Actually, this kind of “journal” or mega-report is what we are planning to do for Wikiconference North America 2016, in that not only do we want to report back to the WMF what we did with the original grant, but we wanted to document best practices for future conferences. This also lets partners (San Diego Public Library and Balboa Park museums) know what we did during the conference so they can evaluate the ROI of in-kind donations and collaborations. It won’t happen immediately, but hopefully by the end of the year for an October conference.
-Andrew -Andrew Lih Associate professor of journalism, American University Email: [email protected] WEB: http://www.andrewlih.com BOOK: The Wikipedia Revolution: http://www.wikipediarevolution.com PROJECT: Wiki Makes Video http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wiki_Makes_Video On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 6:32 AM, Lodewijk <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > >
_______________________________________________ Wikimania-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
