Talk:Wikimania

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

You can have look on Talk:Wikimania 2005 overview.

About this page[edit]

I'm trying build a comprehensive historical overview of wikimanias past & present -- please add relevant information if you know it. Thanks! -- phoebe 03:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikimania Handbook[edit]

Similarly, a handbook for running Wikimania, from the end of a bid and resulting volunteer and local interest (and preliminary press) to the crunch period leading up to a successful conference. 66.31.29.221 01:37, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikimania Committee[edit]

A discussion for a Wikimania Committee is linked above. Please contribute. Seddon 05:35, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Sub-pages[edit]

I find the sub-pages relating to Wikimania confusing, and it seems that structurally, they are redundant of the category system. For instance, I would like to be able to link to Wikimania Jury without creating a redlink. A redirect seems like it would address the symptom more than the problem. Any objections if I move these pages to their more natural titles, and let the category system keep track of what belongs with what? -Pete F 21:34, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done -- I addressed this issue in most cases (moreso with the recent Wikimania pages). Wikimania jury (note lower case "j") is no longer a red link. -Pete F (talk) 02:46, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for all the quiet work you've put into curating and improving the Wikimania mes--^H^H^Hpages! :) Asaf Bartov (WMF Grants) talk 04:49, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for noticing Asaf! I'm hoping to make it easier for everyone to navigate and find the information they need, whether they're a bidding team, jury member, media source curious about Wikimania…etc.
There's some even more important quiet work going on right now though -- I've noticed User:Harej is putting some effort into the Wikimania Handbook. I'm thinking some sort of barnstar might be in order… -Pete F (talk) 16:19, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

À propos des critères pour le choix des lieux d'organisation des rencontres Wikimania[edit]

Je pense qu'il serait à l'avenir souhaitable qu'un projet aussi humaniste que Wikimédia ait l'ambition de choisir ses lieux d'événements non pas seulement en fonction de leurs facilités balnéaires, mais aussi en fonction de critères tels que : le respect des droits de l'homme et des minorités, le respect de certaines valeurs démocratiques, la corruption régnant dans le pays... Il faut absolument intégrer ces éléments aux critères de sélection. Faire des conférences dans un pays où des gens meurent sous les balles pour certains, ou dans dans un pays où certains se gaveraient pendant que d'autres crèveraient de faim, c'est assez déconcertant, inconvenant, indécent :-/ 78.250.243.101 22:25, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Red link[edit]

Wikimania 2012 lessons is a red link, I'm reporting it because I am not sure it is meant to be like this. --Elitre (talk) 12:18, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Two years to plan and implement Wikimania[edit]

Wikimania Esino Lario bid is proposing now in 2014 an event for 2016. Two years time would allow our event to manage properly risks, but it would obviously be also a change in the way Wikimania is planned and organized with a series of positive and negative implications. --iopensa (talk) 18:41, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

+1 (Seen on Wikimedia Forum feeds; thanks for wide distribution.) We're not in 2006 any longer. Nowadays, not only Wikimania is more complex, but Wikimedia programs are expected to meet a higher standard of planning:
  • mid-term strategic planning, annual planning, budgeting are heavily impacted by such a big program as running a Wikimania;
  • two years of programmatic results are now required to even start considering asking being trusted with stable recognition (and then perhaps annual grants);
  • not to speak of reporting of course, which takes time and is needed by the next organising team;
  • the interaction between the organisational side of Wikimania, the program, scholarships is tricky and needs to be carefully put together in advance (just think of the 6 months that can be needed for visa of some participants), otherwise we'll exclude some valuable volunteers or otherwise fail to be on par with our increasingly challenging strategy goals.
We can no longer afford organising Wikimania on the whim of a few weeks or months. --Nemo 19:10, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
Allowing two years to organise an event like Wikimania - which has attracted attendees by the hundreds year after year - seems a logical thing to do. — foxj 19:20, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
I think it is appropriate to pick the winner much sooner so they have a longer period to prepare everything. This will allow more of the preparation tasks to be undertaken by volunteers rather than using donor-funded staff. John Vandenberg (talk) 20:49, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
I'd worry about whether the volunteer teams behind such bids can be sustained over the course of 2 years of planning - which is a really long time! If this can be done, then that would be great though. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:16, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
A large event of this nature requires a large venue. Major venues often have to be booked over a year in advance. Two year planning is very normal in international conferences for this reason. Regarding volunteer teams over a long period, I note that with a two-year cycle, it does not increase the overall amount of work to be done -- there will be periods in the two years when nothing much needs to be done and other periods which will be just as intensive as with a one-year cycle. Kerry Raymond (talk) 23:49, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
You can find other comments also on the Wikimania mailing list thread. --iopensa (talk) 08:59, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
I think that two years is a good idea, but if 24 months seems difficult for some reason, then let's try adding at least a few months to the lead time. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:26, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Two years would make organization easier but is very long for volunteers. What about pushing the deadline from 6 months to make it somewhere in between ? Anthere (talk)
I understand the problem of keeping volunteers active; it is a good point. At the same time - for fundraising and risk managements - adding six months doesn't change efficiently. Below you find how i looked at it (please note that I calculated for fundraising at least 6 months; not in the current system because deadlines for project applications are often September-October and March-May or the beginning of the year). --iopensa (talk) 11:46, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
' Current system 1 year Possibility 1.5 year Possibility 2 years
December 2013 Jury selected and opening of the biding process
January 2014
February 2014
March 2014 Bidding ends
April 2014 Decision
May 2014 25
June 2014 Jury selected and opening of the biding process 24
July 2014 23
August 2014 22 (event)
September 2014 Bidding ends 21
October 2014 Decision 20
November 2014 19 19
December 2014 Jury selected and opening of the biding process 18 18 (expected answer from fundraising and possibility to select another location)
January 2015 17 17
February 2015 16 16
March 2015 Bidding ends 15 15
April 2015 Decision 14 14
May 2015 13 13 (expected answer from fundraising) 13
June 2015 12 12 12
July 2015 11 11 11
August 2015 10 (event) 10 (event) 10 (event)
September 2015 9 9 9
October 2015 8 8 8
November 2015 7 7 7
December 2015 6 6 6
January 2016 5 5 5
February 2016 4 4 4
March 2016 3 (expected answer from fundraising) 3 3
April 2016 2 2 2
May 2016 1 1 1
June 2016 Event Event Event
July 2016 Event Event Event
August 2016 Event Event Event

Strategic review[edit]

There seems to be some prospect of a strategic review of Wikimania [1]. I suggest that details and a timeline could profitably be posted at this page. It would help to publish the terms of reference, the deliverables and the customer. It would also help to publish the stakeholder mapping and arrangements for the engagement with the various parts of the community involved. Rogol Domedonfors (talk) 21:07, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

A good suggestion. Wikimania is also an opportunity to involve those who are currently outside the movement. For Montreal we at WPMEDF have invited speakers from PAHO, the CDC, and the NIH. We had someone from the WHO attend in 2012 which turned into a Wikipedian in Residence their. And in London had people from the NHS. People from Cochrane have attended for a few years now. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:23, 18 October 2016 (UTC)