Art+Feminism User Group/Reporting/Metrics2017

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

2017 Summary[edit]

During our March 2017 campaign, 228 events took place in 37 countries on all six inhabited continents and online. At least 3,545 participants created or improved 6031 pages, and uploaded 1587 images to Wikimedia Commons.


  • 228 events
  • 37 countries and online
  • 4,105 participants
    • 2,600 of which we have usernames
    • at least 1,087 of these users were newly registered
  • 6031 pages created or improved
  • 1363 pages created or improved
  • 4518 pages improved
  • 1587 images uploaded to Wikimedia Commons

Estimate the Metrics for Events Missing Dashboard Data[edit]

Missing Events

We note that this year we had 22 events who failed to adequately report any data, and 8 events that verbally reported some data. This is a significant increase from last year. We believe this is part of the growing pains of implementing the Dashboard campaign, and site event submission workflow. One of our key goals for next year is to reduce the percentage of such events.

For this year, we would like to make a good faith effort to estimate the metrics for those events:

  • Attendance at Missing Events: Given that our average attendance across all events was 13.4 people, and we had 22 events who failed to report data, a flat numerical estimate based on 13.4 p/event x 22 events gives us 294.8 participants. Given that these more disorganized events are on the lower side of the attendance bell curve we are conservatively rounding down to estimate that we had 250 participants at the missing events
  • Productivity for Missing Events: While we have had a steady increase in productivity per participant from .33 articles per participant in 2014 to 2.13 articles per participant in 2017, per our last sentence, we think that these missing events are likely amongst the least productive events, and thus rather than ascribing a flat 532 articles (2.13 articles/p * 250 participants) to the events, we think it is more prudent to make a very conservative shift to our 2015 productivity numbers for these events, as that was a year dominated by new events. We also think that it is more likely that these events improved articles, rather than creating them. Thus .6 articles/p * 250 participants allows us to estimate that we had 150 articles improved by the missing events.

Thus we believe that these numbers skew lower than our numbers for past years (e.g. the number of participants was higher than these numbers reflect). We think there is a decent possibility that this change in reporting percentage could be related to our use of Dashboard, a tool that was new to even the most experienced editors and organizers.

Dashboard Undercounting Large Events

In past years we have assessed attendance at very large event by door count, rather than meetup page sign ins. We determine productivity by meetup sign ins, and we include those non-signed in users when determining overall productivity per participant. We assume these people to be attendees who came to check out what was going on, to learn, and to listen. We believe this is a valid and productive outcome, especially for larger events where facilitators are not able to provide steady one-on-one training and mentorship. This year, as in past years, we only have two events where this is significant enough to need to account for it in our metrics:

  • Paris, France. This event is a two day event supported with significant funding from Fondation d'entreprise Galeries Lafayette that has a much wider scope than other events, including: long table discussions and commissioned art performances. The door count for the event was between 1000-1200 people; 60 people signed in on dashboard, so we will add 1000 people to the overall participant attendance.
  • MoMA, New York City. Because of our public programming track, we have discussion sessions that span the entire day, including the morning keynote panel, and breakout sessions. Thus MoMA draws a significant percentage of people who want to come learn more about Wikipedia and Art+Feminism, but do not sign in to dashboard. The percentage is smaller than Paris: The door count was 225 people; 132 signed in on Dasbhoard, so we will add 93 people to the overall participant attendance.

Granular Data[edit]


  • 178 events on Dashboard
  • 20 events with meetup pages
  • 8 events with verbal reporting of results (numbers of people and sometimes articles, but no usernames or article names)
  • 22 events without reporting of results



Pages created:

  • 927 pages were created by Participants signed in via dashboard
    • We believe this number is somewhat low, because It doesn't account for edits that took place after or before an event, which is normal for an event like ours, where people start Hey page, but take the rest of the week to finish it and then post it. Furthermore, we have a consistent problem where organizers failed to correctly set the start and end times of their events. In some cases this was due to TimeZone changes; In other cases they set the start time after the end time. We noted this in detail in our dashboard report.
    • wikimetrics says 23,362 pages were created, It doesn't give us an information on how many were improved. But we don't really believe that number!)
  • 97 pages were created by Participants signed in via meetup pages. List here.
  • 198 pages created by WiR
  • 141 pages created or improved by WMES events

Pages improved:

  • 4.32K pages were improved (via dashboard)
  • 74 pages were improved by Participants signed in via meetup pages. List here.
  • 13 pages improved by WiR
  • 106 pages were verbally reported improved, without specific article names


  • 1520 images uploaded as tracked in Dashboard
  • 67 images uploaded by WiR

Dashboard data available at

Women in Red data available at