Just some thoughts over this sentence: *The ability to share experiences and information with a wider community indicates that the applicant, if awarded a scholarship, would be able to bring those experiences or lessons learned at Wikimania back home, thereby enriching their home wiki community or home country.*
New attendants at Wikimania, I mean - new at Wikimania, not new in the movement, are delighted by contact with so many Wikimedians, they bring new ideas at home, want to share more, in a contrary of one who attends Wikimania year after year. Sometimes this is not recognize as fact. Regards, Zana 2015-08-01 1:34 GMT+02:00 Ellie Young <eyo...@wikimedia.org>: > On behalf of the two of us here at WMF who work on the Scholarship Program > (Ellie and Sati), we’d like to offer the following response to the various > points raised in this thread: > > *(1)* To the point around *repeat scholarship recipients*: Given the > concerns about scholarships being awarded to the same people year over > year, for the 2015 Scholarship Program we included a two new questions in > the application[1]. From these new questions, the Scholarship Committee > could understand how an applicant's previous attendance had changed or > improved their Wikimedia contribution, and how attending this year would do > so again. To Stuart's previous point, the intention was to set the bar was > *higher* for those who had attended Wikimania before on a > WMF scholarship, but *without* setting an automatic or blanket penalty. > > As a data point, of the 2015 Scholarship recipients ~26% received a > scholarship in 2014 from WMF[2]. Unfortunately, we don't have data > readily available to do a year-over-year comparison for past Wikimainias. > > *(2) and (3)* To the point around *enriching home communities / countries > and selection criteria:*"Enrichment" was a big focus on the revised > 2015 Scholarship application and selection criteria. In previous years, the > application questions and selection criteria focused on an applicant's: > contribution to the Wikimedia movement, contribution to other free > knowledge/software movements, and interest in Wikimaina. Based on feedback > from previous scholarship applicants, recipients, the Scholarship > Committee, Wikimania organizers, and WMF staff, these questions and > criteria were changed to focus on: relevant experience within > the Wikimedia movement [3] as well as "Enrichment". > > From the Scholarships page[4], "Enrichment" means: "The ability to share > experiences and information with a wider community indicates that the > applicant, if awarded a scholarship, would be able to bring those > experiences or lessons learned at Wikimania back home, thereby enriching > their home wiki community or home country. Applicants are encouraged to > write about or provide examples demonstrating this ability; a few examples > could be on-wiki reports, personal blog posts, or talks/presentations given > about what they learned from an event, conference, or discussion. > > To this end, as in 2014 we have required all scholarship recipients to > create an on-wiki report[5]. The summarized outcomes from 2014 can be found > here[5]. Once all 2015 scholarship reports have been submitted, > another analysis and summary of outcomes will be posted here[2]. > > [1] Question added into the 2015 application: > > - Have you previously attended Wikimania on a WMF scholarship? YES/NO > - Note: there is already a separate question on "Have you attended > Wikimania before? If so, in what year or years?" > - If YES, please use the space below to tell us about something great > that happened as a result of attending Wikimania previously? What are your > goals for attending Wikimania again? > > [2] > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_scholars/2015_Outcomes > > [3] > https://wikimania2015.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships#Relevant_experience > > [4] https://wikimania2015.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships#Enrichment > > [5] > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:TPS/Wikimania_scholars/Proposed_2015_Process#Outcomes_reported_by_2014_Scholars > > (4) To the point of why we do not offer partial scholarships anymore, the > overhead processing to adminster this was high. We also noted that there > were regular occurrances of people then declining the offer and partial > scholarsips going unused was also high. > > If anyone would like to reach out to either one of us offlist to followup > with questions, we can be contacted at: > > eyo...@wikimedia.org > shous...@wikimedia.org > > Thanks, > > Ellie Young and Sati Houston > Wikimedia Foundation Community Engagement > > On Jul 31, 2015, at 7:45 AM, Osmar Valdebenito <b1mbo.wikipe...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > 2015-07-31 9:16 GMT-03:00 Lane Rasberry <l...@bluerasberry.com>: > >> Hello, >> >> Leave the fairness of the scholarship process aside. Regardless of its >> fairness, the process is generating ill-will because of lack of >> transparency and poor communication. The problem might be growing to >> something beyond what volunteers can manage and perhaps paid staff support >> from the communications department of the WMF would be a worthwhile >> investment to protect community reputation considering the seriousness of >> this, the problem's persistence, and the fact that a little more >> communication would go a long way to resolving the negativity. >> >> Thanks Praveen for voicing concerns. They are worth addressing and what >> you are saying is what a significant and large demographic also has been >> believing for years. I first heard this in 2012. It is good that this year >> for the first time the list of scholarship recipients was published and >> shared openly. Regardless of whether the scholarship award process is fair >> and adequate, it is definitely true that the rumor is circulating among >> many countries, especially in the Global South, that some people are >> getting scholarships repeatedly. >> >> Here are some of the complaints which I have repeatedly heard, and which >> are critical to address for the sake of community health: >> >> 1. People who get scholarships somehow become better candidates for >> getting more scholarships, when ideally, new people from a region should >> attend Wikimania every time >> >> As I mentioned, this is complex. Because the option would be to penalize > the applications of some people because they attended in the past, even if > they made great presentions or where very active in the organization, and I > don't really like that idea. People that received scholarships in the past > is because they have been very active Wikimedians and that usually doesn't > change year to year, so probably they will have great chances in following > Wikimanias. > >> >> 1. In the Global South especially, people who get scholarships >> actively or unconsciously suppress the development of their local >> Wikimedia >> community so that they retain a leadership role and remain the most >> eligible people to receive scholarships, grants, attention from Wikimedia >> community leaders, and other privileges. >> >> Being a member of the so-called Global South, I think this particularly > wrong (and almost offensive). This is not an issue that only applies to the > so-called Global South, but in general in our movement. Usually, leadership > in most of our organizations are very stable, with some exceptions. > Particularly because it is something that takes a lot of time and > dedication. Saying that scholarship recipients "actively or unconsciously > suppress development of local communities" is a huge accusation, especially > when most of them work a lot trying to disseminate Wikipedia and increase > the participation. And saying that it is "in the Global South especially", > even more. > >> >> 1. There is a tremendous amount of ignorance and lack of cultural >> insensitivity about the value of scholarships among WMF staff and >> Wikimedia >> community members from richer countries. At this year's Wikimania, we >> stayed in a city where ~75% of residents make USD 160 a month, ( >> >> http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/07/24/world/social-issues-world/mexico-poverty-rate-hit-46-2-last-year-2-million-join-ranks-poor/) >> and stayed in a hotel where the nightly charge per room was $320 or two >> month's income by local standards. The amount of money thrown around >> during >> Wikimania is shocking to many Wikipedians and this issue is never >> discussed, so far as I know. >> >> An international conference for ~1000 participants is expensive. We don't > know the details but probably the WMF and the local organization made > everything possible to have a very good Wikimania and saving resources as > much as possible. I think WM2015 was a success and I'm very happy that > scholarships recipients were able to be in a hotel next to the rest of the > conference, when in other opportunities scholarship recipients had a lot of > difficulties regarding accomodation. I think it was a step forward. > However, I never heard anyone complaining about how much was spent in > London, where prices are much higher than in Mexico City and where it was > much more difficult for people in developing countries to participate. > Mexico has a lot of difficulties (just like many other developed countries > have), but questioning the decision to host Wikimania there and the > decisions made by the local organization is also culturally insensitive. > >> >> 1. Just in general and beyond scholarships - there needs to be more >> discussion about how money is viewed differently in different places. This >> applies to grants, staffing, community engagement, and many other things. >> If complaints are not pouring in about this, it is only because people are >> not comfortable speaking up. Diversity creates a lot of concerns and we >> are >> a very diverse community. >> >> yours, >> >> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 7:49 AM, Nicholas Bashour < >> nicholasbash...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I believe that what Praveen may be saying is that he thinks the value >>> that a repeat scholarship recipient can gain from coming back to wikimania >>> numerous times is outweighed by the value that someone who has never been >>> to wikimania but has nevertheless been a very involved wikimedian can gain >>> from attending. Therefore, given that there are limited resources, >>> scholarships should always go to the people who can gain the most from >>> receiving them, which Praveen may be arguing will always be someone who has >>> never been to wikimania versus someone who has. He's saying that despite >>> having many repeat scholarship recipients, there has not been any added >>> value on wiki to justify that, and therefore new recipients should be >>> actively prioritized over repeat ones. That's not to say whether or not >>> that's actually the case or that this was the point he was trying to >>> convey, but rather what I understood his argument to be. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Nicholas >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> Am 31.07.2015 um 07:39 schrieb Nkansah Rexford <nkansahrexf...@gmail.com >>> >: >>> >>> I just want to know why some users were able to achieve scholarship >>>> again and again while regular Wikimedians being excluded. >>>> >>> >>> And that is EXACTLY what Stuart explained. I understood, unless you >>> didn't! >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Friday 31 July 2015 04:01 PM, Stuart Prior wrote: >>>> >>>> Praveen, >>>> >>>> I was chair of the Scholarship Committee for this year. >>>> >>>> It's unfortunate that you didn't get a scholarship, however there were >>>> many high quality applications and sometimes the difference between success >>>> and failure is very small, and I feel genuinely bad for any Wikimedian with >>>> a good application that didn't make it, but it's very competitive. >>>> >>>> We do take into account previous scholarship awards, and focus on >>>> making sure new people get a chance. But consistently good applications and >>>> excellent work can warrant repeat scholarship awards despite this. >>>> >>>> In some cases where people have been granted Scholarships previously >>>> but have been unable to attend the conference due to visa issues we have >>>> considered that when receiving their applications for the current year. >>>> >>>> I won't comment on any individual's scholarship, but "regular >>>> Wikimedians" certainly make up the bulk of the scholars. Edit count is not >>>> the only factor, but it still is a significant (and clearly verifiable) >>>> factor when looking at someone's application. >>>> >>>> However, we looked for organisers too. Some of our community are better >>>> facilitators and community builders than they are editors, and running >>>> events, training and building partnerships are things that were marked >>>> favourably. >>>> >>>> Moreover, two identical applicants can make wildly differing >>>> applications. We look for those that comprehensively demonstrate their >>>> contributions and qualify their statements. >>>> >>>> Please apply again next year. You have just as much opportunity as >>>> anyone else. >>>> >>>> Hope this helps. >>>> >>>> Best >>>> >>>> Stuart Prior >>>> User:Battleofalma >>>> >>>> On 31 July 2015 at 09:16, Dariusz Jemielniak <dar...@alk.edu.pl> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Praveen, >>>>> >>>>> I've been a steward, as well as the chair of the FDC for three years, >>>>> so you may assume I've been somewhat active in Wikimedia movement. I did >>>>> not receive a global scholarship neither (although I did eventually go, as >>>>> I got elected to the Board of Trustees). >>>>> >>>>> I think it is clearly an assumption of bad faith to say that there is >>>>> a bias in scholarship committee. The criteria are explicit, and obviously >>>>> with limited resources a large number of excellent candidates, even with >>>>> accepted presentations, will not make it. >>>>> >>>>> I would suggest you focus on Wikimedia activity, prepare a great >>>>> presentation for the next year as well as a compelling application, and >>>>> try >>>>> again. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> >>>>> DJ "pundit" >>>>> 31 lip 2015 10:07 "praveenp" <me.prav...@gmail.com> napisał(a): >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> Please don't derail the actual topic of the thread. I really didnt >>>>>> assume such an interpretation from quoting his words. Whenever I asked >>>>>> about the issue to anybody, I generally got such a reply, which I want to >>>>>> avoid here. >>>>>> >>>>>> If it is need to start a new thread, I will do that. :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> But please tell me why some people regularly get scholarships atleast >>>>>> since 2008, active (in Wikimedia projects / outreach programms) users >>>>>> never >>>>>> get a chance to share their experience and problems at Wikimania. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Praveen. P >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Friday 31 July 2015 12:40 PM, WereSpielChequers wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Praveen, >>>>>> >>>>>> Whether there was anything personal or confidential in Gerard's >>>>>> private emails to you is for him to say not for you to decide. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> >>>>>> Jonathan >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 31 Jul 2015, at 05:59, praveenp <me.prav...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> Osmar Valdebenito, >>>>>> No offense was intended :-(. For prominent communities that may be >>>>>> true, but could you check list of users who got scholarship from >>>>>> Malayalam >>>>>> community. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Amir Ladsgroup, >>>>>> >>>>>> 1) As you can see there is nothing confidential or personal in >>>>>> Gerards reply. He just gave a summary of "known" practices. >>>>>> 2) Users are not asking for trophies. They also want to participate >>>>>> Wikimania and share and get the experience. >>>>>> 3) Wikimedia projects are community processes. I simply don't >>>>>> understand how granting scholarship to same persons again and again for >>>>>> five or six years help that process. I also dont understand that >>>>>> communication and sharing of multiple viewpoints, ideas and practices is >>>>>> possible in the above scenario. >>>>>> 4) Yes; If clicking tick marks in translatewiki on some 500 string in >>>>>> 5 minutes before applying for scholarship (as reviewing the translation) >>>>>> is >>>>>> a prominent contribution. >>>>>> >>>>>> In the beginning every body treated equal, we have multiple >>>>>> participants (with understandable reasons) for Wikimania. It started to >>>>>> shrink later and now people plainly believe granting scholarship is an >>>>>> act >>>>>> of favoritism. I also want to prove I am wrong. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> Praveen. P >>>>>> User:Praveenp >>>>>> >>>>>> PS: Mail striped because mailman held my previous reply claiming " >>>>>> Message body is too big:" >>>>>> >>>>>> On Friday 31 July 2015 05:03 AM, Amir Ladsgroup wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> There are several issues I want to comment: >>>>>> 1-First of all. Do you have permission from Gerard to publish your >>>>>> conversation? Maybe there is something confidential in it, Did you care >>>>>> to >>>>>> check? >>>>>> 2- Scholarship is not award or trophy, bear that in mind. >>>>>> 3- People are expected to come here and learn, communicate, etc. >>>>>> that's why a same person gets scholarship, >>>>>> 4- No one's wife got scholarship because of being wife of someone. >>>>>> They probably are prominent contributors too. >>>>>> 5- Check my first question and answer that. (Emphasizing) >>>>>> >>>>>> Best >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 12:05 AM Osmar Valdebenito < >>>>>> b1mbo.wikipe...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Sorry, but when I read "No regular Wikimedian get any scholarship", >>>>>>> I stopped reading. >>>>>>> It is not only a lie, but also very unfair to all the extremely >>>>>>> great Wikimedians that attended and made great contributions in >>>>>>> Wikimania, >>>>>>> and also the volunteers that have helped now and in the past reviewing >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> evaluated thousand of applications in the Scholarship Committee. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list >>>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing >>>>>> listWikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list >>>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Wikimania-l mailing list >>>>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Wikimania-l mailing >>>> listWikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> +Rexford <http://google.com/+Nkansahrexford> | khophi.co >>> <http://khophi.co/about> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikimania-l mailing list >>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikimania-l mailing list >>> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Lane Rasberry >> user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia >> 206.801.0814 >> l...@bluerasberry.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimania-l mailing list >> Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimania-l mailing list > Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimania-l mailing list > Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l > >
_______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list Wikimania-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
