Talk:RecentChangesCamp

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following is meant to serve as an invitation for any wikipedians who might be able to swing by Portland for a fantastic event. I'm not sure that this is the best/right place to advertise for wikipedians ... any thoughts? BrandonCsSanders 05:55, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 Invitation Synopsis 2 The Full Story 3 Be Prepared 4 Announcing recent changes camp 2007 5 notability

[edit] Invitation Synopsis

• Please join us for RecentChangesCamp 2006 ... "Building communities worth having!"*

You are reading this Invitation because someone wanted to see you at RecentChangesCamp 2006. RecentChangesCamp is an un-conference (BarCamp) of, for, and by folks who want to "build communities worth having" both online and off. This especially includes the OpenTechnology/OpenCulture movement.

We are coming together to make connections, write code, have fun, revise the CyberneticRoadmap, do as much good work as each and every one of us can … and then go home more connected, more energized and more capable of building great communities and the tools they depend on. Bring your friends and join a good party that's growing even better!

*What:* RecentChangesCamp 2006 ... Building communities worth having

*When:* February 3-5, 2006

*Where:* PortlandOregon and LocationInEurope

*Format:* OpenSpace

[edit] The Full Story

RecentChangesCamp is hosted by the Wiki community. Wiki is software that allows nontechnical users to freely create and edit Web content using their browser. The most exciting aspect of Wiki is that it truly encourages democratic use of the Web. We chose the first part of 2006 in order to complement Wikimania2006 and WikiSym2006 and to provide yet another great venue for the Wiki community and friends to come together to work and play.

As caretakers of primarily online communities, we (the Wiki community) are especially looking forward to cross-pollination with folks who nurture offline communities (ProcessArtists) and those who develop the OpenTechnology tools we depend upon to build our wikis.

• What kinds of community do you dream of?
• What do you need to build them?
• What projects would you work on if you could?
• What skills, resources, gifts and connections do you have to share with other community builders?
• What would happen if you could get what you need and contribute what you have?

Come to PortlandOregon or the LocationInEurope and find out!

[edit] Be Prepared

We are opening the RecentChangesCamp space for meeting, for learning, for connecting, for writing code … with no imposed limits or agendas - only the charge to come and learn and contribute as much as you can.

Agenda:

You can add to the agenda any issue of importance to you. It will be discussed and addressed to the greatest extent possible. All of the key points and next steps will be captured, and offered online, so that the entire OpenCulture/OpenTechnology community can benefit from our work.

Spirit:

We invite your presence, onsite and/or online. Please pass this invitation on to others you see leading and doing good work in OpenCulture/OpenTechnology and building communities both online and off. We need you to add your spirit to the many many connections that are happening now. Please bring stories of your progress, your skills and insights, and your passion for what can happen next.

Format:

This gathering is the product of many actions and connections. This space is an Invitation to make more of them, and more of us, flow more together, to the good. Participants will be smart, caring, creative and connected leaders, coders, organizers, activists and instigators. Beyond this, the space will be wide open for us to make good things happen.

Registration:

A big "Thank You" to our sponsors and contributors building a CultureOfHospitality that allows us to offer this event for free. To register, please add yourself to the AlreadyRegistered page or email ted@chicagohumanist.org with a short bio and we'll add you.

A list of LocalLodging and MealOptions will be provided for you to easily arrange for them. FinancialAssistance may be available, please ask! If you can help provide FinancialAssistance for those who are attracted to this conference but are not able to cover their expenses, please let us know.

We don't know exactly what is going to happen, but we do know it is going to be energizing! Come, learn and contribute as much as you can and want. Be prepared to be surprised by the results!

Warm regards the CoConveners,

• TedErnst
• BrandonCsSanders
• MarkDilley
• JohnAbbe
• RaymondKing
• MichaelSparks (RecentChangesCampEurope)
• your name here

[edit] Announcing recent changes camp 2007

So I've added the next recent changes to the page, but I'm afraid it goes through as a Wikipedia:Vanity_page, since I'm one of the non-organizers, so I won't go further than that.

Again, we invite all wikipedians to attend. People needing hosting or travel arrangements can request them on the RCC wiki. We also need help cleaning up that wiki and coordinating the event. TheAnarcat 15:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] notability

I don't mean to sound like Scrooge here, but we need to be fair to other non-notable articles that have been deleted or redirected or merged. Outside of being a Wikipedia related event, how exactly is this notable enough for an article? As far as I can tell, it isn't. Less than 200 attendees. No occurrences in the major media. Kingturtle (talk) 14:14, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Again, no offense to anyone, but I keep looking for news items on this, and all I find are blog entries and self-promotional postings. If this was not a Wikipedia related event, I think it would be deleted. Please get some legit sources and provide reasons in the article for notability. Kingturtle (talk) 20:39, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

There's an exclusive news article by The Oregonian in the References section presently. As WP:N doesn't even require exclusive coverage, just substantial, I would say the conference is notable. There are people from many notable wikis attending this year, including Foundation staff. VanTucky 20:50, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

The link to the Oregonian story doesn't even link to the Oregonian website. And I can't find any other news stories on this item.

"If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources [plural] that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be notable."

There is no significant coverage. There is but one source, and it doesn't link to the newspaper's website, and we can't use the attendance of Wikipedia Foundation staff as a source - that's not independent; it is self-referential. Kingturtle (talk) 21:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I was mentioning the attendees to refute the idea that this doesn't have anyone of note attending, not to assert independent verification of notability, sorry if there was any confusion. The linked article is a reposting of the entire thing, mostly because the Oregonian doesn't keep their articles up on the web forever. I can use the library records of the paper to get it if need be, but for a news article to be used, it doesn't have to have a live net link. The largest newspaper in Oregon gave significant coverage to Recent Changes Camp, and that meets notability by far. If you're really suggesting that the article is a fake, call Mike Rogoway at the paper. His number is right at the bottom. To suggest that an exclusive news piece on the front page of the business section isn't enough coverage to make an annual event notable is not in line with WP:N from my perspective. VanTucky 21:27, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

A) A notable attendee does not a notable event make.

B) The reason I wanted to see the actual Oregonian article is to find out what page it was on. Was it on page 1 or tucked away in page 20 of an insert? How significant was the coverage?

C) The article needs many more independent references to make it up to snuff. Kingturtle (talk) 20:16, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't need multiple exclusive news stories. Either multiple trivial sources combined or a very few large, exclusive articles. Notability policy requires significant coverage, which is defined as "more than trivial but less than exclusive". If not even exclusive coverage is needed, and the subject has it, then it is therefore obviously notable. VanTucky 22:12, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok. WP:N specifically states "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be notable.". It meets everything but the word "sources" (plural) which it says "The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally preferred.". READ "generally preferred" not required. This is notable. And if you'd like - we can even have a vote about it. --ShakataGaNai ^Talk 22:20, 11 May 2008 (UTC)