Jump to content

QW2022/Requirements/Specification

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Translate this page
Other languages:

Languages, support and translation

  1. Language support will be planned based on demand. Participants should have a process and be encouraged to request language facilities.
    • Note, used in QW2021 was English and Spanish.
  2. Encourage contributors to give input in their own languages, no requirement to speak in English
  3. Encourage contributors to provide media content (slides and video) in advance for possible translation

Accessibility

  1. Human-generated captioning if possible, otherwise good AI, such Otter.ai
    • Note, keep reminding native speakers to use simple, plain, not-too-fast language, with non-specific references.
  2. Encourage pre-recording to allow for decent translations of captioning for playback
  3. Agreed post-recording where possible based on best practices (including allowing off-camera participation)
  4. For folx participating online in potentially LGBT unfriendly areas, we should fund VPNs or other privacy protections in the main grant?
  5. Weekend events/sessions may be best for participation
  6. Sessions should cater for low bandwidth users, such as audio-only and text-only participants.

Locations & virtual engagement

  1. Most likely central location will remain Linz, Austria
  2. Possible satellites in places including New York City, London, San Francisco, Singapore, Nigeria — for convenience and carbon minimising
    • Notes; as long as there is a hybrid option for folx to join sessions from home too that is fine (even domestic travel/accommodations in the US has become expensive due to pandemic and may be out of reach for some... but it is understood that in NY and SF this is where the biggest concentrations of Wikipedians are)
  3. Satellite locations should be made available in Latin America, Africa, Asia with coordination with some of our partners from these regions. (They may or may not be able to travel out of their countries or be allowed into other countries due to COVID.)
  4. Make it simple for a relatively small group to be able to apply for a budget to hire space and infrastructure for 4 or more participants
  5. It's important to be clear on the advantages of a hybrid event — justifying remote and satellite but also justifying benefits of having an in-person space.
    • One rationale for a hybrid event is so that a Covid flare-up could mean we dial things back in affected territories but that territories doing well could still host their in-person space.
    • Wikimania happening imminently makes it easier for us to learn from their experiences — it would be good to have an organiser review our proposal
  6. Celtic Knot 2020 and Arctic Knot 2021 are models for the remote aspects

Partnering

  1. It is desirable to have a spread of several partners.
  2. External hosts to help with facilities should be considered, like GLAMs or Universities, with the benefit that they have no issues of internal Wikimedia politics and may offer support as well as location facilities like good value campus accommodation
  3. Less reliance on how partners function would be assured by having a directly funded WMLGBT+ project manager.

Scale

  1. Expect a 'medium' size conference of 40 to 80 participants. (Consider that QW2020 had ~100–150 registrants, that we could not all accommodate)
  2. Outreach to prospective participants.
    • Note, further research is needed to identify the ideal groups where registration should be encouraged.

Audiences

  1. Target audiences may have very different backgrounds, inputs and needs
  2. Need to enable any new-to-Wikimedia academics and Open Knowledge movement people, especially joining for a few presentations, rather than for the whole schedule — this is deliberate in conference design (for ex.: attract people for keynotes but they stick around for the rest)
  3. User Group will want to use conference for under-the-hood organisation stuff (both for participants and observers)
  4. QW2020 was set up in a way that encouraged external proposals, but had disappointing call-for-proposals engagement from inside the UG, so need to consider how to stimulate proposals both internal and external (for ex.: human rights advocates, queer history academics, privacy activists)

Proposal

  1. Be familiar with the Queering Wikipedia 2020 proposal
  2. Some volunteer work will be involved — financial oversight, for example — but some of this organising work is Work™ and should be paid as such. This likely includes project management and (as already agreed) writing up the grant application. If something need more than 4–8 hours a week of effort, that should be budgeted for.
  3. Having some kind of (paid) project manager to arrange 15-minute conversations with UG stakeholders might be a useful means of ensuring conversations happen, rather than relying on everyone being able to speak up at nebulous Zoom committee meetings.
  4. For paid organising staff, we can benchmark against Wikimania and Chapters conferences, for example.

Scheduling and workshops

  • Look to be able to have "breakout sessions" and "watchalong" events (like Celtic Knot 2020 and Arctic Knot 2021) where satellite venues might do things on their own and feed back
  • Virtual editathon side-events

Carbon footprint

  1. Minimize carbon footprint without compromising on conference value.
  2. Ensure there is a method to report on how "green" the conference is, such as swapping flights for other transport, or the use of satellite locations.
    • Note, this may link with measures and terminology of the existing WMF green report.

Early notes on topic ideas

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=QW2022/Requirements/Specification/en&oldid=26885497"