The anonymous survey among the conference participants was conducted from November 22 to December 10, 2015.
What aspects of the conference were the most useful for you?[edit]
35 answers. 8 different codes.
With 17 assignments it is clear that meeting other people was the most positive useful aspect. Especially the diversity of the conference was highlighted several times.
That leads to the second strongest useful aspect (10 assignments): the shared experiences of different language versions and their special needs (e.g. right to left writing).
The connection between the different Wikimedia projects and their collaboration was mentioned 4 times.
Twice it was expressed that the conference will lead to future collaborations.
Twice the working on a mission statement was expressed as most useful aspect.
Twice to express requests and needs to WMF was stated.
Twice the sharing of GLAM projects was mentioned.
And one time set up of the presentations with a following Q&A to get deeper information.
What aspects of the conference were the least useful for you?[edit]
26 answers. 8 different codes.
The answers are very diverse. 8 times people didn't see anything useless or gave a joke answer (e.g. the weather).
4 times it was expressed that a general discussion was suppressed by discussions on special problems.
3 times the fringe program and social events were mentioned (but at the same time recognizing that other participants find them very useful).
Twice the amount of time that was used to work on the mission statement was critized as beeing useless.
Twice organizational aspects, i.e. the breakout room and facilitation were expressed as being useless.
The unclear future of Wikisource and the outcome of the conference was mentioned one time. As well as a to rushed discussion on the general needs of Wikisource.
Once the more technical presentations were expressed to be useless, due to lack of previous knowledge.
Is there anything that would have made the program better?[edit]
32 answers. 10 different codes.
15 times a better planning was suggested. Especially the long session on Saturday and the too short handed publication of the program were critized.
There were several suggestions how the program would improve besides better planning: Concrete success stories on Wikisource, more tracks, inviting an OCR-specialist, more online discussion prior the conference.
Also improved logistics of the conference was suggested 5 times, especially the wish for more coffee-breaks was expressed.
4 times answers suggested a more proactive participation by the conference participants would help to improve the program.
Once a general more positive attitude was suggested.
On the other hand 5 times the code "everything is fine/ nothing to improve" was asigned.
What other topics would you have liked to see covered?[edit]
26 answers. 6 codes.
12 times the answer suggested that due to the already dense program everything was fine and there's nothing to add.
4 times it is suggested to implement some statistics in presentations.
(Introduction to) Technical aspects such as useful tools were missed 5 times.
3 times the wish for more about Wikidata was expressed. Once the wish for a best practice model was declared. Once a discussion on how to attract new editors in Wikisource was missed.
How satisfied were you with the following aspects of the program?[edit]
Overall scope and selection of the conference topics[edit]
Very satisfied
13
35.1 %
Satisfied
23
62.2 %
Less satisfied
1
2.7 %
Unsatisfied
0
0.0 %
Number of conference participants and composition of the audience[edit]
How well do you feel the conference team supported you during the conference?[edit]
Very well (5)
30
81.1 %
4
7
18.9 %
3
3
8.1 %
2
0
0.0 %
Poorly
0
0.0 %
What you suggest to be done differently (at the next conference)?[edit]
26 answers. 8 codes.
11 answers suggested a improvement in the program planning process such as an earlier release of the final program or an edit-a-thon or a hackathon for Wikisource and a wider range of different Wikisource community members, language wise.
9 times the organization was suggested to improve, especially with more coffeebreaks, a different time of the year (more daylight equals more proper working hours), and a better internet connection.
Was the English language an obstacle for you? If so, can you estimate how much you understood of the sessions?[edit]
