Talk:Wikimania 2016 bids/Esino Lario/Program

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Thinking about the audience[edit]

As Frieda was suggesting there are essentially three groups of people attending Wikimania who have different needs: newbies, insiders and engaged. It can be really useful to think about their different expectations to create a program which can suits all of them. --iopensa (talk) 08:23, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Loved this: «The presence of other 2 presentations make it more likely to have some audience at the session (at least the other presenters will listen to your talk if they are not editing their slides meanwhile)». --Nemo 14:27, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback Wikimania it mailing list[edit]

Some of the points which have emerged:

  • relevant to focus on the user and their level of knowledge of topics (it could be worth to include the envisioned target of each presentation: something like basic (no knowledge required), advanced (experience and knowledge required)
  • necessary to include references and previous experiences if we want to propose a new format to argue it. this would help us making stronger arguments and respond properly to critiques and remarks.
  • nice souvenirs of the Dev space (in Hong Kong fresh, busy, wit people working, good wifi, tables and chairs, near the lunch area...).
  • Maybe the pre-conference with the development workspace could be more properly included in the conference main programme as a parallel area/track )this would work better if the spaces/areas are clearly and physically different). it is a relevant space and it would be nice to have everybody there at the same time.
  • more experienced people in training can provide us hints and references.
  • good idea posters with photos.
  • for the dev area local LUG, "installer party" to instal linux if you ask for it and [[1]] (the primary school has a digital interactive billboard)

--iopensa (talk) 11:57, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wikimania needs to be more interactive
  • relevant to be site-specific
  • relevant to give space to workshops and problem-solving, and to create session to deal with concrete objective (we need to brainstorm to decide how to do this or that, we need to take a decision about...). this kind of sessions need 1h - 1h30.
  • more plugs!
  • nice to have a small program which fits into the budge, with a map of the conference rooms.
  • need for an offline program of the day
  • need for info about the speakers and an abstract of the presentation (info also on the room door)
  • Wikimania needs to show that it does things in its specific way (something which needs to be very different from the experience you get from an online participation)
  • a conference which interacts more with social media
  • icebreaking session was appreciated in Milan. something which could be replicated
  • appreciated the interactive nature of the "grantmaking day" with experiment and role game
  • the rhythm of the conference doesn't seem sustainable. 7 different locations, moving from one place to the other every 30 minutes, difficult to select the presentation and to understand what might interest you or not.
  • maybe a couple of hours in the same location rather than moving around
  • it is important to consider what sessions and format leave to the participants (knowledge, skill, ideas, decision...)
  • the wikiwomen lunch has a good margin of improvement. it could be organized after related sessions, thematic tables with different hints for the conversation, maybe a panel with the coolest projects relevant for issues related to the gender gap
  • 5 days but with the first 2 more focussed on newbies or with specific meetings (geographically and thematically focussed).
  • cutting off the presentations?
  • no meetups during the breaks (too short)
  • formal meetups can be disappointing and very poorly attended.

--iopensa (talk) 13:30, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • attenzione a che questo non si riduca a una ghettizzazione con "area VIP", area "wikimediani esperti normali" e "massa indistinta"; cioè a che non sia in contraddizione con questa necessità [di focalizzarsi su tipi diversi di pubblico/partecipanti]. --iopensa (talk) 19:41, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Other hints[edit]

--iopensa (talk) 17:03, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

--iopensa (talk) 21:02, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help desk[edit]

Frieda suggested that maybe we can also have a sort of help desk where people can ask questions. For example "I work in a museum, is it possible to create a partnership? what should I do?" Or, I add, "can you show me again how to make a table on a wiki?". I think it would be cool. Not easy to have an answer to all questions, but cool. --iopensa (talk) 10:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Children[edit]

With the reference person of the Kindergarden we set up the age at 24 months because it is a little less complicated for them to manage. The age was actually decide to make sure Celeste could attend! The Kindergarden can only host the children on Saturday and Sunday because the school (3-6) is still open until the end of June. --iopensa (talk) 10:46, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Calendar[edit]

With the team in Esino Lario we decided to put the main days of the conference on Saturday and Sunday for the availability of the volunteers in Esino. --iopensa (talk) 10:46, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Titolo[edit]

In altre pagine come Esino_Lario/Feasibility_study questo è chiamato "program". Se mi dite quale parola preferiamo la applico sistematicamente. --Nemo 14:03, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

come preferisci. ho notato che "program" è l'uso più comune su meta; forse è la soluzione migliore. in effetti è brutto che sia un po' e un po'. grazie mille! --iopensa (talk) 18:23, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Idee Gender Gap[edit]

Ho buttato giù un po' di idee relative ad attività legate al gender gap. L'idea di base è quella di cercare di integrare il più possibile la questione nello svolgimento della conferenza invece di mettere semplicemente un paio di presentazioni a tema e il classico WikiWomen Lunch. Sicuramente c'è tantissimo da migliorare e per il momento la cosa non si discosta così tanto dal vecchio modello, quindi aspetta commenti e opinioni.

  1. Discussione (mini Barcamp?) per "addetti ai lavori" con un taglio abbastanza pratico;(durante la Preconference?)
  2. Incoraggiare la creazione di poster, estendendo l'invito anche ad altre realtà associative di presentare la loro esperienza sulla questione del gender gap e riunirle in una sezione apposita;
  3. Panel Gender Gap: the State of the Art o qualcosa del genere da programmare prima del WikiWomen Lunch (si potrebbe pensare anche ad una presentazione di alcuni poster particolarmente densi o innovativi)
  4. Un evento pubblico in cui fare una discussione (potrebbe essere il numero 3) in una location aperta in cui passino delle persone per incoraggiare la partecipazione;
  5. Creare una WikiWomen Dinner aperta a tutti in cui discutere in maniera informale della questione, si potrebbe adottare una soluzione del tipo "porta un uomo o una persona scettica sul gender gap come invitato/a"; durante la cena si potrebbe fare anche un evento stile PechaKucha in cui i partecipanti possono esprimere idee, presentare un poster, criticare eccetera
  6. WikiWomen Lunch: cambiare l'organizzazione favorendo la discussione tra le partecipanti piuttosto che i discorsi di ringraziamento e simili(creare dei tavoli tematici o altro). A me piacerebbe anche che la cosa fosse aperta a tutti, ma credo che ci siano molte opinioni diverse su questo punto.
  7. Giochi: organizzare una sessione di giochi (ma potrebbe essere anche ripetuto tutte le mattine, in orario 9:00-9:30 prima che inizino le sessioni, a rotazione) per stimolare riflessioni su comunicazione, privilegi, diversità eccetera. Un paio di cose interessanti che ho trovato:


I problemi principali di queste attività sono:

  1. La scarsa partecipazione. Finire con il ritrovarci sempre le stesse persone è sempre un pericolo.
  2. Il troppo. Sicuramente sono tante cose e quindi è importante capire quali possono essere davvero interessanti e quali si possono togliere.
  3. Il posizionamento spaziale e temporale. Credo sia importante cercare di non sovrapporsi troppo ad altre sessioni o attività in modo da ampliare la partecipazione e combattere l'effetto ghetto.

--Atropine (talk) 18:39, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Anche questo workshop potrebbe essere interessante --Atropine (talk) 00:26, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

After meeting of may 2015 in Esino Lario[edit]

We provided (for the meeting in Esino Lario) a slideshow with updated informations about the program organization: you can view and comment it here. We also collected some suggestions working in 3 different groups during the meeting on sunday morning. --Marcok (talk) 08:53, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments and suggestions[edit]

Andrea Zanni suggeriva di istituire un chapter meeting permanente e un hackaton permanente, cose che - compatibilmente con gli spazi - trovo anch’io sarebbe bello poter fare. In questo modo forniremmo dei punti di riferimento stabili e aperti 24h/24. Potremmo comunque utilizzare quegli stessi spazi anche per alcuni meetup (ad esempio su argomenti locali e specialistici per i dev). L’hackaton permanente mi sembra compatibile con l’idea dello spazio collaborativo aperto 24h/24. --Marcok (talk) 08:53, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Randa meetings and invites[edit]

Interesting: https://blogs.fsfe.org/mario/?p=336 --Nemo 14:27, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wikimania_2016_bids/Esino_Lario/Program&oldid=20599427"