Talk:Project grants/Take the Lead!: Difference between revisions

From Wikimedia UK
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(→‎Discussion: Comments)
(Further comments)
Line 10: Line 10:
:Yes, this is a different take on what WMUK has been doing for some years, sponsoring [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:The_Core_Contest "The Core contest"], which Cas also runs. Most of the prize-winners are usually not in the UK, so physical prizes such as bottles of plonk etc aren't practical. Personally I think the outcomes of that have clearly made it well worthwhile, though as a winner in the past some might say I'm biased. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 17:28, 6 June 2015 (BST)
:Yes, this is a different take on what WMUK has been doing for some years, sponsoring [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:The_Core_Contest "The Core contest"], which Cas also runs. Most of the prize-winners are usually not in the UK, so physical prizes such as bottles of plonk etc aren't practical. Personally I think the outcomes of that have clearly made it well worthwhile, though as a winner in the past some might say I'm biased. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 17:28, 6 June 2015 (BST)


This seems like a sensible proposal overall. On the rewards, I've raised concerns about giving Amazon vouchers before now, due to some controversies surrounding the Amazon company, but I've come to the conclusion their a reasonable prize compared to alternatives, and I'm happy to support giving them subject to some flexibility being given if a winner requests it. I prefer the £25 option when it comes to the distribution of the prizes, as I'm sure most volunteers would be happy with cash prizes at that level, and it does indeed spread the love around more. On the overall budget, I don't think £250 is unreasonable, though I think this request would be strengthened by reducing it down slightly. Perhaps a £200 budget with eight £25 Amazon vouchers – one going to the winner, and seven others being randomly distributed based on article submissions? [[User:CT Cooper|CT Cooper]]<small><span style="font-weight:bold;">&nbsp;·</span>&#32;[[User talk:CT Cooper|talk]]</small> 21:53, 9 June 2015 (BST)
This seems like a sensible proposal overall. On the rewards, I've raised concerns about associating Amazon with WMUK before now, due to controversies surrounding Amazon in the UK, but I've come to the conclusion their a reasonable prize compared to alternatives, and I'm happy to support giving them subject to some flexibility being given if a winner requests it. Paid editing ''per se'' doesn't bother me that much, though I respect that it is a third rail in the Wikimedia community, so direct cash prizes are probably best avoided. I prefer the £25 option when it comes to the distribution of the prizes, as I'm sure most volunteers would be happy with cash prizes at that level, and it does indeed spread the love around more. On the overall budget, I don't think £250 is unreasonable, though I think this request would be strengthened by reducing it down slightly given the budget constraints WMUK now faces. Perhaps a £200 budget with eight £25 Amazon vouchers – one going to the winner, and seven others being randomly distributed based on article submissions?

Revision as of 22:03, 9 June 2015

Discussion

Update?

Hi Casliber, is this grant application still live, or could it be closed? You will see from the Grants page that grants can be paid only to members of the charity, so you'd either need to join or include in the grant proposal a member who would receive the funds. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 14:30, 28 May 2015 (BST)

For the record, Casliber have never personally received any funds. The office have always directly paid any prizes to the eventual winners. If Wikimedia UK would like a member to be a "sponsor" of such competition grant application, I'll be happy to be such a member for this, Core, Stub, and/or GAN contest that Casliber would like to run. -- KTC (talk) 09:04, 29 May 2015 (BST)
Thx Katie, I sorta dobbed you in on the other pages before I saw this (chuckle). Casliber (talk) 15:59, 29 May 2015 (BST)
Thanks Katie, that would be perfect. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:45, 29 May 2015 (BST)

Is it too early to discuss this? I'm not 100% comfortable this idea. Feels a bit like paid editing. Plus £250 while not a huge amount of money could be better spent on other things. Why not buy some fancy paper such as this and then put them in a nice presentation sleeve like this and give out winners and runners up certificates with maybe a box of quality street or a bottle of plonk if you really want to be generous. I've won several prizes for work in my lifetime and I have to say that the nice feeling you get is from the winning not from the actual value of whatever you win. Theresa knott (talk) 13:41, 29 May 2015 (BST)

Ok here's the thing. The prizes are for amazon vouchers (sorry forgot to add that - was in a hurry and doing stream-of-consciousness writing). I think books for learning are better than awards or a bottle of plonk. And speaking of personal experience, I spent several years in my early teens shit-broke....and would have really appreciated a book voucher or two more than decorative awards. I'll get back to filling this one out. Casliber (talk) 16:00, 29 May 2015 (BST)
Yes, this is a different take on what WMUK has been doing for some years, sponsoring "The Core contest", which Cas also runs. Most of the prize-winners are usually not in the UK, so physical prizes such as bottles of plonk etc aren't practical. Personally I think the outcomes of that have clearly made it well worthwhile, though as a winner in the past some might say I'm biased. Johnbod (talk) 17:28, 6 June 2015 (BST)

This seems like a sensible proposal overall. On the rewards, I've raised concerns about associating Amazon with WMUK before now, due to controversies surrounding Amazon in the UK, but I've come to the conclusion their a reasonable prize compared to alternatives, and I'm happy to support giving them subject to some flexibility being given if a winner requests it. Paid editing per se doesn't bother me that much, though I respect that it is a third rail in the Wikimedia community, so direct cash prizes are probably best avoided. I prefer the £25 option when it comes to the distribution of the prizes, as I'm sure most volunteers would be happy with cash prizes at that level, and it does indeed spread the love around more. On the overall budget, I don't think £250 is unreasonable, though I think this request would be strengthened by reducing it down slightly given the budget constraints WMUK now faces. Perhaps a £200 budget with eight £25 Amazon vouchers – one going to the winner, and seven others being randomly distributed based on article submissions?