On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Edward Saperia <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 2 July 2014 15:37, Oliver Keyes <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> I feel like that might be a bit short-notice - papers need to be
>> submitted, reviewed or voted on, so on and so forth. But it could be lovely
>> to have a 'best presentation' award for WM itself!
>
>
> Well, we could pick from things featured in the research newsletter, for
> example? How do you imagine the winner to be chosen? We can always do
> something more structured for next year. But this might be a good way to
> launch the idea of a research award.
>
> Ed
>
Not an award, but it seems worth mentioning
https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submissions/The_State_of_Wikimedia_Scholarship_2013-2014
here ...

(Anyone who is going to be in London and has ideas or feedback about
the newsletter: don't hesitate to say hi ;)

>>
>> On 2 July 2014 10:33, Edward Saperia <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I really like the idea of some kind of annual award.
>>>
>>>
>>> If someone puts it together before Wikimania, I can put it into the
>>> closing ceremony?
>>>
>>> Edward Saperia
>>> Conference Director Wikimania London
>>> email • facebook • twitter • 07796955572
>>> 133-135 Bethnal Green Road, E2 7DG
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2 July 2014 10:15, Aaron Halfaker <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Given that it seems we agree with Poitr's desire for research about
>>>>> Wikipedia to lead to useful tools an insights that can be directly applied
>>>>> to making Wikipedia and other wikis better, what might be a more effective
>>>>> strategy for encouraging researchers to engage with us or at least release
>>>>> their work in forms that we can more easily work with?
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's a couple of half-baked ideas:
>>>>>
>>>>> Wiki research impact task force -- contacts authors to encourage them
>>>>> to release code/datasets/etc. and praise them publicly when they do -- 
>>>>> could
>>>>> be part of the work of newsletter reviewers.  There are many researchers 
>>>>> on
>>>>> this list who work directly with Wikimedians to make sure that their
>>>>> research has direct impact and their awesomeness is worth our appreciation
>>>>> and public recognition.
>>>>> Yearly research award -- for the most directly impactful research
>>>>> projects/researchers similar to
>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikimedia_France_Research_Award.
>>>>> One of the focuses of the judging could be the direct impact that the work
>>>>> has had.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Aaron
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 7:05 AM, Heather Ford <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Apologies. You're right, Han-Teng. The reviewer looks to be Piotr
>>>>>> Konieczny who I think is on this mailing list?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Heather Ford
>>>>>> Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme
>>>>>> EthnographyMatters | Oxford Digital Ethnography Group
>>>>>> http://hblog.org | @hfordsa
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2 July 2014 12:58, h <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Heather, I am not sure who contribute that. Probably not Nemo. If
>>>>>>> this issue of newsletter is correctly attributed, the contributors 
>>>>>>> include:
>>>>>>> Taha Yasseri, Maximilian Klein, Piotr Konieczny, Kim Osman, and Tilman
>>>>>>> Bayer. My suggestion is only a personal one, and I am not sure if it is
>>>>>>> against policies to make a few edits once the newsletter is out.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks again to the contributors of the newsletter, my life is a bit
>>>>>>> easier and more interesting because of your work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2014-07-02 15:35 GMT+07:00 Heather Ford <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +1 Thanks for your really thoughtful comments, Joe, Han-Teng.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nemo, would you be willing to add a note to the review and/or
>>>>>>>> contacting the researcher?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>> Heather.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Heather Ford
>>>>>>>> Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme
>>>>>>>> EthnographyMatters | Oxford Digital Ethnography Group
>>>>>>>> http://hblog.org | @hfordsa
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2 July 2014 05:17, h <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The tone of the sentence in question
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     'it is disappointing that the main purpose appears to be
>>>>>>>>> completing a thesis, with little thought to actually improving 
>>>>>>>>> Wikipedia'
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> could have been written as
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     'It would be more useful for the Wikipedia community of
>>>>>>>>> practice if the author discussed or even spelled out the implications 
>>>>>>>>> of the
>>>>>>>>> research for improving Wikipedia".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     This suggestion is based on my own impression that
>>>>>>>>> [Wiki-research-l] has mainly two groups of readers: community of 
>>>>>>>>> practice
>>>>>>>>> and community of knowledge. It is okay to have some group tensions for
>>>>>>>>> creative/critical inputs. Still, a neutral tone is better for 
>>>>>>>>> assessment,
>>>>>>>>> and an encouraging tone might work a bit better to encourage others 
>>>>>>>>> to fill
>>>>>>>>> the *gaps* (both practice and knowledge ones).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     Also, the factors such as originally intended audience and word
>>>>>>>>> limits may determine how much a writer can do for *due weight* 
>>>>>>>>> (similar to
>>>>>>>>> [[WP:due]]). If the original (academic) author failed to address the
>>>>>>>>> implications for practices satisfactory, a research newsletter 
>>>>>>>>> contributor
>>>>>>>>> can point out what s/he thinks the potential/actual implications are. 
>>>>>>>>> (My
>>>>>>>>> thanks to the research newsletter's voluntary contributors for their 
>>>>>>>>> unpaid
>>>>>>>>> work!)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     While I understand that the monthly research newsletter has its
>>>>>>>>> own perspective and interests different from academic newsletters, it 
>>>>>>>>> does
>>>>>>>>> not sacrifice the integrity of the newsletter to be gentle and 
>>>>>>>>> specific. I
>>>>>>>>> would recommend a minor edit to the sentence as the the newsletter 
>>>>>>>>> could be
>>>>>>>>> read by any one in the world, not just the Wikipedians. It is
>>>>>>>>> public/published for all readers, and thus please do not assume the 
>>>>>>>>> readers
>>>>>>>>> know the context of Wikipedia research.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> han-teng liao
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2014-07-01 19:37 GMT+07:00 Heather Ford <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks so much for the newsletter [1]! Always a great read...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> But have to just say that comments like this: 'it is disappointing
>>>>>>>>>> that the main purpose appears to be completing a thesis, with little 
>>>>>>>>>> thought
>>>>>>>>>> to actually improving Wikipedia' [2] are really harsh and a little 
>>>>>>>>>> unfair.
>>>>>>>>>> The student is studying Wikipedia - they can hardly only be 
>>>>>>>>>> interested in
>>>>>>>>>> completing their thesis. We need to remember that researchers are at 
>>>>>>>>>> very
>>>>>>>>>> different stages of their careers, they have very different 
>>>>>>>>>> motivations, and
>>>>>>>>>> different levels of engagement with the Wikipedia community, but 
>>>>>>>>>> that *all*
>>>>>>>>>> research on Wikipedia contributes to our understanding (even if as a
>>>>>>>>>> catalyst for improvements). We want to encourage more research on 
>>>>>>>>>> Wikipedia,
>>>>>>>>>> not attack the motivations of people we know little about - 
>>>>>>>>>> particularly
>>>>>>>>>> when they're just students and particularly when this newsletter is 
>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>> housed on Wikimedia Foundation's domain.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>> Heather.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter/2014/June
>>>>>>>>>> [2]
>>>>>>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter/2014/June#.22Recommending_reference_materials_in_context_to_facilitate_editing_Wikipedia.22
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Heather Ford
>>>>>>>>>> Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme
>>>>>>>>>> EthnographyMatters | Oxford Digital Ethnography Group
>>>>>>>>>> http://hblog.org | @hfordsa
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> Wiki-research-l mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Wiki-research-l mailing list
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Wiki-research-l mailing list
>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Wiki-research-l mailing list
>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Wiki-research-l mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wiki-research-l mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Oliver Keyes
>>>> Research Analyst
>>>> Wikimedia Foundation
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wiki-research-l mailing list
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wiki-research-l mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Oliver Keyes
>> Research Analyst
>> Wikimedia Foundation
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wiki-research-l mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>



-- 
Tilman Bayer
Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications)
Wikimedia Foundation
IRC (Freenode): HaeB

_______________________________________________
Wiki-research-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

Reply via email to