Hey Gnagarra, Thanks for the clarification. The report would therefore be quite a costly business, if you expect it to be executed by paid staff. And it would probably go at the expense of what they would otherwise be doing. 6-12 months is by the way a very long time to publication!
Could you therefore clarify a bit better what your intended goals are besides satisfying curiosity of people like you and me? Because I surely can imagine I would appreciate such report as well, I'm just not sure I'd consider that enough to produce it :) But if you could find additional valued for it, who knows! Best, Lodewijk 2016-10-22 12:27 GMT+02:00 Gnangarra <[email protected]>: > Its not something that a volunteer could be expected to manage as it would > need a dedicated person with resources to follow up with those involved and > collate all the information > > I would see it as something done by the WMF either by their Wikimania team > or the media team given the WMF already do a fair portion now for > reporting, realising that it would probably 6 months to year finish, even > then it wouldnt capture all the benefits which take even longer to > materialise. Once published the Wikimania wiki could be closed down. The > audience is the community, as well as those looking to be involved in a > wikimania in the future also anyone that wants to see how international > events are organised and our donars. > > > > On 22 October 2016 at 18:09, Lodewijk <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hey Gnagarra, >> >> (changing topics here as we're going on a tangent) >> in an attempt to avoid/limit additional work for organizers that are >> totally worn out at the end of a cycle: >> - What would be your intended use for such document/journal? >> - What would be the intended readership >> - Would you imagine volunteering to organize such journal, even if you're >> not on the organizing team? After all, anyone could collect such >> information together. >> >> Best, >> Lodewijk >> >> 2016-10-22 12:06 GMT+02:00 Gnangarra <[email protected]>: >> >>> It would be nice to see past events wrapped up into one journal covering >>> all aspects from original discussion until the final reporting of the event >>> including financials, attendee reports and media reports at the moment >>> everything is spread across chapter, foundation, event pages which means >>> lessons, pitfalls, successes, the work involved over time arent where >>> people can find easily >>> >>> On 22 October 2016 at 17:56, rupert THURNER <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> the points lodewijk mentioned with styles, and independent user groups >>>> working on it are quite valid points imo. additionally the purpose of a >>>> wiki is to collaborate on a purpose. if the purpose is gone, no wiki >>>> software is necessary. following that logic, one could argue to dump a past >>>> wikimania wiki into a static html page is best. search could be done via >>>> standard web search. if the wikis are not disturbing one could let them >>>> just sit where they are. >>>> >>>> rupert >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Lodewijk <[email protected] >>>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> The discussion has now been moved to https://meta.wikimedia.org/ >>>>> wiki/Wikimedia_Forum#Wikimania_wikis apparently, where it will >>>>> probably also get archived not too distant in the future. I hope someone >>>>> will post a link here to that archive page. >>>>> >>>>> Lodewijk >>>>> >>>>> 2016-10-22 11:07 GMT+02:00 Rehman Abubakr <[email protected]>: >>>>> >>>>>> (cross-posting to Wikimania-l and Wikimedia-l) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> As earlier discussions on this topic received relatively little >>>>>> response from the community, I'm sending this email to let you know about >>>>>> the new topic posted at https://meta.wikimedia.org/ >>>>>> wiki/Meta:Babel#Wikimania_wikis, with regards to having a single >>>>>> unified Wikimania wiki. >>>>>> >>>>>> I have copied the original post below for ease of reading. Please >>>>>> post your comments on the meta page. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ********** >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi. I was looking at Special:SiteMatrix >>>>>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:SiteMatrix> and couldn't >>>>>> help noticing the whopping 14 separate wikis (and growing) for all the >>>>>> different Wikimanias, including a separate wiki for a "Wikimania team". >>>>>> Is >>>>>> there any current plans of a more sustainable or streamlined approach to >>>>>> running these wikis? >>>>>> >>>>>> I am aware that this has been discussed a few times before, but no >>>>>> significant effort was put into it. Wikimania project domain >>>>>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_project_domain> is the >>>>>> most significant discussion which I could find, but participation was >>>>>> quite >>>>>> low on that, with no(?) WMF staff comments. >>>>>> >>>>>> From what I understand from the above linked discussion, some key >>>>>> points against a unified Wikimania wiki was that: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. We will not be able to preserve old Wikimania wikis as a "time >>>>>> capsule" >>>>>> 2. Older Wikimania organizers may face new organizers "steamrolling" >>>>>> over their pages >>>>>> 3. Organizers will not have complete control over the site as old >>>>>> admins might interrupt for whatever reasons. (or vice versa) >>>>>> >>>>>> My though for these points was: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. Why not have each Wikimania project branch their pages as >>>>>> wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/2016/Main page, or alternatively, have >>>>>> separate namespaces for each project (i.e. 2016:, 2017:, etc). We could >>>>>> then protect all pages under a project (i.e. 2016/ or 2016:) once a >>>>>> project >>>>>> is over. >>>>>> 2. This could be avoided by protection, as stated above. >>>>>> 3. Make it much less complicated. Once the project is over, all >>>>>> previous admin rights will be revoked, and the new organizers will get >>>>>> the >>>>>> rights. New admins can be advise to not modify previous project >>>>>> namespaces, >>>>>> or if better, if we can block previous projects' namespaces from editing? >>>>>> Furthermore, there could be a bot logging all changes made to old project >>>>>> namespaces, for transparency. >>>>>> >>>>>> Is there any other views on this? Did I miss something obvious? >>>>>> Looking forward to your comments. Cheers, Rehman. >>>>>> >>>>>> ********** >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks and regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> User:Rehman <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rehman> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> GN. >>> President Wikimedia Australia >>> WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra >>> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> > > > -- > GN. > President Wikimedia Australia > WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra > Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
