Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:51, 2 January 2025

	Wikimedian of the Year is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Misplaced Pages community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured list on January 15, 2021.
Article milestones Date Process Result August 19, 2013 Articles for deletion Redirected October 28, 2018 Articles for deletion Kept May 6, 2020 Articles for deletion Kept July 30, 2020 Featured list candidate Promoted Current status: Featured list

This article is rated FL-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Awards Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Awards, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of awards and prizes on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AwardsWikipedia:WikiProject AwardsTemplate:WikiProject Awardsawards Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. Lists Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Misplaced Pages. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Misplaced Pages Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Misplaced Pages, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's encyclopedic coverage of itself. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. Please remember to avoid self-references and maintain a neutral point of view, even on topics relating to Misplaced Pages.WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject WikipediaWikipedia Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Principal project

Does someone know 2017 honorable mention recipient Diego Gómez's principal project? The only text-based "hole" in the chart. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:03, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Not answered, so will try again. And is the honoree even an editor on Misplaced Pages (a Wikipedian)? Randy Kryn (talk) 15:18, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

I'm starting to think we should just eliminate the "Principal project" columns altogether. In some cases, the cell is not applicable, and in other cases, multiple projects apply. I'm also not sure the column's sort function is particularly helpful. Thoughts on removing the column and mentioning projects in the Rationale cells? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:17, 7 August 2024 (UTC)\

( Peanut gallery comment) I agree with merging into rationale; I doubt many are trying to sort by project and space is valuable. Queen of Hearts  02:34, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

I think the principal project column provides useful information and I'd be inclined to keep it. –Novem Linguae (talk) 07:07, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Wikipedian of the Year. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141222053950/http://wikimediaukraine.wordpress.com/2014/02/23/in-memoriam-of-ihor-kostenko/ to https://wikimediaukraine.wordpress.com/2014/02/23/in-memoriam-of-ihor-kostenko/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:12, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Wade

I see this list was just promoted to FL status (congrats!), but the description for Jess Wade seems off. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:59, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Popped an 'is' in there, seems better. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:33, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Randy Kryn, See "As of February 2020, she has written over 900 articles. began to write articles to "better represent women and people of colour". ---Another Believer _(Talk) 03:12, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Missed that, thought you meant the first sentence. How about something like: Wade is a physicist who began a year-long effort to create Misplaced Pages articles about scientists and engineers which "better represent women and people of colour". As of February, 2020, she had written over 900 new titles. (EDIT: I'll add it for now, been editing a bit since writing this}

Should also mention the year she started. Spotted a wall-of-text paragraph in the lead, will check that out. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:25, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Another Believer, can you check the source for the 2015 recipient and see if the edit I just made is accurate. From the source it reads as if the Commons uploader was mentioned as an example and not the actual awardee, who still remains secret and undescribed. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:52, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Consistent column widths

Anyone good with tables know how to set consistent column widths across tables so the scroll down is a lot cleaner? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 23:29, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Peacock tag

Randy Kryn, this article does have a lot of puffery regarding several of the winners; as examples,

• "for his massive contributions to the Malay Wiktionary" editorializing massive.
• "provided invaluable contributions to medical content on Wikimedia" editorializing invaluable.
• "Citrawati was instrumental in...through her valiant..."
• "Gelauff is a prolific contributor, a mentor to many Wikimedians, and a volunteer for many community groups and efforts"
• "Lih is an internationally-renowned..."
• "Lin was a prolific contributor...also a key organizer of..."
• "Väänänen has been a critical volunteer contributor..."

Overall, the article also has a more subtle bias trying far too hard to paint all of these contributors in a very positive light and emphasize their contributions as much as possible, instead of a neutral "so-and-so won because they did this-and-that". It is also sourced mostly to WMF press releases, so the sources being positive isn't a valid defense. AryKun (talk) 15:09, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I agree some work is needed here and welcome your help to make the text more neutral. Are you interested? Would love to see some collaboration here to fill in the missing cells, too. I'll try to add some new text. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:19, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Hello AryKun, I'm not sure about all of them but you may be mixing up Jimbo Wales quoted language upon awarding the individuals with language added by editors, although the quotes should be more obvious. Please have another look. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:23, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Not really, I'm not really interested in meta-Misplaced Pages type articles. AryKun (talk) 15:34, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

FYI there's an article about my work and award in the Bay Area Reporter if you or another editor want to add it (I won't do it myself). Funcrunch (talk) 15:57, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I've added as supplemental secondary coverage. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:39, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

If we are quoting WMF directly, I think the rationales should be in quotes instead of wikivoice. See List of Nobel laureates in Physics and other Nobel list pages. Sir Kenneth Kho (talk) 16:33, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Would be nice if the award had "Wikipedian of the Year" and "Wikimedian of the Year" categories (it was named 'Wikipedian of the Year' until 2017). Both would be major awards, with Misplaced Pages and the sister projects guaranteed an awardee yearly. Another reason to ping Jimbo Wales who may have some thoughts on Another Believer's formatting suggestion below. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:58, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Merge cells?

Perhaps we should merge the Image and Recipient cells, in an effort to reduce the number of cells and overall table widths? If there's interest, anyone know the best markup for formatting? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:44, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Proposed format:

List of Wikimedian of the Year winners

Year	Recipient	Principal project	Rationale	Ref.
2011	Rauan Kenzhekhanuly	Kazakh Misplaced Pages	Kenzhekhanuly recruited a stable community to improve the Kazakh Misplaced Pages, which in a year increased from 4 to over 200 active editors, and 7,000 to 130,000 articles. Wales was criticized by fellow Wikipedians because of Kenzhekhanuly's ties to the government of Kazakhstan. Wales stated on Reddit in 2015 that he'd been unaware of Kenzhekhanuly's prior positions in the Kazakh government and said that if he had known Kenzhekhanuly was going to go on to become deputy governor of a Kazakh region, he would have "refused to give that award".

References

1. Michel, Casey G. (April 2, 2015). "Misplaced Pages Founder Distances Himself from Kazakhstan PR Machine". EURASIANET.org. Archived from the original on November 1, 2021. Retrieved September 6, 2020.
2. Morris, Kevin (April 26, 2013). "Winners of Misplaced Pages's biggest award still haven't received prize money". The Daily Dot. Archived from the original on May 18, 2020. Retrieved June 24, 2016.
3. Orlowski, Andrew (December 22, 2014). "What's Jimmy Wales going to do with $500k from the UAE?". The Register. Archived from the original on June 3, 2016. Retrieved June 24, 2016.

(or similar). Is this an improvement or not really? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 20:47, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

I think it looks better to have the name to the side instead of the top but I couldn't really tell you a reason why based on PAGs. So feel free to take my opinion with a grain of salt. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 23:25, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Edit request

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

Any chance anyone would be willing to add "She is youngest recipient of the award" somewhere in the text about Hannah Clover? The source already cited verifies this statement. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 01:44, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Oh hey, congrats!!

I don't see a great place to put it - it isn't really part of the rationale, which is the only freeform section. I suppose in practice it's kinda a free-for-all but I don't quite see it fitting there regardless. Rusalkii (talk) 05:17, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

I was thinking the end because it's not part of the rationale. I do think it's a detail that should probably be mentioned somewhere but it's not the end of the world if it's not. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 08:20, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Clovermoss, my recommendation to you is to own and enjoy this award without any effort trying to embellish it or interpret it on your own. Let other editors describe its prestige, and if they do not do so to your liking, just let it be. The award stands for itself forever. Cullen328 (talk) 08:33, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Oh I'm not bothered if it isn't implemented and there's a reason I did the edit request instead of simply adding it myself. I just figured I'd mention that the source does actually say I'm the youngest recipient because it seems like a noteworthy detail. It's not me embellishing anything. The source actually introduces me with Meet the youngest Wikimedian of The Year in history! Life goes on regardless. 😅 Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 08:36, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Good point, the award seems at the stage where it can mention something like youngest-oldest as descriptors, although there is a fly in the ointment - the unidentified 2015 winner. Although the odds are that you are the youngest we have no idea of the age of the 2015 recipient. Awhile ago I asked Jimbo Wales if that winner still had to have their identity hidden, and he said he'd look into it. If they can be identified that would fill in an interesting mystery in the award's history. Randy Kryn (talk) 09:07, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

I know you can't use this as a source but I did actually ask the foundation ahead of time and they double checked to verify that I was truly the youngest. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 09:08, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. They must have asked Jimbo. The identity of the 2015 winner and their unknown backstory gives the award a unique talking point. Randy Kryn (talk) 09:16, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure I need to be in the history section and recipients from other categories (not the main award) have been younger. If text about it is included, I think my entry on the list makes the most sense. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 09:29, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

But that's me just being nitpicky. I appreciate that you added text about it somewhere. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 09:33, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

It needed the update anyway since the text listed the winners except those after 2019, the five next winners should also be included for section consistency. Thanks for opening the discussion. Randy Kryn (talk) 09:37, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

That sounds like a reasonable enough rationale to me. Thank you for making the article better :) Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 20:57, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Edit request

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

Hi, I am Caner, this year's Media Contributor of the Year award winner. First of all, I would like to thank the users for the contributions made about me. But I have a request. Would it be possible to use File:Wikimedia Summit 2022 Portraits Kurmanbek (cropped).jpg or File:Portrait of Caner Ozyayikci (cropped).jpg instead of my current photo on the page? The current one is quite dark and makes me look quite small in the image. Kurmanbek (talk) 14:46, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done, a good idea and option, thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:59, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

Taufik Rosman

Depending on the result at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Taufik Rosman, we might want to consider merging some of the content from his article to be included here. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 20:20, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

This was closed as a redirect so I encourage people to look at the history of the page content and see if anything can be transferred here. It was more fully fleshed out than what is currently in this article. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 13:19, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Nationality

I feel like we should note that Hannah Clover is the first winner from Canada somehow. People probably just assume she's American when scanning this list. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 23:13, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

I had many people assume I was American when I was standing in front of them. I seriously had to tell about fifty people I was Canadian. Anyways, there isn't really any sourcing to say I'm the "first" Canadian but there is sourcing to support my nationality itself. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 14:31, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, people are probably going to keep assuming unless we note it somehow. I'm not really sure how to elegantly add it that wouldn't be undue weight though? The rationales for the two American winners don't actually say they're American either, but readers can click on the individal articles and find out. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 19:19, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Maybe add a little country flag beside each winner's name? Funcrunch (talk) 19:29, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Multi photo

@Di (they-them): Eugene isn't with us in this one, but there's a better one of Taufik and I together at File:Taufik Rosman and Hannah Clover.jpg, if we're going to do a multiple winner photo like . Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 08:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Although I suppose "better" is somewhat subjective. I think it's a good idea to consider other options though, thank you of thinking of this! Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 08:12, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Personally I think the photo with Eugene works best, but like you said it’s subjective. I think either photo is good though, so I'm not really sure which to use. Di (they-them) (talk) 14:04, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

The "Eugene" seems better in terms of presenting more winners. My two cents is that we need to have Hannah (and future yearly winners) represent Misplaced Pages, Wikipedians, and the foundation on television, podcasts, radio shows, etc. The yearly winner is an immediate hook to present to producers. Should ping foundation p.r. reps and board members (if someone has a list of their Misplaced Pages user names. I mentioned this to a few but don't know if this has been followed up on, which I should do as well). Randy Kryn (talk) 14:31, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

I mean I've talked to the press a few times, pretty much whenever I've been asked. The WMF do contact local/national media, it's up to them to decide whether or not they want to run a piece. I was somewhat surprised that the Niagara Falls Review didn't seem to care when they run articles about local human chess events, but that's life.

If I end up getting a scholarship to the next wikimania, we could all try doing a group photo that gets as many winners in one spot as possible. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 14:40, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Well, a good PR campaign gets results. If the foundation really wanted the winners on podcasts, TV, etc. that would occur (a full press package, phone calls and follow-up with producers, lots more). Unless they don't know how, which I must, ah, assume on good faith. As for scholarships, hopefully a couple of thousand are given out for Paris in 2026 for the 25th Anniversay-year conference. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:47, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Well I don't think the foundation is necessarily going for PR. I got the impression it was more along the lines of "someone from your country did cool stuff on Misplaced Pages if you're interested" kind of interaction. As for scholarships, you've always been more hopeful than me on what's realistic for conferences. But there's Kenya in 2025 and I hope to see at least some of the other WOTYs there. If I do, I'll definitely try for that group photo. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 14:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

2000 scholarships at, say, $4,000 American dollars each for travel and hotel, giving everyone an extra couple/few days to research and explore Paris, might be a measly eight million dollars. Less if in-kind donations are received from a hotel chain or airline (or by ship, that would be fun). A good fundraiser can get that in 15 minutes with the right meeting with the right multi-millionaire or billionaire (or corporate sponsor with no promises of "good coverage in Misplaced Pages", and telling them that just the opposite would probably occur just to be sure of no monetary influence) presenting a targeted-donation request ("Wikipedians in Paris, 2026", or "Wikimedians Will Always Have Paris"). These things are doable (and all former Wikimedians of the Year who want them should get automatic scholarships to every conference - just to get the photo!), they just need specific well-presented and targeted donation requests instead of throwing all the money in a big pot. Frustrating or just surprising to think that this isn't being done for major worldwide and regional conferences. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:21, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

I was trying to decide whether or not you were serious, Randy. A "measly eight million dollars" out of a budget of under $200 million dollars is....a heck of a lot of money for a conference that actually has very little impact on anything within our projects, our infrastructure, or our growth of editorship. That $8 million is more than all of the WMF and affiliates spend on all global, regional, and specialized conferences throughout the year. Don't get me wrong: I've been to a lot of Wikimanias, and they're generally interesting and fun, and great networking opportunities. (Disclosure: one partial scholarship, several I paid for personally, several others I was subsidized because committees I was on had key functions there). But I could never justify that much of the annual budget being spent on an event that has never been shown to have significant effect, and often makes those who can't attend feel left out or more isolated. As a movement, we get a lot more value for money out of hackathons than we do out of Wikimania. Risker (talk) 16:51, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

• Featured lists that have appeared on the main page
• Featured lists that have appeared on the main page once
• FL-Class awards articles
• Low-importance awards articles
• Awards articles
• FL-Class List articles
• Low-importance List articles
• WikiProject Lists articles
• FL-Class Misplaced Pages articles
• Low-importance Misplaced Pages articles
• WikiProject Misplaced Pages articles
• Implemented requested edits