that spending more on gender gap will have any measurable impact on gender gap? I also note that you say projects have not emerged. That sounds like people do not actually have ideas how to impact gender gap with money.
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF is shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no reason
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 12:17 PM, MF-Warburg mfwarb...@googlemail.com wrote: Sorry if this was already answered and I overlooked it, but will there be something like a special form of advertising this campaign in order to attract many requests that propose to do something about the Gender Gap? Great question. Current thinking is to do the usual announcing on mailing lists, blog/social media, village pumps, etc, as well as experimenting with running Central Notice banners. Would like to attract folks from various wikis who have interest in this theme and ability to lead a project in their community, beyond the usual (relatively small) slice who regularly participate in lists like these or in the usual grantmaking discussions on meta-wiki. And although outside media could help bring total newbies to contribute ideas, discussion, and other forms of participation, it is pretty darn important to have at least 1 experienced Wikimedian on a funded team in order to lead and execute a useful community project, so in-movement (particularly on-wiki) promotion is a priority. Any thoughts/suggestions would be welcome! 2015-01-06 21:11 GMT+01:00 Siko Bouterse sboute...@wikimedia.org: On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 2:37 AM, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: Thanks Siko, also from me. I do hope that you use this time to really learn of the dynamics of grants/impact, by following up of earlier experience and also in defining expectations targets etc in a specific area For me an eyeopener was a program run in Sweden by WMSE to get more female contributors. It was funded from outside WMF and primary involved workshops for Wikipedia writing, in a form we are all familiar with. The workshops was run in different middlesized towns and got a very limited attendance, 3-15 persons, whereof only a tiny fraction stayed on as Wikipedians after the workshop. I got annoyed at first noticing it cost something like 100-200 dollar per participant, and 20 times as much to get the one among them who stayed on but only making some 50-100 edits. I saw it as a truly waste of money (not WMF though). But then I learned that those activities attracted more media attention than any other program having been run by WMSE, there must now be between 30-50 coverages in local and nationwide papers and radio stations. And the funding body saw this as a thundering success, and has given even more funding for a second year. And then something happened as a result from this media coverage, more female editors has now a year later turned up! Anders Thanks for sharing this example, Anders. We're definitely going to learn a lot from this experiment, as I am from this discussion, and will be sharing back findings too :) Your point about media interest as well as longer term impact is super important. While we do need to be able to demonstrate some short-term impact, I also think that for many of the grants we make the impact can really only seen much more clearly in the longer term. So following up well after the pilot is over will also be important. I don't usually think that media coverage alone = thundering success (like you, I'd probably have been disappointed at first with the early outcomes you mentioned). But I do see that one possible outcome for campaigns like this is increased media coverage which in turn could result in longer term impact by bringing in more people to the projects. Will be on the lookout for this - glad you mentioned it! Siko Chris Keating skrev den 2015-01-06 10:53: Thanks for the details Siko! Going back to the original message in this thread - I would indeed be concerned if the WMF was shutting down grantmaking for good projects for 3 months for no good reason. However that's not really what's happening. It's more that non-urgent grantmaking is being postponed; and there is a good rationale for it (one more about wanting to experiment with grantmaking styles, than about the gender gap being a special case). Makes sense to me. Chris On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:59 AM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: Actually, the experiment is whether such a campaign would drive more successful grants, as I understand it. It works from the assumption that such grants would have a positive impact. I'm happy to go with that assumption though. I still strongly disagree with this initiative, but especially the way it is executed. I'm glad to hear that all time-sensitive requests can still apply during this period - that would probably be quite a few requests. I'm still in the dark as to why this has to be a three month program (that is a very long period of time to put everything on hold for an experiment) and not just 2-4 weeks. Then you could actually
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why is bank transfer no longer possible?
Patricia Pena, 06/01/2015 19:32: worked with our bank to improve the security and fraud protection of our bank accounts so that we can now disclose the bank account information on our donation pages. Great! Can these important security tips/steps be documented on a Meta-Wiki page, so that other affiliates can ensure their security as well? Nemo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] Looking for new Signpost editors-in-chief
Dear Wikimedia community, The deadline set for new editor-in-chief applications is fast approaching. As I said two weeks ago:[1] Why should you apply? First, you will have established contributors who are currently producing consistently stellar work, thus making your initial learning curve far smaller. Second, it is an area far different than Wikipedia itself; writers at the Signpost frequently use and develop a different range of skills such as editorial judgment and journalistic tenacity. Third, the personal reporting you want to do is wide open. With News and notes having been on an extended hiatus, you are free to take it in the direction you want, but you will not have to fight to get readers—you will have thousands from the very beginning. Do you want to bring valuable content contributions to light? Do you want to examine arcane financial details of the Wikimedia Foundation and its affiliates? Do you want to investigate sockpuppet armies and their effects? Do you want to be the hub for fostering innovative ideas that will keep Wikipedia relevant for decades to come? The limit, quite literally, is your imagination. Please send an email to this address (wikipediasignp...@gmail.com) to indicate your interest. I would like to find two individuals so that the overall time commitment is smaller. I look forward to hearing from you. Regards, --The ed17, Signpost editor-in-chief http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-12-24/From_the_editor ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] Is there some Wikimedia project to host contents based on original research? [Davenport]
My suggestion to Sucheta would be to start a website dedicated to the mission, to first publish there with appropriate free licensing, and to gradually port over material from there to WP on an topic-by-topic basis, assuming there is also scholarly literature on the topics being covered. It would also help to submit this documentary and historical website to scholarly review to better establish the work done there as academically reliable. Many of the academic journals include a website reviews section in the book reviews section these days. In short: first go off-wiki to systematize and write. Then document your work as reliable. Then integrate your work with the scholarly work of others and port over piece-by-piece to WP. My two cents... Tim Davenport Carrite on WP Corvallis, OR Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 19:00:03 +0530 From: Sucheta Ghoshal sucheta.ghos...@gmail.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Is there some Wikimedia project to host contentsbased on original research? Message-ID: CAF5rHFfSORaOBed=zvi+docgkn4irp4faeomzygxlqtg6yf...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi all, A few of my friends and I have been planning to document the history of counterculture in Bengali art and literature. These friends are also working in that domain professionally, and have access to a huge repository of texts, images, and other relevant details that they are willing to make available digitally in the form of free contents. We wish to have the contents as wikis, and, pictures and video snippets that might be involved - as properly licensed free materials. Now, the concern is if there is some Wikimedia Project that would host contents that are based on such an enormous amount of original research. Wikipedia is certainly not the appropriate place. And, as there exist no earlier works on this particular domain on the internet, references would be negligible. I was thinking about Wikibooks, instead. I am not entirely sure if that fits either, but I assume it fits better than Wikipedia, at least. The last option is to host it ourselves with the MediaWiki setup, and I am considering it very much. But, the idea essentially is to make people edit and enrich it with as much inputs as possible. It would be really helpful, in that case, if it could be placed in one of the Wikimedia projects. Suggestions, of every kind, would be deeply appreciated. Best, Sucheta ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Conference in Berlin: 2015 and beyond
Hoi, Now that sounds like a plan :) Great ! GerardM On 6 January 2015 at 17:41, Nicole Ebber nicole.eb...@wikimedia.de wrote: Dear Wikimedians, I am glad to inform you that WMDE will be hosting the next Wikimedia Conferences (2015, 2016, 2017) in Berlin. In December, WMCH has pulled back from hosting the conference in Zurich. Together with the WMF – the funders of the event – we now have determined the location for the next couple of years, in order to put an end to the exhausting discussions around the logistics. The next conference will be held in Berlin on 15-17 May 2015 [1]. Criteria for invitation will be announced in the next couple of weeks. In the previous years, WMCON has always been kind of a monolith, a one-shot instead of being an episode of a series. From now on, an essential effort will go into the time between the episodes. WMDE’s goal is to secure sustainable involvement of all participants before, during and after the event as well as to build bridges to future events (Wikimania, regional conferences, next WMCONs). Of course, we will be liaising closely with the programme committee, WMF and the facilitators. We will update the meta pages and provide you with more information soon. Best regards, Nicole [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2015 -- Nicole Ebber Referentin Internationale Beziehungen Advisor International Relations Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin Tel. +49 30 219158 26-0 http://wikimedia.de Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why is bank transfer no longer possible?
Hi Lodewijk and all, Thank you for your feedback regarding the IBAN information. As an update, the Finance team worked with our bank to improve the security and fraud protection of our bank accounts so that we can now disclose the bank account information on our donation pages. We have updated the USD and EUR account information, and will add the remaining currencies as we get the green-light from our bank. Thanks and Happy New Year! Pats Pena On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: Hi Pats, Thanks. Lodewijk On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 9:30 PM, Patricia Pena pp...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi Lodewijk, Thanks for letting us know! IDEAL has been back up in the page, but we recently made a few changes that ended up accidentally removing the option from the form. It's all fixed now :) Regarding IBAN: Finance is still working with our bank and we should be sending an update once we hear from them. Thanks, Pats On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: Hi Pats, Please be aware that iDEAL is still not functional on the Dutch fundraiser page. Also, IBAN is missing. Best, Lodewijk On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 10:16 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: Hi Patricia, Thanks for telling that the iDEAL will be back soon. I don't quite understand from your answer why you add the increased hurdle of emailing the team for the IBAN though. Am I overlooking something? Best, Lodewijk On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 10:06 PM, Patricia Pena pp...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi Lodewijk, Currently IDEAL is temporarily down on our pages (it went into maintenance mode after our annual campaign), but should be back up soon :) We know the importance of this method for Dutch donors and have supported this option since we started fundraising in the NL. We also support offline bank transfer (IBAN) and donors can get the account number with our Donor Services team. We had an extremely successful Fundraising campaign this year, and there will be some great mobile optimization coming up in the next few months, which will allow mobile donors to complete their donations in a much faster and easier way. Thanks! Pats On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: A while back now, the chapters were no longer allowed to fundraise, because the Wikimedia Foundation argued they would be better able to do this. At the time, this sounded somewhat reasonable. However, since then, there have been some disturbing developments - at least for Dutch donors. No longer it is possible to pay electronically (iDEAL, one of the most common methods is no longer supported - 'electronic banking' simply refers you back to the credit card page) or even via regular bank transfer (using an IBAN) in the Netherlands. The donation page https://donate.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:FundraiserLandingPagecountry=NLuselang=enutm_medium=spontaneousutm_source=fr-redirutm_campaign=spontaneous only allows credit card and paypal, and the 'other ways to give' simply sends you to the helpdesk if you want to make a bank transfer payment. What is the reasoning behind this? Have bank transfers become a legal swamp? Are there statistics suggesting that this method was no longer required by donors? Did the European bank account somehow get temporarily suspended? If it has become so hard to donate, maybe it makes more sense to send the donors to the local chapter pages where they can actually donate in the local suitable methods (in this case, Wikimedia Netherlands offers both iDEAL and IBAN http://www.wikimedia.nl/pagina/doneren-aan-wikimedia-nederland ). One of the Dutch OTRS team members asked for elaboration, but didn't quite get a satisfying answer. I hope this is a temporary situation, and that this threshold will be removed again. It would be sad if we go through all kind of trouble to enable long tail methods like bitcoin, but skip bank transfer... Best, Lodewijk ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l , mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org ?subject=unsubscribe -- Pats Pena | Sr. Manager, Global Operations Wikimedia Foundation office +1 (415) 839 6885 x6764 cell: +1 (415) 816 3349 fax: +1
[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Conference in Berlin: 2015 and beyond
Dear Wikimedians, I am glad to inform you that WMDE will be hosting the next Wikimedia Conferences (2015, 2016, 2017) in Berlin. In December, WMCH has pulled back from hosting the conference in Zurich. Together with the WMF – the funders of the event – we now have determined the location for the next couple of years, in order to put an end to the exhausting discussions around the logistics. The next conference will be held in Berlin on 15-17 May 2015 [1]. Criteria for invitation will be announced in the next couple of weeks. In the previous years, WMCON has always been kind of a monolith, a one-shot instead of being an episode of a series. From now on, an essential effort will go into the time between the episodes. WMDE’s goal is to secure sustainable involvement of all participants before, during and after the event as well as to build bridges to future events (Wikimania, regional conferences, next WMCONs). Of course, we will be liaising closely with the programme committee, WMF and the facilitators. We will update the meta pages and provide you with more information soon. Best regards, Nicole [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2015 -- Nicole Ebber Referentin Internationale Beziehungen Advisor International Relations Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin Tel. +49 30 219158 26-0 http://wikimedia.de Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Is there some Wikimedia project to host contents based on original research?
+1 Ting Chen Original research in a wiki way = Wikiversity Original report (for recent events) and interviews = Wikinews Regards, Michel Castelo Branco 2015-01-05 12:07 GMT-02:00 Ting Chen wing.phil...@gmx.de: Hello Sucheta, for me this looks like a good restart for Wikiversity. For me beside of providing university courses one of the target of Wikiversity is also always to be actually do crowd sourced research works. Best regards Ting Am 01/05/2015 um 02:30 PM schrieb Sucheta Ghoshal: Hi all, A few of my friends and I have been planning to document the history of counterculture in Bengali art and literature. These friends are also working in that domain professionally, and have access to a huge repository of texts, images, and other relevant details that they are willing to make available digitally in the form of free contents. We wish to have the contents as wikis, and, pictures and video snippets that might be involved - as properly licensed free materials. Now, the concern is if there is some Wikimedia Project that would host contents that are based on such an enormous amount of original research. Wikipedia is certainly not the appropriate place. And, as there exist no earlier works on this particular domain on the internet, references would be negligible. I was thinking about Wikibooks, instead. I am not entirely sure if that fits either, but I assume it fits better than Wikipedia, at least. The last option is to host it ourselves with the MediaWiki setup, and I am considering it very much. But, the idea essentially is to make people edit and enrich it with as much inputs as possible. It would be really helpful, in that case, if it could be placed in one of the Wikimedia projects. Suggestions, of every kind, would be deeply appreciated. Best, Sucheta ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Is there some Wikimedia project to host contents based on original research? [Davenport]
Wikiversity allows original research: https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Original_research On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 6:48 PM, Tim Davenport shoehu...@gmail.com wrote: My suggestion to Sucheta would be to start a website dedicated to the mission, to first publish there with appropriate free licensing, and to gradually port over material from there to WP on an topic-by-topic basis, assuming there is also scholarly literature on the topics being covered. It would also help to submit this documentary and historical website to scholarly review to better establish the work done there as academically reliable. Many of the academic journals include a website reviews section in the book reviews section these days. In short: first go off-wiki to systematize and write. Then document your work as reliable. Then integrate your work with the scholarly work of others and port over piece-by-piece to WP. My two cents... Tim Davenport Carrite on WP Corvallis, OR Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2015 19:00:03 +0530 From: Sucheta Ghoshal sucheta.ghos...@gmail.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Is there some Wikimedia project to host contentsbased on original research? Message-ID: CAF5rHFfSORaOBed= zvi+docgkn4irp4faeomzygxlqtg6yf...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi all, A few of my friends and I have been planning to document the history of counterculture in Bengali art and literature. These friends are also working in that domain professionally, and have access to a huge repository of texts, images, and other relevant details that they are willing to make available digitally in the form of free contents. We wish to have the contents as wikis, and, pictures and video snippets that might be involved - as properly licensed free materials. Now, the concern is if there is some Wikimedia Project that would host contents that are based on such an enormous amount of original research. Wikipedia is certainly not the appropriate place. And, as there exist no earlier works on this particular domain on the internet, references would be negligible. I was thinking about Wikibooks, instead. I am not entirely sure if that fits either, but I assume it fits better than Wikipedia, at least. The last option is to host it ourselves with the MediaWiki setup, and I am considering it very much. But, the idea essentially is to make people edit and enrich it with as much inputs as possible. It would be really helpful, in that case, if it could be placed in one of the Wikimedia projects. Suggestions, of every kind, would be deeply appreciated. Best, Sucheta ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Find me at: personal blog http://IaskQuestions.com ** This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorised copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. Diese eMail enthaelt vertrauliche und/oder rechtlich geschuetzte Informationen. Wenn Sie nicht der richtige Adressat sind oder diese eMail irrtuemlich erhalten haben, informieren Sie bitte sofort den Absender und vernichten Sie diese Mail. Das unerlaubte Kopieren sowie die unbefugte Weitergabe dieser Mail ist nicht gestattet. ** ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
