Thanks Deryck, that's the kind of experience that would be really useful in the guidebook!
Sent from my iPhone On 31 Mar 2014, at 17:11, Deryck Chan <[email protected]> wrote: > And that neatly introduces me to the lectern. > > In 2011 and 2012 (and possibly earlier) there was only one "abstract" field > with the instruction "min. 100 words". So, submission authors wrote at all > kinds of lengths from 101 words to 1000+ words. This created two problems: > 1. Judging was difficult because different authors give wildly different > levels of detail. > 2. Most of the abstracts are too long for the programme booklet. In 2011 they > asked successful submitters to submit a 100-word tl;dr with a one-week time > limit shortly before Wikimania itself, which was a bit hectic. > > So in 2013, I split the "abstract" field into two: a tl;dr of "max. 100 > words", and a "detailed proposal" of "min. 300 words". I put in comments that > authors are encouraged to reuse material between the two fields as they see > fit. I felt that it was useful to have 300+ words from every lecture proposal > because that actually gives reviewers some more detail about the line of > argument that the speaker would take. > > Someone who's going to deliver a 25-min lecture should find no difficulty > writing more than 300 words to give a taster of the lecture. The speaker will > typically monologue for 17 minutes, which would be about 2000 words (assume > typical English speeches in Wikimania). If you can speak 2000, you can write > 300. > > Of course the exception would be proposals for open discussions, which were > introduced to the submission system after the 2013 submission template was > made. So maybe Ed can make a note to say that purely open-floor sessions are > exempt from the 300-word proposal. > > Hope that helps. > Deryck > > > On 30 March 2014 08:53, Ed Saperia <[email protected]> wrote: >> The real reason was of course "we inherited the template from last year". >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On 30 Mar 2014, at 08:52, Steven Walling <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Saturday, March 29, 2014, Andy Mabbett <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> I'm drafting a couple of submissions for sessions at Wikimania, and >>>> (having successfully made submissions for Wikimania 2012, for >>>> Wikimedia UK AGMs, and for other conferences) have come to the >>>> conclusion that 300 words is too much text to require. >>> >>> To be honest I always ignore this requirement. It's silly. A well-written >>> proposal should be concise. >>> >>>> >>>> What is the thinking behind this figure? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Andy Mabbett >>>> @pigsonthewing >>>> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Wikimania-l mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikimania-l mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimania-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimania-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
_______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
