Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2016-10-14/News and notes

Judging from headcount in the group photo, it seems that gender bias in Wikipedia is greatly exaggerated. Staszek Lem (talk) 19:35, 14 October 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't know that it's fair to say the attendance at a conference like this is representative of the Wikipedia editing community as a whole. Interesting point.  Go  Phightins  !  19:55, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * And even if it were, there still looks to be a pretty hefty male overrepresentation in the photo, to my eye. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 20:47, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I think that the only conclusion you can draw about the gender gap from attendance at this event is that people who like Wikipedia enough to attend a 3-day conference about it (and all the socializing, learning, presenting, listening, brainstorming, etc. involved in that) are a little more representative of the general population than are the active editor base (still not actually representative, of course -- at the most basic level, it is WikiConference North America). A lot of people in this photo are not active Wikipedia editors, but people who use Wikipedia, teach about it, work in other non-profits, volunteer in other open culture projects, and otherwise see the importance of the project. Librarians are one contingent always well represented at this sort of event (at least those I've been to), and which is itself majority women. That's not to say the gender gap/gender bias on Wikipedia isn't improving, of course, but I'd be hesitant to come to any conclusions based on off-wiki events like this. &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 14:41, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

$2.7 million is raised in Australia and not a cent goes back. What a rip off. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:17, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * And whose fault might that be? Tony   (talk)  00:34, 15 October 2016 (UTC)


 * One important factor that affects "fundraising challenges" is the fact that the WMF is spending 300 times as much (52596782 ÷ 177670 ≈ 296) as it was spending ten years ago. Does anyone here believe that the WMF is accomplishing three hundred times more than it accomplished ten years ago?



--Guy Macon (talk) 22:29, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
 * They spend the money on all the wrong things, Salaries and junkets for one thing, for the bloated staff list, and expensive outside consulting and research; not nearly enough on essential engineering, design, and software support for critical issues - still expecting the volunteer community to do most of the development for free as well as provide the content that ultimately gets the donations, and not enough on scholarships for meetings, conferences, and grants for worthwhile off-Wiki initiatives. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:42, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Just to be clear and to clarify a somewhat ambiguous wording: the video was not sponsored by WMCH (it was volunteer work, like 99% of the work to date). The chapter supports Kiwix itself (hosting fees, hackathon costs, etc). Stephane (Kiwix) (talk) 06:52, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Fixed; thank you, Stephane. Tony   (talk)  12:40, 19 October 2016 (UTC)