User talk:Sbouterse (WMF)
- 1 Thoughts on individual grant size
- 2 Ineligible proposals
- 3 Re:6 months or 2 years?
- 4 Grants:IEG/MediaWiki and Javanese script
- 5 Idea Lab
- 6 Re:Verification
- 7 Questions at proposal pages!
- 8 Grants talk:IEG/Consolidate wikiArS to involve art schools
- 9 interview
- 10 Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
- 11 A barnstar for you!
- 12 Thank you!
- 13 Thank you!
- 14 The Idealab design
- 15 commons:User talk:Rillke/Discuss/2013/2#looking for info about Wikivoyage logo voting
- 16 Reveille
- 17 Grant input
- 18 Please fill out our brief Participation Support Program survey
- 19 IEG: Maps
- 20 Hong Kong
- 21 Comments on ShareMap Grant page
- 22 Now i remember the conversation
- 23 What is about - C'est quoi. A series of communication tools about Wikipedia. Cameroon pilot project
- 24 IEG committee
- 25 Beginning of MassMessage, end of EdwardsBot
- 26 New IEG proposal
Thoughts on individual grant size
I was thinking about fellowships and IEG proposals recently. And thought about how the fellowship program encouraged amazing work, adding to but not more amazing than the best work done without such support; and at the same time created a large gap between those supported (at full-time salary for months, with frequent blog posts and other spotlights) and everyone else (who got if lucky the occasional blog mention.) The current IEG creates slightly smaller gaps -- many applicants are asking for support for group projects, or projects with significant material expenses. Some are asking for very little, but it seems they may be excluded by virtue of being so small. The target average grant size is still a large and, to some, offputting amount to give the "winning" proposals... and again the alternative is no support.
A less divisive way to bootstrap individual support might be gradually, with small amounts. In my mind there is a sweet spot around ~$1k/mo for 1-6 months. That's enough to cover housing for people in almost any part of the world; and enough to support a team of 5 working full-time in places with the lowest cost of living. It could be given to dozens of individuals/groups a year; and is at the same time Not a Big Deal yet also being Totally Awesome. So the issue could simply be "ask for this if you need it, don't if you do not." rather than "apply for this Reward if you think your idea is Best and will Win". Stipends of roughly that low amount also helped get Global Voices off the ground without feelings of discontent or resentment. In that case there was expressly a reach out to find someone who could take on a granted/stipended role once there were enough volunteer projects/blog reviews in that area/language-group. And every paid role both produced something new and facilitated the work of others.
Once small grants were available for individual support, it seems less disheartening to me to also have some larger grants for those who feel they need them for a particular epic project.
None of this is related to your own oversight and facilitation, which as ever I find inspiring; thank you. I know that the current program is set on its course, and look forward to seeing what comes of it. –SJ talk 08:27, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
- Hi SJ! I've got some similar concerns about the amounts requested for IEGrants in this round, actually. I hope that ideas asking for the smaller amounts of funding won't be dismissed by the committee - we'll be able to give out more grants if we don't spend the total amount on just a few grants for $30k each, and spreading out the number of projects and ideas we can test with a pot of grant money among more grantees feels like the right way to go, even with the current model for somewhat grand-scale projects (the thing I love most about people in this community: big dreams! the thing I'd love to encourage more of: dream big, scope small). I'd love to see us make a range of grants, maybe one large and several small, and see what comes as a result. I guess we'll have to see how that plays out in this round before making further tweaks, and depending to what degree WMF is willing to continue investing in grants to individuals, I think there is some more room to play with a program specifically for smaller grants as you say...the Global Voices model is totally fascinating. Thanks as always for sharing your thoughts here - I'm a little distracted trying to "meet the deadlines" on the current course obviously, but not so much that I'm not interested in tossing around other models we should try in the future :-) Siko (WMF) (talk) 22:17, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I have changed the status of four proposals to ineligible, those were empty/incomplete, no responses from anybody per obvious reasons. Hope you don't mind. And I thought I should let you know. And I replied at my talk page regarding IEG design. -- ɑηsuмaη ʈ ᶏ ɭ Ϟ 22:36, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Ansuman, thanks for letting me know. I had not marked those that were incomplete with status ineligible for a specific reason, actually. Incomplete proposals are sent intentionally back to the IdeaLab rather than marked ineligible, because they can be worked on to be improved for future rounds still...eligibility is a particular status that WMF staff determines from the eligibility criteria, so it is somewhat different than a measure of completeness. It is not a big problem, but in the future it would be better to not change eligibility status yourself, because in this round we've assigned this action to WMF staff and I would prefer to not confuse people by having non-staffers also adding that status to pages right now. Cheers! Siko (WMF) (talk) 22:59, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
Re:6 months or 2 years?
Hi Siko, thanks for reminding. I just changed the plan from 2 years to 6 months to make it eligible. And thanks for providing information about WMF Grants. Please let me if anything I can do.--AddisWang (talk) 02:59, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Bennylin, sorry if that was confusing. Yes, you're eligible, that review template at the top of your proposal talk page basically means you'll be considered by the committee during this round :-) Siko (WMF) (talk) 17:30, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Per Grants talk:IEG/Backlog pages for all WikiProjects moving over to the Idea lab sounds like a good one, but I'm not sure how one would do that. Thanks! Biosthmors (talk) 05:16, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
- Done! Looking forward to seeing this take shape more for the next round :-) Siko (WMF) (talk) 19:18, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Hi! Can you talk a bit more about verification? If you plan to verify as the Chinese Wikipedia Community (and I appreciate why you are doing that, thanks for being clear!), what exactly would be needed from the WMF end to support this? Siko (WMF) (talk) 22:24, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
- I found another page for details. Since I'm not the Staff of WMF, I need "An Authorization Letter for maintaining the Weibo account with Company’s seal or legal person’s signature" and a copy or a photo of "The Company Registration Documents" at the end.--AddisWang (talk) 14:43, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
I've checked with WMF communications and legal and they do not believe WMF will be able to provide verification, unfortunately. Here is the reason:
- All chapter/community/volunteer oriented twitter or social media handles managed by volunteers have been created by those groups and are maintained solely by those groups. If WMF was to provide a seal or corporate confirmation of any sort (even certifying that the account is volunteer-run), this presents a risk because we can then be held accountable for anything done or said on the account, including if an account was hacked etc. WMF cannot approve or verify a social media account on behalf of a group of volunteers or contributors at present - particularly if it means maintaining that approval with a third party.
Sorry to be the bearer of disappointing news! That being said, it sounds like your project budget was not really intended to be used for the verification, but rather for engaging the community that you connect with via this Weibo account. So, given that, I am wondering if you believe your project can still continue as planned and be successful without WMF-assisted verification? Siko (WMF) (talk) 18:14, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Siko. Yes I had bad feeling when I got the information. I can understand the WMF policy which is the reason I try to avoid the issue happened in maintenance. According to the data of the account, we attract at most 30 followers everyday. Which is six months will be 3600. With the prize I mentioned in the plan, it will work for attracting thousands people to follow us. But the boom will not gona to happen. I'm sure we can achieve a lower level of success without verification. Depends on that, I will change the criterion of the application. But I'm not sure should I remove the verification part from the plan or just keep it. Thanks!--AddisWang (talk) 00:43, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
- I suggest updating the plan to reflect that verification is not possible. You can add a note at the top of the page mentioned it has been updated from the original submission based on the talk page discussion, if you like. Thanks! I am hoping all the best for your PR efforts, whatever happens :-) Siko (WMF) (talk) 01:22, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Questions at proposal pages!
Hi, please see the last discussion. The questions at proposal talk pages (I guess there'd be similar questions at other proposals) about budgets, I found it inappropriate. Isn't there a better way to do this, like asking by wmf staffs or discussing privately. Anyway we are mentioning the amount publicly. What you think! (Asking as a committee member!) -- ɑηsuмaη «T» 21:27, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
- Hi, thanks for the response and clarification. I actually think, prefer this kind of discussions should be done publicly, but I found this inappropriate the way I was asked. That's why I reacted. I have made the changes and replied there again. Thank you! -- ɑηsuмaη «T» 04:59, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi Siko, I've seen the feedback evaluation from committee. Should I answer the comments (specially first and second)? Where? Inside or outside the score template? Thanks! --Dvdgmz (talk) 09:02, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
- Hi! You aren't obligated to respond, as those comments are mostly intended for you to consider as input if a) your project is selected for a grant in this round and we enter the fine-tuning adjustments phase to your project plan or b) your project is not selected in this round but you'd like to improve your proposal and resubmit in a future round. However, you'd be most welcome to address them on the talk page now too of course. I might suggest just creating a new section outside of that template called something like "response to aggregate scoring feedback." Make sense? Siko (WMF) (talk) 23:32, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for delayed response. I just sent an Email though "Email this user" about the interview you mentioned on my talk page. Let me know if you don't get it. Thanks a lot!
--AddisWang (talk) 18:53, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Addis - I just emailed you back, let me know if you don't get this one either. Hope to speak soon :-) Siko (WMF) (talk) 18:36, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
Thanks for the work, perseverance, patience, and skill in spearheading the IEG program. Thanks especially for responding patiently and carefully to my countless questions and comments. I enjoyed working with you and I'm grateful for all that you've done. --Pine✉ 21:35, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|The Herding Cats Barnstar|
|Thanks for being so patient and thorough and kind with us! It musn't have been easy dealing with people from all around the world with such different backgrounds, but I think you did beautifully. It was a pleasure working with you, I peronally learned a lot, and I look forward to future rounds. (You made my day with that unexpected barnstar, I hope this makes you smile too!) Raystorm (talk) 10:09, 30 March 2013 (UTC)|
Thank you for the barnstar! In the process of reviewing applications, I learned a lot of new stuff! It was exciting to be a part of the IEG committee and I enjoyed collaborating with other members and brainstorming ideas. I am a bit disappointed that I could not work as hard as I wanted. I plan to get more active during Round 2! Netha Hussain (talk) 12:58, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your message. I am afraid that my availability might change until August, so I am not sure I will be able to apply again. In any case, I appreciate all of the feedback and the way the evaluation process took place. GoEThe (talk) 12:34, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
I want to thank you as well for your message in the IEG process. I am in a similar situation as the last participant. I am not sure I will be able to apply again but in any case I appreciate all the feedback. We'll be in touch. --Marcmiquel (talk) 16:31, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
The Idealab design
Hiya Siko. I didn't follow the idealab design, I recently saw the pages. I absolutely love what you guys did, I love the kitten, I love the clean design and all the organization there. I don't know if you are the only one to credit, I'm sure Ms. Walls had a large part in it. So, please accept this as Job well done! I commend both of you. I hope a little bit of that levity, and charm gets carried over in other staff projects as well, most of them look very serious. Please pass on this appreciation to anyone else involved in the design. Good job! (I would make a minor critique though, that the main page(Grants:Idealabs) is a bit too long and can be tightened up but it's a trivial concern.)- Kind regards. Theo10011 (talk) 21:55, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the kind words, Theo! Levity is definitely what we've been going for, and I'm happy to hear you think more fun in staff projects would be a good thing, because I'm hoping we'll keep on like this (where appropriate) in the future :-) Much credit is indeed due to Heather Walls, so I'll make sure she sees this too. We're also working on a sprint of IdeaLab improvements this month, and will end up with a new, shorter main landing page and more sub-pages instead, so hopefully that should be even better (totally agree with your critique). Cheers! Siko (WMF) (talk) 22:36, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
I am sorry for the belated reply there; that's why I'd like to make you aware of it. You'll receive the material on 6th or 7th August. If there are questions left (also after reading the material), feel invited to ask me (at Commons). I hope this is ok for you, if not, just tell me right away. Thanks for your interest. Best -- Rillke (talk) 11:06, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
- And breakfast too! Thanks, Pine, just what I needed :) Siko (WMF) (talk) 14:43, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello! I wanted to let you know that I've prepared a good portion of the grant over at Grants:IEG/Reimagining WP Mentorship, but I'd really appreciate your review and input as soon as it is convenient for you! Feel free to just make changes, especially in regards to budgeting (unsure of prospective values), additions, and changes in wording. Thanks! --Jackson Peebles (talk) 02:51, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Please fill out our brief Participation Support Program survey
Hello, the Wikimedia Foundation would like your feedback on the Participation Support Program! We have created a brief survey to help us better understand your experience participating in the program and how we can improve for the future. You are being selected to participate in our survey because you submitted or commented on Participation Support requests in the past.
Click here to be taken to the survey site.
The survey should take less than 10 minutes to complete. We really appreciate your feedback! And we hope to see you in the Participation Support Program again soon.
This message was sent via Global message delivery on 21:46, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
The Wikimania HK and your interaction with us encouraged us a LOT to go ahead for the IEG. Our grant request is posted there /Wikimaps Atlas. Are we still allowed to edit our proposal following the comments we start to get ? Yug (talk) 19:15, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
- Hi, Yug! I'm so glad you were encouraged and submitted your proposal. We'll be posting some more info on your page later this week. Meanwhile, yes, you are absolutely welcome to make edits and updates during this discussion period - it is a good idea to consider this your living project plan :) Cheers! Siko (WMF) (talk) 00:40, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Was an excellent situation to sound out about the ideas, and I must say the ideas lab was very helpful in a number of ways. Now I am on the ground in a sort of way after some post Hong Kong diversions, the general application will be worked on as soon as I can organise. Thanks. sats (talk) 09:38, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
- Glad to hear it, SatuSuro! Looking forward to more soon, Siko (WMF) (talk) 16:09, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for commenting ShareMap grant page I tried to answer your questions in both discussion page and in grant description
If you have any further question or something needs clarification just let me know
Now i remember the conversation
I have just remembered the main conversation we had in Hong Kong.
On Wednesday 23rd I have an umissable component of the project arise which I have to attend to, and have stated as such on my talk page for the IEG, and am begging leave from whoever might be examining it on that day that there are some edits due in thet evening or the following day due to the wiki takes event trouncing all other commitments.
In the strictest sense an opportunity presented itself to further the project which requires me to drive 400km + (probably 500km) tomorrow
- Hi SatuSuro. Thanks for the info. The committee will be reading and scoring proposals for over a week, starting on the 23rd, so I don't think you need to worry about this timing interfering with the scoring/review process in particular - good luck with your opportunity! Siko (WMF) (talk) 20:50, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
What is about - C'est quoi. A series of communication tools about Wikipedia. Cameroon pilot project
- You're most welcome, iopensa - I think your scores look quite good overall and I know the committee was pleased with the level of thought and detail that went into your proposal overall, so thanks for seeing this through :) Siko (WMF) (talk) 18:17, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi , Siko , Thank you for informing me. I have quite busy to our WMIN FDC process, so I haven't engage myself this round to much. I would like to works in next round if you like. Thanks Jayantanth (talk) 07:26, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
- Hi, Jayantanth. I completely understand, and wish you all the best with the FDC process meanwhile! Let's be in touch next round to see how things stand for you then. Best, wishes, Siko (WMF) (talk) 23:06, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Beginning of MassMessage, end of EdwardsBot
Hi. You're being contacted as you're listed as an EdwardsBot user.
With over 400,000 edits to Wikimedia wikis, EdwardsBot has served us well; however EdwardsBot will no longer perform local or global message delivery after December 31, 2013.
New IEG proposal
Hi Siko, I just applied for an IEG here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Global_Economic_Map Do you have any advice on the budget for this project? I'm unsure what amount to assign for each individual expense. Thanks Mcnabber091 (talk) 02:36, 25 November 2013 (UTC)