Allow me to throw in some perspective here, since I think I stand somewhere
between midway and the opposite end of the spectrum vis-à-vis this discussion.
> Wiadomość napisana przez Romaine Wiki w dniu 4 sty
> 2015, o godz. 05:21:
>
> Hi Ilario,
>
> As said before, that certain grant requests
Le 03/01/2015 14:58, Jane Darnell a écrit :
As a member of the IEG committee I am happy to say that there is no need to
panic. WLM is highly successful project and no one is talking about
shutting it down, or any other project for that matter. The current
campaign is scheduled to be one of hopefu
Hi Ilario,
As said before, that certain grant requests are submitted late, it doesn't
mean it is a good idea.
I was also not speaking about WLM organizers alone, but about all
organizers in general.
Shutting down the grantmaking for them is highly demotivating. Also when it
does not effect them d
One article was unfortunately omitted from the previous email notification
to this list.
"*The next big step for Wikidata—forming a hub for researchers*" focuses on
"a grant application to the EU that would expand Wikidata's scope by
developing it as a science hub. The proposal, supported by more
Yes, considering that WLM mailing list has less subscribers than this
one, I suppose that it's better to repeat here this question.
The discussion is now out of that thread because it has opened a new one
here.
This may be helpful for people who do not understand the "root cause" of
this dis
I hate to fall in repetition of the discussion we had already on the wiki
loves monuments mailing list about this but:
- the problems we identified are far more general than Wiki Loves
Monuments. Even if WLM is fully unaffected, our points stand because that
would be because of timing and not becau
Hi Romaine,
probably it's my feeling but a lot of countries apply for a grant for
WLM very late (in general during summer).
So it cannot be demotivating for WLM.
I do not understand the impact of the project to assign the first three
months of 2015 to a specific topic with the normal period o
Thanks Lila!
On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 7:35 PM, Lila Tretikov wrote:
> For everyone here: I've asked our Grantmaking team to comment and clarify
> the details of this plan.
>
> On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Lodewijk
> wrote:
>
> > Answering to Teemu and Chris:
> >
> > I do think that the for Wik
I did!
On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 8:01 PM, Romaine Wiki wrote:
> Hi Jane,
>
> Read!
>
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikilovesmonuments/2014-December/007600.html
>
> > From February 1-April 30, PEG will only accept
> > proposals as part of the gender gap campaign, with the exception for
> u
Hi Jane,
Read!
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikilovesmonuments/2014-December/007600.html
> From February 1-April 30, PEG will only accept
> proposals as part of the gender gap campaign, with the exception for urgent
> requests.
This means regular projects will not be accepted. That is e
For everyone here: I've asked our Grantmaking team to comment and clarify
the details of this plan.
On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Lodewijk
wrote:
> Answering to Teemu and Chris:
>
> I do think that the for Wiki Loves Monuments and Wiki Loves Art it is safe
> to claim that if we organize it the
Answering to Teemu and Chris:
I do think that the for Wiki Loves Monuments and Wiki Loves Art it is safe
to claim that if we organize it the way we would always do, it would still
tip the gender balance in our community a little more to the female side.
However, I disagree that this should be a ma
Like Bence, I would be interested to see how this kind of experiment in WMF
grantmaking works out. And also like him I would be a little surprised if
something like this is implemented with no notice period.
A couple of responses to Lodewijk's post;
> with people
> confirming my fear that this w
Teemu,
Of course! Not only that, but I think that an internal survey already shows
that WLM attracts a higher percentage of female contributors than any other
project that measured it. Don't assume by the subject heading of this
thread that any WLM project is being shut down. In fact, nothing is be
Nope. Whether or not lots and lots of female-related content is generated
and by whom, the participation factor is crucial. Without the women, there
is no female perspective, period. And as far as gender measurement goes,
even if you count all the ones who declined to specify their gender, the
Dutc
Hei,
5 cents: would it make a difference if the Wiki Loves Monuments / Art project
plans (and others) will explicitly promise that, for instance, the gender (f/m)
balance of the participants (n 500) will be 40/60 and +50% of them will be new
editors?
This would be meet the strategic objectives
It is perfectly defined, it only matters which point of view you take.
The Wikimedia movement consists out of people, projects and content. There
is less content about so-called female topics. There seem to be less
projects that specifically cover those so-called female topics. And there
are less
..and I dream of repetitive metrics that can be compared year to year
On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Fæ wrote:
> Ethically, I would rather defer a proposal, such as one for Wiki Loves
> Pride or a more general diversity event, until the restriction is lifted.
>
> There is too much pointless pol
Ethically, I would rather defer a proposal, such as one for Wiki Loves
Pride or a more general diversity event, until the restriction is lifted.
There is too much pointless political flim flam already in our Wikimedia
community without masking events as GenderGap for the sake of faking
metrics.
F
..and I am hoping to see lots of "gendergap paint"
On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Lodewijk
wrote:
> I hoped that after the discussions on the wiki loves monuments mailing
> list, someone of the grant team would have proactively informed the wider
> community in an earlier stage. I hope that the
I find it interesting to discover via this conversation that it has not
been defined yet!
On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 4:12 PM, Bence Damokos wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Jane Darnell wrote:
>
> > Nope. Gendergap is about the gap in female participation, not in
> > female-related topics.
I hoped that after the discussions on the wiki loves monuments mailing
list, someone of the grant team would have proactively informed the wider
community in an earlier stage. I hope that the fact they did not do this,
means they are reconsidering the way this campaign is shaped.
As indicated befo
On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Jane Darnell wrote:
> Nope. Gendergap is about the gap in female participation, not in
> female-related topics.
>
I would say it is both, but in either case this would be important to
define if that is the criteria on which to solicit proposals. (The vision
of Wik
Hi all,
I think some clarification is needed by people who are in charge for the
grantmaking process. There is a difference between "shutting down the
grantmaking process (PEG) and (IEG) for three full months" and adding a
voluntary gendergap "theme" to a project to get better funding chances.
So
I would not comment but it's important to define if this gap has been
minimal in the past.
If the femal participation has always been under the 10% (in 10 years)
within a community, probably there are some infrastructural problems to
be analyzed.
The expected impact can be perceived as a tem
There are multiple ways in how to define the Gendergap, in this case it is
about female participation.
I do think it is a problem that the number of female participants is
dramatically lower than those of male contributors, but still this does not
give any good reason to exclude good projects who
Hi all,
I think that it's important to say that someone of the grant's team
probably will be out until 11th January (I have received an out of
office), so I suggest to postpone this discussion if we would not
proceed to a "
conviction in absentia".
Personally I had some concerns and I did a
Nope. Gendergap is about the gap in female participation, not in
female-related topics. The Dutch Wikipedia has a severe gap with only 6%
female participation. I would say this is a pretty urgent problem for the
Dutch and Flemish community, so I was very glad to see this as a main theme
for the com
This is not a good point but it always the same point of discussion:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cathedral_and_the_Bazaar
Nothing new.
Both models have their own strengths and their own weaknesses.
regards
On 03.01.2015 14:57, Mathias Damour wrote:
User:Pi zero made a pretty good poi
Hello Jane,
Sorry, but I think you miss the problem here.
As I said before, I am fine with more projects that improve the coverage of
so-called female topics, but not if this is damaging the projects which do
not aim for such.
I hope this campaign in this form is cancelled and witdrawn and that
As a member of the IEG committee I am happy to say that there is no need to
panic. WLM is highly successful project and no one is talking about
shutting it down, or any other project for that matter. The current
campaign is scheduled to be one of hopefully many, targeted at the
community in order t
Le 03/01/2015 12:55, Romaine Wiki a écrit :
Hi Fae,
I haven't seen a page about this on wiki yet. It appears that various
volunteers who are working on organizing are informed about this behind the
scenes directly.
It also was mentioned in a discussion about the organisation of Wiki Loves
Monum
Hi Fae,
I haven't seen a page about this on wiki yet. It appears that various
volunteers who are working on organizing are informed about this behind the
scenes directly.
It also was mentioned in a discussion about the organisation of Wiki Loves
Monuments which raised many concerns. It was first
On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Romaine Wiki wrote:
> It is time for a new strategic priority: closing the Community Gap. That is
> the gap between WMF and the local communities worldwide. It is not new, it
> exists for many years already. (It resulted also in the drama of the
> situation around
Hi Romaine, is there a link to an on-wiki page that states this.
Based on your email, it is unfortunate that rather than stating that
PEG/IEGs would be prioritized to gendergap proposals for a time, the
choice appears to be to reject everything else.
I am not against positive discrimination where
Hi all,
Some disturbing news entered my mailbox the past days. The grant making
team is going to shut down the grantmaking process for Project and Event
Grants (PEG) and Individual Engagement Grants (IEG) for three full months!
They have decided that they want to focus only on a specific strategi
36 matches
Mail list logo
