Kay, bless your heart.
Galder, Gereon, Xavi: I would be *particularly* interested in research in
other languages, since it's harder for me to run across that in my regular
feeds. (that may also be true for some of the reviewers :) but they're also
lang and time limited)
Recommendation that might conceivably be implemented for this cycle:
-- Update "can submit" to "encouraged to submit" in any languages
-- If in a language other than {core langs} <-- which may be only English
this year, ask submitters to recommend a reviewer who can share a review of
the work in English
-- To Andy's point, confirm the license of the research is one that is
open (so that it can be independently translated)
-- Have a two stage award: the first stage, based on a quick review for
significance and interest, identifies finalists which are, if not already
in one of the {core langs}, translated into one of them. (at least in
abstract + summary; we facilitate this translation by supporting /
sponsoring community translation; it's a universal benefit for researchers
around the world)
-- Second stage is as currently imagined: review of finalist papers in
{core langs}.
<3. SJ
On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 10:27 PM KAY WOODING via Wikidata <
[email protected]> wrote:
> I SPEAK ENGLISH THABKS I APPRECIATE IT JESUS LOVES YIU I LOVE YOU GOD
> BLESS YOU HAVE A BLESSED DAY
>
> On Wednesday, January 12, 2022, 09:55:21 PM EST, Leila Zia <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> We gave the option of accepting nominations in more languages some
> more thought. I want to be very honest: I don't have a good solution
> to accommodate more languages in this cycle. We considered the option
> of allowing/encouraging nominations in other languages, and not doing
> the broader search we do in English in those languages. However, even
> this option is not really guaranteed to work because we consider
> "scholarly publications" which can be papers of a few pages or books
> that can be hundreds of pages. We cannot guarantee that we can
> translate the scholarly publication (independent of its length)
> in-time for the review.
>
> Given the above, my suggestion to you is that if you know of a
> scholarly publication that is in another language than English and you
> think we should consider it, still nominate it. We will consider it,
> even if I can't guarantee that we review it.
>
> I'm sorry that I am not able to offer a better solution for this
> cycle. We will continue thinking about this point for the future
> cycles.
>
> Best,
> Leila
>
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 12:46 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Leila,
> > I have read it, that's why I'm confused.
> > ________________________________
> > From: Leila Zia <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 9:40 PM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List <[email protected]>
> > Cc: [email protected] <
> [email protected]>; Discussion list for the Wikidata
> project. <[email protected]>
> > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: [Wiki-research-l] Re: The Wikimedia
> Foundation Research Award of the Year - Call for Nominations
> >
> > Hi Galder,
> >
> > Please see below.
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 12:26 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks, Leila, for answering the question raised.
> >
> > Anytime.
> >
> > > I'm a bit confused with this, I supposed that the Wikimedia Foundation
> Research Award was an initiative from the Research team of the WMF (
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research), but I read in your
> answer that "WikiResearch is primarily in English and about research
> published in English". I understand that the main working language of the
> WMF is English, as this mailing list is, but I would assume that an Award
> promoted by the WMF should be multilingual.
> >
> > Sorry. Let me clarify. What I was referring to when I used
> > WikiResearch in my email was the WikiResearch twitter account:
> > https://twitter.com/WikiResearch . I did not intend to refer to the
> > WMF Research team or Wikimedia Research community. And to repeat: this
> > is one source we use to find research done on the Wikimedia projects.
> > There are other sources as I mentioned in my response.
> >
> > > Me, as a Basque Wikimedians User Group member, I promote Wikimedia
> activities in Basque language, because that is our goal. But the WMF is not
> the English Wikimedians User Group, as far as I understand. Our designated
> lingua franca may be English, but the WMF can't exclude research that is
> not made in this language from an Award. I would understand if the
> (non-existing) English Wikimedians User Group created the "EWUG Research in
> English Award of the Year", but is not the case.
> >
> > I understand and acknowledge your point about inclusion. I hope some
> > of the points I shared about our existing process in my other email
> > can help you find possible solutions we can consider doing. :) On my
> > end: I have a todo to come back to you all.
> >
> > Best,
> > Leila
> >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Galder
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Leila Zia <[email protected]>
> > > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 8:04 PM
> > > To: [email protected] <
> [email protected]>
> > > Cc: Wikimedia Mailing List <[email protected]>;
> Discussion list for the Wikidata project. <[email protected]>
> > > Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: [Wiki-research-l] Re: The Wikimedia
> Foundation Research Award of the Year - Call for Nominations
> > >
> > > Hi all, Thank you for your feedback. I take your comments as a sign of
> > > genuine care and I'm happy to engage and learn with you how we can do
> > > better. (Note: I'm responding to all lists, though some of the
> > > feedback has been sent only to wikimedia-l.)
> > >
> > > * Galder, Gereon, Xavier, Gnangarra, and Andy: thank you for your
> feedback.
> > >
> > > * Andy, I'll respond to your comment first. We do not require the work
> > > to be published under a free license for us to consider it for the
> > > award. However, if the work is shortlisted, we reach out to the
> > > authors, tell them that it's shortlisted, and it can be considered for
> > > the award if the work is at least made publicly available. At that
> > > point, we also encourage the authors to publish under a free license
> > > and share with them a few ways they may be able to (even if the work
> > > is published somewhere already with restrictions). The issue of
> > > licenses is on top of our mind and we actively look for ways to push
> > > for more Wikimedia research work to be published under free licenses.
> > >
> > > * I am going to share with you some of my thoughts, and a possible
> > > improvement we can make in the process.
> > >
> > > ** Let's try to keep things simple to be able to improve things
> > > together. This is not a case of "WMF did x". The idea of the award was
> > > created in the Research team, and both last year and this year, we've
> > > been grateful to have the support of researchers outside of WMF for
> > > it. (Aaron Shaw (Northwestern University), and Benjamin Mako Hill (U.
> > > of Washington)). I take full responsibility for the execution of the
> > > award and I can take your feedback and see where we can improve the
> > > process. :)
> > >
> > > ** In order to be able to improve the process, I should share more
> > > details about how we do the search for the publications first. We have
> > > multiple sources for searching for research published in a given year:
> > > 1. The nomination process we shared on this thread.
> > > 2. Research publications shared in WikiResearch twitter account.
> > > 3. External research search engines and repositories for different
> > > fields: we use scholar.google.com, dblp.org and more.
> > >
> > > To give you a sense of the distribution of scholarly publications we
> > > identified last year from each of the above sources: 11 nominations
> > > and 170+ research publications through the twitter account and
> > > external searches. The award chairs (2 people; this year it is going
> > > to be Mako and I) reviewed all identified publications. We discussed
> > > every publication at varying depth depending on the result of our
> > > initial reviews.
> > >
> > > ** Knowing the process, there are at least a few ways I think the
> > > process must be improved. I'm sure now that you see more you can
> > > critique even more. :) I proactively share with you some of them here:
> > > ::* I need to have an easychair account to nominate. That can/must
> > > change (but to what? we want these nominations to be private, and we
> > > need a way to be able to process them efficiently because we're only 2
> > > people. We are considering openreview.net for the future years because
> > > they're open source; but they still have other limitations. For this
> > > year, easychair it is.).
> > > ::* We need more people on the committee: both for workload sharing,
> > > and also including more perspectives. (This is /a lot/ to ask of
> > > researchers. I'm grateful that Mako and Aaron have supported us in the
> > > past.)
> > > ::* We need other non-English sources to source community research.
> > > (WikiResearch is primarily in English and about research published in
> > > English.)
> > > ::* The shared language of reviewers is assumed to be English. If we
> > > are going to at scale consider other languages, then we need a way
> > > that this group of people can converse on academic topics with one
> > > another without having to share a language.
> > >
> > > ** I also understand the reality of the resources available to me and
> > > our team. I understand the importance of working on multiple fronts
> > > with regards to the research community (Wikimedia Research Funds, Wiki
> > > Workshop, global research competitions, research showcases, monthly
> > > office hours, talks and presentations, formal collaborations, and
> > > more). I believe in the importance of motivation (and we have seen a
> > > very good momentum around the award idea from last year's run). We
> > > need to do many things, with very limited resources; Our values and
> > > ideals are important and we have to attempt to hold them all as we
> > > make decisions. In practice, sometimes we can't meet all the ambitions
> > > we have. We need to make trade-offs. What is important is to be aware,
> > > to listen, to try to improve, and to be honest.
> > >
> > > I will leave you with the above and I commit to talk with Mako to
> > > consider ways to open up the process for more languages to be included
> > > (in 2021 or in 2022+; I can't promise changes for the 2021 process.).
> > > One of us will write back here with what we decide to do.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Leila
> > >
> > > On Sat, Jan 8, 2022 at 5:42 AM Andy Mabbett <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 7 Jan 2022 at 19:48, Leila Zia <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > =Eligibility criteria=
> > > >
> > > > > * The publication must be available in English.
> > > >
> > > > I echo others' concerns about this.
> > > >
> > > > I'm equally concerned that, while WMF regard being in English as
> > > > essential for one of their awards, they do not regard the use of an
> > > > open licence as a requirement.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Andy Mabbett
> > > > @pigsonthewing
> > > > https://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wiki-research-l mailing list -- [email protected]
> > > > To unsubscribe send an email to
> [email protected]
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected],
> guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/OOQOYTEXTIUEFZNU636I3UMQLFBK7A7H/
> > > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected],
> guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/TZLPDY4SJW3LRT5OFR6ORXS5ZFMSV6XM/
> > > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/CQUZB2G35KQM6KCYWMTD77CG226NK5QE/
> > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list -- [email protected], guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/[email protected]/message/GAUENZS6G43BVUOT2C76F3KFAUR2UO4B/
> > To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> _______________________________________________
> Wikidata mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> _______________________________________________
> Wikidata mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>
--
Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
