Grants:APG/Proposals/2016-2017 round 1/Wikimedia Argentina/Progress report form

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



Purpose of the report[edit]

This form is for organizations receiving Annual Plan Grants to report on their progress after completing the first 6 months of their grants. The time period covered in this form will be the first 6 months of each grant (e.g. 1 January - 30 June of the current year). This form includes four sections, addressing global metrics, program stories, financial information, and compliance. Please contact APG/FDC staff if you have questions about this form, or concerns submitting it by the deadline. After submitting the form, organizations will also meet with APG staff to discuss their progress.

Contents

Global metrics overview - all programs[edit]

Introduction[edit]

Before entering into analysis of the programs we must highlight some important changes that have undergone regarding the annual grant.

  • The education program has focused its work in the classroom through two projects: Editing Clubs and Wikipedia at the University. In the annual grant we believed that we were going to promote a specific project for the provinces "Wikipedia in your province" that we are not finally implementing. This is because the results of such a massive activity - see Impact report here - were not good during 2015-2016, especially in comparison to the time invested. It is for this reason that we must update the number of total participants and active editors. We expected to reach 200 teachers + 500 students through this project that would have meant 1980 participants and 1550 new editors in the Education Program. As we are not doing it we have updated the numbers for the Education Program as 1280 participants and 850 new editors.
  • The "number of quality articles" metric work very well on specific projects, such as offline activities or projects within the classroom. Instead it is more difficult to apply in massive activities. We are learning from it in order to see how we can improve or where we can apply this indicator for next year. In this sense and mainly in GLAM we have analyzed the quality differentiating articles created - on es wiki and other wikipedias - and improved articles that generally refer to more massive activities. In this sense we have not counted the very small changes. It is a metric that takes time to be implemented so we must review its definition towards a more oriented metric on diverse content, at least within the GLAM program. We will review this at the annual grant 2018.

New Global metrics Overview

Program Participants Newly registered Content pages Number of quality articles % of institutional growth Comments
Education Program 845 366 479 238 (41%) 11 new partners Several Education projects haven't started yet
GLAM Program 556 128 7384 pages on Wikipedia,

3373 metadata added 208 books - 37336 pages uploaded to Commons

4495 on Wikipedia. 7 new partners We have analyzed all the articles created and improved in GLAM as much as possible. The number is the most estimated possible.

The pages on Commons are mainly books and can't be analyzed by this metric properly.

Community Support Program 395 67 Not yet available Not yet available 4 new partners

16 activities defined by our community interests

It refers to new projects supported and planned for the 2nd half of 2017. However we have supported:
  • 75 new articles
  • 1449 images uploaded on Commons
Total 1796 561 7545 articles created/improved

3373 on Wikidata

208 books (37336 pages on commons)

4732 quality articles 22 new partners

16 activities defined by our community

Other relevant metrics can be found here.


Education Program[edit]

Summary
During the first half of 2017, WMAR’s Education program focused on:

  • Promoting activities led by teachers, using Wikipedia in the classroom
  • Making sure these activities get students actively involved as editors,
  • Getting new counterparts involved, to make the program grow both at a local and a regional level.

We also incorporated a new objective associated with the current context of the Wikimedia movement:

  • Positioning the Education program within Iberocoop and the movement's strategy process.

Wikipedia as a learning tool in onsite and remote learning [edit]

Short Summary:
As we said in our Impact Report, one of WMAR’s greatest challenges was to position Wikipedia as a learning tool in the classroom. Every time we’ve tried, we’ve faced the same problems:

  • Despite the training courses, educators were not confident to use Wikipedia in the classroom,
  • Argentinean school and university culture makes the educator leader of the classroom. It is very difficult to change this paradigm, so our projects had to maintain this hierarchy, at least initially.
  • Argentinean schools and universities do not have internet access, in general.

The importance of the Argentinean educational context
During the first half of the national school year, educators went on strike in high-schools and universities. For this reason, classes began later than what had been planned. As a strategy, WMAR emphasized online training courses and then, once classes had begun, we started to work in schools and universities. To date, we have had three and a half months of classes, so most of our projects were re-scheduled for the second semester of the year.

Success: Wikipedia in schools and universities[edit]

Bearing theses challenges in mind, during 2017 we promoted two proposals for the classroom: the Editing Clubs (pilot) and Wikipedia in the University.
Both projects have very specific objectives:

  • Having students & academic researchers as quality content editors
  • Legitimizing the Education program in high-schools, universities and at the national level

How did we plan the projects?

We launched an open call for high-schools and universities around the country. 14 institutions were interested: 10 of them were universities and 4 high-schools. In this first semester, Wikipedia in the University was implemented in 5 national universities: the University of Salta, the University of Rio Negro, the University of Buenos Aires, the San Bartolome Superior Institute (Rosario) and the Superior School of Social Services (Chivilcoy). We chose educators who taught their classes during the first part of the year, on subjects that were not very present in Wikipedia and who accepted to incorporate Wikipedia as an assignment. For this reason, we have worked with classes on paleontology, nutrition, medicine, economy with gender perspective and local heritage.
For high schools, we chose to work with schools from La Rioja and Buenos Aires province, less affected by the educational context.

How were these projects organized?

Wikipedia in the University

  • Educators were trained both online and in-person.
  • Educators could choose whether to work on the improvement, creation or translation of content.
  • Students first edited their articles in their sandbox and then their work was published under the supervision of the WMAR team and volunteers.
  • Every project led by an educator was evaluated as part of the subject.

Editing Clubs
The Editing Club is designed in three phases, lasting a total of three weeks:

  • First phase: in-person meeting with educators, editing workshop and defining the topic that the class will edit on.
  • Second phase: educators train students and lead the project in the classroom. WMAR provides technical support remotely. This is the offline phase.
  • Third phase: in-person meeting with the educators and students when, assisted by WMAR volunteers, the work done offline is published in Wikipedia.

What results did we get?

At a qualitative level, we would like to emphasize:

  • Quality content: the content added to Wikipedia was considered to be, mostly, of quality. No content added by the Clubs has been erased or modified and we have added content on specific subjects that were not present on Wikipedia.
  • We promoted cultural change: after the activities, we interviewed the educators who confirmed that the perception that they had of Wikipedia changed.
  • We have incorporated new partners: ministries, high schools and universities at the national level, with which we plan to continue working in the second semester of the year.

At quantitative level:

Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (at end of Q2) End of year (projected or actual) Comments
100 students University 28 95 Above target n/a
100 articles created/improved 61 86 100 n/a
70% quality articles (university) n/a 61% On target n/a
450 students High-School n/a 135 450 2 more Editing Clubs planned + UNESCO online contest
150 created/improved 41 39 150 UNESCO online contest 2nd half of the year.
% of quality articles (high-school) n/a 56% Not yet available n/a
At least 7 institutions involved 1 7 10 We expect to work with 3 new universities.
Number of trainings n/a 17 Around 30 According to recent results.
Number of educators involved 559 310 Not yet available Only Editing Clubs and Wikipedia in the University's projects
% of educators' satisfaction n/a 100% n/a n/a
Number of volunteers involved 1 12 Around 20 Mainly educators + WMAR's volunteers leading education activities.
Number of staff hours n/a 120 Around 240 According to recent results.
Editors retention n/a Not yet available n/a n/a

What changes did these projects generate in our Education program?

  • They provided the Education program with a strategic direction in relation to the work with high-schools and universities
  • By offering specific projects, the interest of the education community in our projects has grown: since we launched the call, 58 educators have expressed interest in our projects.
  • Legitimizing WMAR’s Education program in educational institutions.

Challenge?
Both projects implied 120 hours of work by the person responsible of the Education program. WMAR’s challenge is to make this model grow at a national scale. For this, we need to build a network of educators that get involved with the projects.

Side effect: Editing Clubs to re-write local history

The Editing Club is a project that makes educators and students work together in a different way. Working with Wikipedia incorporated an educational tool, opened new spaces for collaborative work and got students out of the classroom to visit archives, libraries and historical sites in order to reconstruct their own local history. For example, students from the province of La Rioja created the article of the most renowned local poet, Héctor David Gatica, and improved the article on the international border crossing Paso Pircas Negras among others. Clubs are positioning themselves as learning activities that also promote the preservation of local heritage at a national scale. That is why we plan to implement them in other provinces in the second semester of the year.



Success: Remote learning [edit]

WMAR’s online course had its fifth edition during the first half of 2017. Even though the course is well defined, we had to make changes. At the beginning of the year, the ES Wikipedia community expressed discontent regarding the results - in terms of editions- from other universities courses, who were not respecting Wikipedia’s criteria and format. In order to continue staying in good terms with the ES Wikipedia community, the 5th edition of the course focused on quality rather than quantity, and every contribution was revised by tutors and volunteers.

For this purpose, the WMAR Education program adapted the course in the following way:

  • Students worked on their Sandbox, so content could be corrected before being published.
  • Suggesting activities focused on improving quality: adding references, categories, improving translations.
  • Getting volunteers involved, especially Spanish Wikipedia administrators, in the revisions of the students’ work.
  • Designing support material to answer the participants’ doubts during the editing process.

This translated into slower work by participants, tutors and volunteers, but, in turn, it also prevented conflicts and discontent within the community. Even though there were less educators involved, because of the educators’ strike in our country, we managed to keep 61 active educators. 45% of the teachers involved answered to the final survey where 100% showed compliance by the content and what was learned in the course.

Side effect: From participants to active editors
After the last three experiences of our virtual course, we have identified the most active participants. During June and July we invited them to participate in the first editing contest organized for educators. The main objective was to continue supporting their learning as editors so eventually they started to be active editors. 40 of them were contacted, of which 23 participated by editing on different topics: technologies, history, human rights and education. We should also point out that this proposal was only addressed to these teachers, with the aim that they could participate in a real activity in Wikipedia but in a safe environment. The community of ES Wikipedia respected the proposal. The results were 89 articles edited, including 13 articles created and 41 new images uploaded to Commons. Carrying out this contest help us to find strategies to re-convene former participants and involved them as active editors on Wikipedia.


Main results

Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (at end of Q2) End of year (projected or actual) Comments
600 participants 361 134 Aprox 300 Less participants due to local context.
450 articles improved 680 260 On target n/a
45 projects designed by teachers 85 35 On target n/a
Participant dropout 41% 45% n/a Around 40%-50% is considered normal dropout
Volunteers involved n/a 2 At least 2 n/a
Tutorials designed n/a 5 n/a n/a
% of satisfaction n/a n/a 100% 100% of the participants was satisfied with the training and learning.
Editors retention n/a n/a Not yet available n/a




Gating factors: Build a community of educators [edit]

While we continue developing different strategies to consolidate our educational projects in schools and universities, we have realized that part of the success at sustaining and replicating is related to building and strengthening a new community of educators.

Which have been our challenges, so far?

  • Identifying educators who can be leaders of WMAR’s proposals in their institutions.
  • Training educators properly.
  • Generating proper support and follow-up.

What do we need to scale the program?

  • Teachers who are interested in using Wikipedia and are properly trained.
  • Working with our community of editors on the importance of mentoring and supporting newbies.
  • Strengthening the work between WMAR and the education partners to promote and scale our projects within the institutions.

What are we doing to solve this situation?

  • We have participated in strategic educational spaces (also media) to identify leading educators
  • We launched an open call for our educational projects in order to identify motivated educators who can become leaders.
  • We have developed trainings and tutorials according to the educators' needs
  • And for the first time, we are certifying the educators (15) who led projects during this first semester to make our educational projects grow and strengthen the relationship with our partners.

Main results

Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (at end of Q2) End of year (projected or actual) Comments
8 strategic educational events n/a 4 On target More information here
4 new partners n/a 2 On target Fundación Ceibal and University of Rosario
Educators' certified n/a 15 Around 30 New goal
Tutorials (according to teachers's needs) 9 11 n/a n/a
Media appearance 26 12 On target n/a
% of topics coverage Wikilesa and Wikipedia in the Classroom Wikipuentes MOOC and Edition Club n/a n/a



Onsite - Online education main learnings[edit]
  • Designing specific strategies for each project, allows us to legitimize WMAR's projects at all levels of education.
  • Providing constant training - virtual and on site - makes educators feel confortable to use Wikipedia as a learning tool.
  • Having teachers leading projects within their institution has meant good results in terms of content and strenghtening the relation with our partners.
  • Redefining the quality criteria in our virtual course has demanded more supervision, but allows us to maintain good results and ensures that we have a good relationship with the community
  • In education, to participate in strategic spaces is much more effective to approach new teachers than having presence in the media.


What's next[edit]
  • Continuing consolidating our projects in at least three new universities and research spaces
  • Training and certifying educators to take our educational proposals to a national scale - July 2017.
  • Launching the 6th edition of Wikipuentes MOOC during the second semester.
  • Carrying out our annual project with UNESCO in high schools of the entire country.
  • Carrying out two more Editing Clubs in the provinces of Tierra del Fuego and Entre Rios.
  • Strengthening our bond with new counterparts who started participating in the WMAR projects, especially with the provincial Ministries of Education.

Changes from our APG proposal

  • Wikilesa: The greatest challenge of WMAR was to position Wikipedia into the classrooms. Wikilesa is a project that we know it works and we are now working to promote it regionally. We'll make Wikilesas in the second half of the year.
  • Project with inland provinces: we had designed a project "Wikipedia in your province" that has not aroused interest. Instead we adapted the Editing Clubs to work with high schools in the inland provinces of Argentina.
  • Community building: It was not a target on our APG proposal but since last year's evaluation - see the Impact report- it is critical if we want to scale our Education Program.

Education & Wikimedia movement [edit]

Success: Education in the movement’s strategy and Iberocoop[edit]

The fact that the movement is designing its future strategy can be an opportunity to position Education inside the movement. For this purpose, WMAR has promoted two work spaces at a local and a global level.


Gating factors: The post-conferences[edit]

In every Education conference we ended up with the same challenges:

  • How to scale education activities.
  • How to measure impact
  • What resources do we need

Even though we face the same problems, it is still difficult to set up a proper post-conference follow up on specific results due, in part, to the following reasons:

  • Many different contexts: Context is key in Education. In education, projects need to be locally established and they require local follow-up. Also, the same projects might deliver different results. To involve all the contexts in an Education conference is hard and it ends up as an expository space of educational projects without a clear strategy to scale global projects locally.
  • Difficulties to set up common definitions: The debate regarding "impact" is always present. Even so, in many cases we remain aligned to the definition of impact associated with the quantitative aspects. While debate is on the agenda, we have not yet been able to determine a common definition of "impact" that is consistent with the reality of education programs.
  • Difficulties to set up a common agenda: We need to go one step further from just being conferences about "what happens around the movement in Education". From planning to evaluation, we must work to define common objectives along with flexible common indicators that can be implemented and re-interpreted in the best way within each local context.


Education meetings learnings[edit]
  • Learning from educational projects allows us to identify interesting projects and even design how to adapt them in each context.
  • We need to define new education indicators to design a common strategy.
  • Organizing meetings that go beyond being an expository and debate place are needed to define scalable and common projects.
  • International education meetings can be a meeting place, but they should also focus on designing common strategies on education within the movement.


What's next[edit]
  • We will continue to work and strengthen our relationship with Wikimedia Israel. We will continue to have regular meetings to share resources, projects and learnings.
  • We will continue to work with the WMF's Education department. In particular we are working to organize part of the Edu track in Wikimania, as a continuation of the work done in Berlin.
  • We will continue to work with the Iberocoop on Education. Particularly we are already working with Wikimedia Chile to scale Wikipuentes and we hope to do it with Wikimedia Mexico before the end of the year.
  • We will continue to generate resources in the next 6 months: tutorials, publications, videos etc that can be used in Education around the movement.

GLAM Program[edit]

Our new partners are:

Partner Activities, so far Next steps
Maten al Mensajero Publishing House     1 training course on Wikidata     Data and editing marathon designed to upload items to Wikidata.  
Hecho en Buenos Aires 1 training on Wikipedia     Digitizing of the 200 magazines
Museo de Arte Contemporáneo de Puerto Rico 2 trainings

1 Edit-a-thon

Help them organize another edit-a-thon.

Consolidating a community of female editors.    

Red de Periodistas con Perspectiva de género 2 trainings about Wikipedia.

1 Edit-a-thon    

Editing workshops to reduce gender gap in Wikipedia.

Consolidating a community of female editors.    

National Institute of Technology for Agriculture and Livestock (INTA)     2 training sessions and

1 edit-a-thon on the subject (July)   

Cooperating with the researchers’ work.

Consolidating a new thematic community.    

Laboratorio de Innovación de la Dirección General del Libro 1 training on Campaign #1lib1ref  Generating a community and a network with libraries.    
Parque de la Memoria Cession of 65 images of works of art     Edit-a-thon. Cession of data bases. Training their educational team.

Our work with these institutions is organized in two phases:

  • Training sessions to promote free culture in the institutional circles - fist 6 months
  • Promoting offline activities to get new thematic communities involved in the Wikimedia movement - next 6 months

We, also, must underline that these institutions have active communities with which we are currently working with two objectives:

  • Designing projects together.
  • Build new thematic communities within GLAM.
Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (at end of Q2) End of year (projected or actual) Comments
250 participants offline 511 193 On target Most offline activities programmed for 2nd half of the year
Number offline activities 10 11 On target Mainly trainings within new partners.
articles created/improved n/a 58 Not yet available 26 articles improved by #1lib1ref

14 articles on the gender edit-a-thon

% articles of quality n/a 43 n/a Others have been very small improvements
New middle-sized partners involved 1 6 6 New target. Continue working with them.
40 new participants retained n/a Not yet available 40 To be analyzed at the end of the year.

Getting new large institutions involved

During 2017, we have released 185 books by the 4 main cultural partners and used 92% of this heritage on Wikidata. Using the material uploaded is undoubtedly one of the quality indicators that we promote. However, we have worked with the same large cultural institutions since 2015 and our work is touching its ceiling. Our historic partners are independent regarding digitizing and currently our work is based on supporting the post-processing of the information and dissemination of their heritage.

Our 2-year work with these institutions has allowed us to have clear success cases that have set a precedent at a local level, which led to the incorporation of two new large cultural partners for the 2017 program.

  • The Library of the Buenos Aires Province Legislature : we have finally began to release content. Also, and most importantly, this institution is becoming a great new ally and referent for other local archives outside Buenos Aires. To date, we have organized with them an awareness event and a training course on post-processing information for cultural institutions, which we will repeat during the second semester of this year.
  • The Mariano Moreno National Library: this library owns one of the two only processed data bases in the country. We have trained 40 librarians on the importance of liberating data and their role in the construction of knowledge. Thus, we have accessed the library’s authority control data base, which contains 11.647 items, and we have matched up 28% of it in Wikidata. Even though we are still validating information manually, thanks to this process we have improved the metadata of over 3200 items related to literary work of the entire world.

Side effect: Building a new community of librarians
We are finally working with communities of librarians. We adapted #1lib1ref to our context and got involved with key institutions of Argentinean culture for the campaign: the Book’s General Administration of Buenos Aires, which manages the network of libraries and the Mariano Moreno National Library, the most important library in the country.
Thanks to this initiative, we trained over 60 librarians - in 3 in-person meetings- and introduced Wikipedia and the free culture to a community with which we had not worked before.The project was finally carried out by 7 libraries, a number we consider to be very good for a pilot test. During the project we provided them with customized support by mentoring them and guided their first steps as editors. The project has meant much more than positioning Wikimedia Argentina within the libraries, by generating a new community with which we are working today. As part of the "call effect", we have been contacted by La red de Bibliotecas de la Universidad de Buenos Aires ( network of Libraries of the University of Buenos Aires) and we are organizing the campaign for the second half of the year.

Main results WIR

Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (at end of Q2) End of year (projected or actual) Comments
6 cultural partners (2 new) 4 6 On target More information here
3 training courses 6 2 On target More information here
200 books released 273 208 Above target n/a
1000 images 1383 n/a On target Activity on the second half of the year
Pages uploaded on Commons 35,000 37336 Above target n/a
% of uploaded of quality n/a 100% On target n/a
800 articles created 2052 318 On target Wikisource project has started on July
% of articles created of quality 407 72% (230) On target 230 articles created in Wikidata (+6 items)
Articles improved on Wikidata n/a 3200 New target Massive upload of data. 4 volunteers involved
Number of volunteers involved 4 4 At least 4 n/a
% of satisfaction n/a Not yet available Not yet available End of the year



Gating: Improve outreach[edit]

Working with new and diverse counterparts shouldn’t be strange, specially considering our local context. In Latin America, and particularly in Argentina, culture is often constructed outside traditional circles. Even though incorporating new partners means getting new communities involved, we are also facing new challenges to reach new audiences and partners. This is mainly because:

  • Approval within the WMAR community: we need to generate a cultural change inside the community of Wikimedia Argentina and show that the program is versatile and that we need larger cultural representation for the program to grow.
  • Geographical diversity: we continue having difficulties reaching new audiences, especially outside of Buenos Aires. Around 90% of our partners are from Buenos Aires City which translates into difficulties to reach strategic cultural institutions beyond the province of Buenos Aires. We are currently working with some volunteers to start promoting the GLAM program in inland provinces.
  • Scope in the media: we are having more difficulties positioning the GLAM project - a part of offline activities- in the media this year. We are working to change our communication strategy, so that it is not only effective when we carry out activities but also a tool to generate awareness and promote the work we have already done, along with our partners, to improve access to free knowledge.

Main results:

Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (at end of Q2) End of year (projected or actual) Comments
Attending to 6 cultural events 7 4 On target 75% in Buenos Aires (we attended to Wikicite)
Media coverage 17 12 On target n/a
% of topics coverage edit-a-thons events edit-a-thons and gender Not yet available n/a


Partnerships' learnings[edit]
  • Working with middle-size organizations is easier, more organic and allow us new thematic communities. They are also open to new activities which adds diversity to the program
  • Although it slows quantitative results, carrying out trainings in cultural institutions are required to drive long-term GLAM's projects.
  • We need to define new roles for historical partners far from "liberating content/creating content" that generate new added value.
  • Continue adapting international projects to our local context - #1lib1ref, transfers of databases etc. continues to be a good strategy to promote new activities within cultural institutions.


What's next[edit]
  • We are going to try to strengthen our work with the new partners that we incorporated in 2017. To this purpose, we are going to continue working on the planned activities as well as working with the partners that we incorporated in 2016, like Open House Buenos Aires.
  • We are going to continue training cultural institutions on issues related free culture and digitalizing. Also, we are opening a digitalization point in our WMAR offices, so that we can liberate private or personal collections and incorporate them to Wikimedia Commons.
  • We have started to work with another #OpenGlam group in the country. In the following months we expect to strengthen our relationship to guarantee better access to cultural heritage.
  • We will promote #1lib1ref within the University of Buenos Aires and continue strengthening our relationships with the network of libraries.
  • We are going to participate in talks on free culture and data opening. The second semester of the year is when GLAM organizes more talks, offline activities related to the program. We will participate in talks on free culture and data opening at the Mariano Moreno National Library, the conference of libraries at the University of Buenos Aires and the Americas’ Regional Conference on open government.

Changes from our APG proposal

  • Underrepresented groups : It is still difficult to work with minority groups. We have contacted different NGOs during the first half of the year but have not yet been able to specify anything.
  • Open offline activities (edit-a-thon, per example): To date, activities have been closed and training-related for over 100 cultural professionals. These activities were necessary to get communities involved and strengthen the concept of free culture in these institutions.For this reason, activities such as edit-a-thons have seen much smaller numbers and the work cannot be evaluated merely with indicators like “# of created articles”.

Improving content[edit]

In the beginning of 2017, we carried out a survey to understand which were the interests and opinions of our community. 72% of editors think it is necessary to continue creating articles, while 63% think it is necessary to improve the quality of existing articles. Also, 54% of editors spend their time in Wikipedia revising and improving content.

To this purpose, during the first half of 2017, we promoted activities according to the following criteria:

  • Activities to incorporate new and more diverse knowledge.
  • Activities to improve existing knowledge.
  • Activities to export knowledge and diversify other Wikipedias.

Success: Adding diverse and quality content to Wikimedia projects[edit]

Wikimedia Argentina has promoted activities to add diverse and quality content within Wikimedia by carrying out specific online and offline activities:

Creating content regarding gender on Wikipedia

The Iberocoop's editing contest The Woman You Have Never Met, aims at improving and creating content regarding women and gender in Wikipedia. These initial objectives, have been improved since 2015:

  • The number of articles created keeps growing: 342 in 2015, 1264 in 2016, 1876 in 2017.
  • The number of women participating also keeps growing: 33% en 2015, 29% in 2016, 38% in 2017

Also we reached the following conclusions:

  • Articles created does not imply that they have a gender perspective
  • Like most Wikipedia contests, they rarely attract new female editors: only 10% of the total number of articles were created by women.

With these challenges in mind, this year we focused the evaluation in analyzing whether new articles had been written with a gender perspective. This can seem difficult but it helps us gain an accurate vision about how new content is created.

On the other side, and with the aim of incorporating more female editors and diversifying content, for the first time the contest was designed as a global campaign. We got 8 communities of the movement involved and the contest was led by WikiDonne, Women in Red and fostered by women from Macedonia, Israel, Poland, Australia, Morocco and the Netherlands. This translated into the creation of 749 articles.

The contest is not only onwiki but we also offer activities, such as edit-a-thons, framed by the campaign. Such activities took place in Chile, Italy, Australia, Morocco, Mexico and Argentina. In Argentina we promoted 5 editing workshops and 3 edit-a-thons, along with La red de Periodistas argentina con visión de género, Museo de Arte Contemporáneo de Puerto Rico and Mujeres en Arquitectura.

Debates to define gender perspective in Wikipedia
Apart from the results, it is important to underline the conversation that took place before the contest. In this sense, we had an interesting debate about what we understood as an article with a gender perspective, depending on each Wikipedia. In 2016 we designed a small handbook to guide the edition and prevent new articles in Wikipedia in Spanish from reproducing the gender gap and existing sexist bias. That’s why the result of these conversations where gender indicators were defined is important, since it can be the first step to reduce the sexist bias in different Wikipedias.

Adding diverse content to other Wikipedias

One of Iberocoop’s greatest challenges is to position Ibero-American culture beyond our borders. Beyond our language borders, many Wikipedias still can’t access the history and culture of our region.

For this purpose, we carried out our project Translating Ibero-America one more time. Even though the objectives were the same as in 2016, results were quite different:

  • The number of editors involved decreased significantly: from 51 in 2016 to 22 in 2017 ·
  • The number of articles was relatively smaller: 425 in 2016, 351 in 2017

We cannot clearly explain why results were so different, particularly regarding the number of editors involved. It may have been due to the month in which other contests were organized or maybe interest on this activity has decreased in the international community. Despite the results, we would like to emphasize that for the first time we included articles about the culture of Central America and Paraguay, which were 26% of the total of created articles, countries without a community of editors. Getting these countries involved implied facing the challenge of including their culture properly, as they are countries that we do not know well. This, which was initially a limitation, has become an opportunity for the region:

Designing the first regional survey
Iberocoop is an open and inclusive network. The only limit is precisely to have an identified community of active editors. This causes some countries to always remain at the periphery of our activities. It is not that there is nothing going on in those countries. As a matter of fact, the Wikimedia Mexico initiative –“Editatona”-, was carried out in many countries of Central America. With this in mind, since May 2017, we began to design a regional survey. Led by Wikimedia Chile and Wikimedia Argentina, during May and June we invited Iberocoop's organizations to share the questions that they think should be included in the survey. At the moment, we are processing the information and working with some of the staff of the Wikimedia Foundation to put it in order and launch the survey at the end of the year. The objective is to identify potential communities, partners and editors in those countries to start working with them in order to make Iberocoop a truly inclusive network.

Main results

Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (at end of Q2) End of year (projected or actual) Comments
3000 articles created/improved on gender/culture 1659 2227 On target TWYHNM: 1876 - TIA:351
100 editors involved (Iberocoop contests) 102 85 On target n/a
20 women editors involved (Iberocoop contests) n/a 15 On target n/a
% of articles of quality n/a 1329 On target Just ES Wikipedia
15 editors from other Wikipedias n/a 42 Above target TWYHNM: 27 - TIA:15
Number editors involved in offline activities (gender) 113 58 Not yet available n/a
Number articles improved in offline activities (gender) 121 40 Not yet available Editing workshops and edit-a-thons planned
Number of new women editors (online-offline) n/a 65 Not yet available Not yet available

Improving the quality of the Wikimedia projects

We continue working with Iberocoop and the editors of the Spanish Wikipedia. Thanks to the survey and the editors’ interest on quality, we organized 2 editing challenges together with Wikimedia Chile, Wikimedia Mexico and Wikimedia Spain. Apart from the numerical results (+4000 improved articles), 67 editors were actively involved, of which 20% were women and 41% were new participants. This confirms that if we pay attention to the online community’s demands and interests, we have great potential to keep on constructing a community of editors that’s committed to our initiatives, especially those related to Wikipedia.

Side effect: positioning volunteer work during editing challenges
A cross-cutting theme in all the WMAR programs is the construction and enhancement of our community’s work. That is why, during 2017, we have begun to position the work of our volunteers in other programs. Such was the case of Jmmuguerza, who during 2016 liberated 3100 images of the historic El Grafico magazine. Through GLAM and our editing challenges, we invited the community of editors to re-use the images to improve Wikipedia articles, Wikidata and Wikimedia Commons categories. As a result, 85% of the images are being used, in 67 Wikipedias, 29% are distinct images, 300 articles were improved in Wikidata and 1000 categories were edited in Wikimedia Commons by our community of editors.

Main results

Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (at end of Q2) End of year (projected or actual) Comments
5 online activities 3 2 On target At least 2 challenges planned
5000 articles created/improved 4376 4833 On target See results here and here
2000 ítems on Wikidata n/a 300 On target Wikidata challenge planned on September. Small improvements
% articles of quality n/a At least 3616 On target The first editing contest (1) was focused on improving articles by using images + categories. 1933 were improved but 1250 were very small changes. In this case we considered quality the use of images and the categories added.

The second contest (2) was focused on improving the quality of Wikipedia and was review by very active editors.

This metric is difficult to apply in cases of massive activities.

Involve 200 editors 41 67 Under target Our editor's community has around 70 active editors (see community survey results)
50 new editors involved 2 27 Under target 27 new participants. Already editors.


Gating factors: Involve new editors & new ideas[edit]

The GLAM program continues to face two major challenges when we talk about creating content. These are:

  • Involve new editors: Our activities continue to attract active editors but these are rarely new editors engaged on any of WMAR's activities. Building a new editors' community is still a major challenge for WMAR and the Wikimedia movement. To try to fix this problem we are working as follows:
  • Approach thematic communities: as has been said, we are focusing our work on training institutions and their communities. Involving existing communities into the Wikimedia ecosystem can be a great strategy to get new editors and content producers/donors into our GLAM program.
  • Make it easer to get involved : along with the Community Support program, we are organizing workshops, editing activities and informal encounters between new editors and our historical community, with the aim of involving them in a more comprehensive manner.
  • Little room for innovation: content is important because it favors the access to more and better knowledge and also because it means the improvement of the Wikimedia projects. But focusing the strategy on content also limits other growth and leaves little room for innovation. To work on this issue and continue proposing more innovative activities, we need to keep on strengthening the work of Iberocoop; the more we are, the more ideas we will have on the table and the more editors will work on the construction of those ideas. Even though the work of Iberocoop has improved during the first semester of 2017, it is important to continue working together with the countries of the region so efforts are better coordinated.


Content learnings[edit]
  • Organizing activities according to our community's interests leads to a greater participation. Gender and quality improvement are key topics.
  • Massive online challenges aren't a good strategy to involve new editors as part of the community.
  • Evaluating through quality indicators works for smaller activities as edit-a-thons but gets difficult on massive activities.
  • Working with editors from communities outside Iberocoop adds cultural diversity within Wikipedia.


What's next[edit]
  • We will design projects to work outside of Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons. During the second half of the year we will focus our work in Wikisource where we will continue positioning the books digitized and we will continue advancing with our work in Wikidata.
  • Along with Iberocoop we will promote new gender projects as well as continue creating diverse content. We are planning to work together with WikiArabia and WikiIndaba to position Latin American culture within those Wikipedias.
  • Working closely with the Community Support program to design new strategies to involve participants as active editors.

Community Support Program[edit]

Summary

During the first six months of 2017, the Cummunity Support program has focused on getting to know our community, engaging it and expanding it.   In this sense, our work reinforces the objectives set for the program during 2017:

  • Expand our community with new members and volunteers.
  • Consolidate our online and offline communities.
  • Strengthen the link between our community and Wikimedia Argentina.
  • Generate a wider and more diverse regional community

One of the greatest changes has been the incorporation of a person in charge of the program as part of the WMAR staff, with the aim of improving communication with our community, making it more fluid and being able to respond the demands and ideas in time and manner.

Working with WMAR’s community[edit]

During 2016 we detected this great challenge:

  • WMAR is aware neither of how its work is appreciated, nor of the community’s specific demands.

To strengthen the link between our community and WMAR, during the first semester of 2017, we carried out 2 large surveys:

Success: Getting to know the WMAR community[edit]

With the objective of getting to know our community, how they perceive our work, their interests and demands, from March to May 2017, we carried out two surveys that engaged 93 members of the WMAR community -members and editors-.

WMAR's members survey
We must underline that only 20% (22) of our members answered the survey, which confirms that we have a small community of active members. The survey has been essential to identify strong and weak points of the work we do as an organization. The most remarkable results were:

  • 86% of our members think it is very easy to contact and approach Wikimedia Argentina
  • 96% believes Wikimedia Argentina tries hard to establish communication with the community
  • 82% thinks Wikimedia Argentina makes a real contribution to free knowledge.

Also, we have challenges to deal with, and they can be summarized as follows:

  • Improving spaces to listen to WMAR's community
  • Generating more technical support to Wikimedia editors

WMAR's community of editors survey
71 editors of the WMAR community answered the survey. This is a survey that we carry out every year, with the aim to know the interests and preferences of the editors and being able to articulate attractive activities for them during the year. As it happens since 2016, the community is very interested in creating and most of all improving content in Wikipedia (92% of our editors work on this project). Also, and unlike previous years, we introduced new indicators to get better quality results.
They were the following:

1. Analysis of local context
Context is key, also when organizing online activities. That is why we wanted to know how many hours editors spend editing and why. It is remarkable to confirm that 54% of our community edits with “some frequency” (between 1 to 3 times a month, to daily). However the 45% does it between 1 to 3 times per month and the number of weekly hours is very reduced (between 1 and 5). According to most of the answers, this is explained by the Argentinean work context.

2. The community on Wikipedia
We wanted to know, for the first time, what obstacles make Wikipedia a hostile environment that affects editions. The answers were disparate. While 30.7% pointed at the community of editors, 23% answered that there are no barriers, and the rest pointed at technical obstacles -format, software etc. In this sense, 69,3% of Argentinean editors consider that the obstacles are different aspects related to the community.

3. Women in Wikipedia
Of the 71 editors that participated in the survey, only 16,9% were women. For the first time, we tried to understand, through the community of editors, how to tackle the gender gap in Wikipedia. According to the editores, women don’t participate because of cultural and social reasons, and lack of interest and/or knowledge on the Wikimedia projects. Regarding possible solutions, they suggested projects aimed at including more women and improving and diversifying channels of communication.

These indicators translate into new challenges that we have already begun to tackle:

  • Lack of time: we have designed proposals accordingly and we have extended the time for participating.
  • Developing practices of positive discrimination to get new female editors involved in Wikipedia.

Lastly, something that is remarkable is the improvement of the community of editors on the existence of WMAR. Comparing 2015, when only 27% knew that WMAR existed, today 64.8% knows and recognizes projects promoted by the organization.

Challenge?
Our challenge is to continue attending the needs of both communities in an efficient manner, in order to expand our offline community. Maintaining a good relationship with our online community is essential to make our projects grow

Main results
You can find the results of our surveys here


Gating: Getting every voice involved[edit]

WMAR’s community is also formed by all the counterparts who work with us. Most of our projects are led by a person who is a referent point in education or culture and who helps gets the work done and disseminate Wikimedia’s values.
We need to make these voices more present in the design of our strategy. For this purpose, we need to expand the roles that currently define belonging to the community, which goes far beyond being editors and/or volunteers.
In the case of WMAR, we need to include new voices in the design of our work:

  • New partners who promote awareness and position the work of WMAR
  • Volunteers who work as a bonding bridge with organizations.
  • Alliances with journalists and the media.
  • Network of experts who work as advisers on specific subjects (Gender- Human Rights)

In order to include these voices, during August we will foster encounters with these leaders in the frame of the process of planning WMAR’s new strategy.


Knowing WMAR's community learnings[edit]
  • Knowing our community - members and editors - is fundamental to carry out proposals according to the interests and needs of our community


What's next[edit]
  • We will continue to generate proposals according to the interests and needs of our community.
  • We will continue to try to identify new and potential members to involve them as part of the WMAR community.
  • We will actively integrate the community in the definition of the strategy of Wikimedia Argentina for 2018. Meetings are alraedy planned for August.

Working for the WMAR’s community[edit]

WMAR’s challenge is about:

  • Listening and providing the existing community with the necessary support .
  • Generating new spaces for participation, to make the community grow.

During 2017, we have worked on these challenges in the following way

Success: Support to WMAR’s community[edit]

During the first semester of the year, we have continued working together with WMAR’s community, especially regarding support to their proposals and initiatives, which is one of their main demands. So far, 16 activities - encounters, projects, online challenges, have been defined through our community's interests.

Support to projects
We have supported the design of 10 projects proposed by our community. At least 5 of them will be technical, financially and institutionally supported during 2017. During the first semester we have continued supporting initiatives of our community that were in line with our objectives:

  • Gender projects: we have continued to support the project Mujeres en Arquitectura led by Jaluj and Imoisset. The project has grown at a national scale with activities outside Buenos Aires and was also presented in WikiWomen Camp in Mexico. So far +70 new articles and +100 categories on Commons have been created.
  • Positioning volunteers as leaders: We supported the participation of our volunteers on strategic awareness spaces. 4 volunteers led activities within FOSS Communities, high schools and universities.

Support projects' strategy
During 2017, we have designed a new strategy to support projects in a more specific and result-oriented way. The main points of this strategy are:

  • Identifying: Use of informal encounter spaces to identify ideas and proposals within our community (partners, volunteers, participants, editors).
  • Meeting: Organizing personalized meetings in our offices or via skype/hangout. During 2017 we have organized 6 meetings.
  • Technical support: Support for project design from the ground up. 4 projects by four volunteers have received this kind of support.
  • Mentoring: Organizing mentoring conferences -in-person and remote- so new members with projects can learn from historical project leaders.
  • Open call for projects: 2 open calls, twice a year, to the community can submit projects and ask for the support they need.

Main results

Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (at end of Q2) End of year (projected or actual) Comments
1 open call for projects 1 1 2 See here
Support 3 new projects 6 10 On target Projects selected will be carried out the 2nd half of the year
100 images/documents  n/a Not yet available On target Will be carried out the 2nd half of the year
200 improved articles. n/a 70 On target Will be carried out the 2nd half of the year

Mobility Grants

So far, we gave out 11 local mobility grants and supported the participation of one member of our community in Wikicite 2017 and Wikimania 2017 with travel grants and lodging. These activities, that we intend to continue promoting during 2017, aim at improving and fostering the participation of our community in the WMAR activities, appreciating the work of volunteers and help them to keep on training and strengthening their bond with the movement.
Main results

Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (at end of Q2) End of year (projected or actual) Comments
10 micro-grants 7 11 Not yet available n/a
1 grant to attend Wikicite 2017 n/a 1 n/a n/a
1 grant to attend Wikimania 2017 1 1 n/a n/a
supported 5 Wikimania grants by members of our community. n/a 3 n/a Those who apply

Encounter spaces
We have continued promoting encounter spaces. During the first semester of 2017, we have organized 10 encounters with the community. Unlike what we did in 2016, we have promoted new encounter spaces, according to the needs and interests of our community. They have been the following:

  • Engage former and new community: we have organized 3 encounters to strengthen bonds and get new members to meet each other.
  • Build new community: 3 encounters led by the new community of photographers.
  • Mentor’s community: 1 encounter to begin to organize the community of mentors
  • Projects’ support: 5 encounters to advise on projects

Main results

Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (at end of Q2) End of year (projected or actual) Comments
 6 offline meeting spaces 2 3 6 Refers to engage former and new community
100 community members n/a 102 Above target n/a
20 of them new n/a 20 On target n/a
Engaging 10 new volunteers n/a 10 On target See story below
Newcomers becoming active members n/a 3 Not yet available Participants becoming new members
% feeling welcome in our activities. n/a Not yet available Not yet available End of the year


Success: Expanding WMAR’s community[edit]

Mentoring between active and new volunteers:
We want new members to feel included and find specific spaces to participate. For this we consider fundamental to begin to build new thematic communities. To do this we work crosscuting with the GLAM and Education programs. We created support and work groups and we have launched a pilot mentoring program with the following objectives:

  • Motivating and empowering the community: helping our volunteers not only lead spaces but groups, so they can pass all their expertise on to new members
  • Incorporating new members and promoting their long-term participation.

So far, we have two new emerging communities more GLAM's focused, and we are starting working to build an education community.

A new community of photographers
After the OpenHouse 2016 activity, we identified a budding network of new photographers that was interested in the Wikimedia projects.
With the aim of consolidating an organized group, WMAR has fostered four encounter spaces where they could meet, exchange ideas and define common objectives. These offline encounters have been complemented with Facebook, Telegram and Skype spaces that enable daily contact and makes it possible for mentors to pass on knowledge in a quick and collaborative way.
The community of photographers has currently 8 members, some of them coming from the provinces of Santa Fe, Cordoba and Chubut. Even though results are yet budding, to date we can emphasize the following achievements:

  • Improving content: +6000 added to the category "supported by". 1002 uploaded in 2017.
  • Engaging our community in new tasks and roles
  • Improving the sense of belonging: getting historic editors involved as mentors and making WMAR participate in spaces of communication has provided new members with a lot of confidence.

Community of women
We have 8 new women as part of our community. 3 of them are beginning to lead projects. Our objective is to encourage them to participate as part of the WMAR community. When we compare this community with the community of photographers, there is one great difference: these women work on a very specific subject -feminism- and it is difficult to engage them in other kind of activities.
To tackle this challenge, we have offered new encounter spaces so the new communities and the historic community get to know each other. They were the following:

  • Project workshop: we identified projects led by women and we organized an encounter to design and organize the proposals. We included Jaluj as a participant, as she is a referent in gender issues and a WMAR volunteer.
  • Gender workshop: to date, workshops for women have been carried out mainly within their organizations. In July 2017, we launched the gender workshop, an editing space that invites these new women to edit with historic editors and members of the WMAR community.

Main results

Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (at end of Q2) End of year (projected or actual) Comments
New participants community of photographers n/a 7 Not yet available n/a
Images on Commons supported by WMAR 1 1002 Not yet available n/a
Building community with at least 15 new women as editors involved n/a 8 At least 15 n/a
At least 100 articles edited n/a Not yet available 100 We are starting to work as a group

Engaging “newbies” in community encounters
One of the most simple and yet most effective strategy to engage new members is to make them feel included and comfortable during informal encounters.
This year we are opening this meetings to members, people who participate in our activities and, also, representatives of our partners -as happened in the community meeting during Iberoconf 2017-. In order to avoid isolated conversation groups, we engaged four active WMAR volunteers and two staff members to make sure “newbies” felt included. Also, after having the feedback from one new member, we are starting to handed out an information and welcoming leaflet about WMAR and how to get involved.
During 2017, we have promoted 3 big encounters that have involved 102 members (offline and online volunteers). 22 of them new. To date, 10 remain active volunteers of WMAR.


Gating: Improve skills & leadership[edit]

Our surveys have confirmed that WMAR’s community is also interested in:

  • Skill building: improving their skills on specific subjects.
  • Leadership: leading spaces within WMAR’s programs

These interests are not disregarded, but slowed down.
We have worked hard to incorporate new members and to support the community’s projects, with the aim of carrying them out during the second semester of the year. During this phase we will launch specific workshops about editing Wikipedia, digitalization, communication, project managing, among others. We think that framing training workshops basing on the projects that they lead makes much more sense.
Regarding leadership, WMAR has always made its proposals open to the participation of the community. It is true that, compared to 2016, results are currently smaller. This is mostly due to the programs’ dynamics during these first months of the year. The GLAM program, where people participate the most, has most of its activities planned for the second semester. We expect the activities scheduled for the second semester to motivate volunteers in their role as ambassadors.


Working with WMAR's community learnings[edit]
  • Identifying "newbies" allowed us to create mentoring spaces where former editors are actively involved in accompanying new ones.
  • The develop an open call for projects allowed new and old editors to come forward with ideas to work together with WMAR.
  • Organizing thematic communities strengthened the participation of old and new editors.
  • The thematic communities generated a space to carry out new proposals in which the group as a whole actively participates.


What's next[edit]
  • We will accompany and promote the proposals designed by the community, at least 5 of them.
  • We will launch a new call for projects. We will expand the call to new thematic communities, also out of WMAR, in order to attract new users.
  • We will organize workshops and trainings for our community designed based on their needs.
  • We will continue to accompany the thematic communities, along with the Education Program and the GLAM program to improve their results and impact.

International cooperation[edit]

Strenghtening communities within the movement[edit]

Iberoconf 2017
On June 10–12, Iberoconf 2017 was held in Buenos Aires. The event was a space of encounter, meeting and sharing for local Iberocoop affiliates.
We decided to organize the event for the following reasons:

  • Iberocoop had grown a lot in the last three years. We had driven, together, dozens of programs, during which we created over 7,000 articles.
  • We grew a lot in number of chapters and user groups but in many cases the organizations are not professionalized enough.

In this sense, our challenge was not understanding if we could work together, but rather be a mentoring network for our communities and local groups. Bearing this in mind, we designed - along with all the participants' input- a conference with two main tracks, to achieve the following goals:

  • Defining the future of Iberocoop and its position within the strategy process
  • Improving the organizational skills to professionalize the network's work at a local and regional level.

Comparing to Iberoconf 2014, we designed the conference as a space for learning and strategic planning, to better leverage the network’s impact within the movement; as a place to represent local organizations and their communities; and as a space to centralize demand.
In this sense we carried out our goals the following way:

1 Involve participants actively: Through virtual and in-person meetings, and instant message channels like Telegram and surveys, we agreed on the state of the network until 2017 and we defined the goals and outcomes for Iberoconf 2017.

2. Professionalize the network: we promoted hands-on workshops, where working in groups could guarantee a similar learning outcome. 45% of the sessions were workshops.

3.Iberocoop's future as a network and within the movement: we organized a structured conference with flexible slots in its debate spaces. We granted facilitation of these spaces to an external contractor, to guarantee fair participation for all. As a result, we managed to achieve concrete outcomes, especially in relation to Iberocoop’s stance in the movement strategy for 2030, and also setting concrete demands in an open letter addressed to the Wikimedia Foundation (known as the Buenos Aires Letter)

4.Involve our local community: first of all, Iberoconf was an event to improve the sense of belonging of our community and make them feel part of the movement Wikimedia. During our community meeting we strengthened relationships with members, volunteers and partners.

We are currently writing the report, as well as starting to analyze the first results. We are also going to have a follow-up meeting in Wikimania. The impact of Iberoconf will be measured more closely in the coming months and we hope to be able to analyze it deeper in the Impact report
Other results are

Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (at end of Q2) End of year (projected or actual) Comments
Number of participants n/a 53 n/a n/a
Iberocoop participants n/a 27 n/a All the organizations involved. The person from Perú, missed his plane.
Number of participants leading sessions n/a 11 n/a Mainly presenting results.
Number of volunteers n/a 2 n/a n/a
WMAR's community participants n/a 33 n/a Communities meeting

WikiWomen Camp

From July 6th to 8th, WikiWomen Camp was held in Mexico. The event was organized by Wikimedia Mexico, Wikimedia Argentina and Wikimujeres. During 2016 we carried out various projects together, such as mentoring other communities at a regional level, creating content and sharing learnings. We understood that our scope was greater if we worked together, as well as our position within the movement and in Wikipedia.
Bearing in mind the idea that "together we are stronger", we decided to organize WikiWomen Camp II, the first since 2012, with the support of WMF.

The objectives were very specific:

  • Networking: finding a better way to share and collaborate together in the future
  • Skill Building: improving technical skills people wanted and need to learn.
  • Outreach & Communication : learning to develop allies and partners, communicate the impact of our work, and educate Wikimedia communities about gender issues
  • Information sharing: creating a more effective platform for knowledge sharing and collaborating across projects

The conference involved 54 people. Of these, 29 were WMF scholarships' grantees because of being women leaders or potential leaders in their communities. We also tried to keep parity in the representation. Also +10 people from the WMF were involved as well as 6 active volunteers from Wikimedia Mexico.

At the organizational level, Wikimedia Argentina played a fundamental role:

1. Before the conference - along with WMF

  • We helped define the participants and the scholarships' grantees.
  • We organized the program's committee, developed the surveys to design it and defined the sessions' leaders.
  • We were the communication focal point for participants' needs.

2. During the conference

  • We provided support to the participants
  • Focal point for the FSP
  • One of the focal points of the logistics

3. After the conference

  • We are in charge of conducting the satisfaction survey
  • We are organizing a meeting in Wikimania to continue working to set up a common agenda and goals.

We are currently writing the report, as well as starting to analyze the first results. We are also going to have a meeting in Wikimania. The impact of WikiWomen Camp will be measured more closely in the coming months and we hope to be able to analyze it deeper in the Impact report.

Revenues received during this six-month period[edit]

Please use the exchange rate in your APG proposal.

Table 2 Please report all spending in the currency of your grant unless US$ is requested.

  • Please also include any in-kind contributions or resources that you have received in this revenues table. This might include donated office space, services, prizes, food, etc. If you are to provide a monetary equivalent (e.g. $500 for food from Organization X for service Y), please include it in this table. Otherwise, please highlight the contribution, as well as the name of the partner, in the notes section.
Revenue source Currency Anticipated Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Cumulative Anticipated ($US)* Cumulative ($US)* Explanation of variances from plan
FDC grant ARS $3.441.000 $2.088.053 - - - $2.088.053 USD232.500 USD122.826 n/a
Membership fees ARS $8.800 $1.445 $1.641 - - $3.086 USD600 USD182 n/a
Fixed-term bank deposit income ARS - $21.914 $51.507 - - $73.420 - USD4.319 n/a
Cash donation ARS - - $55.000 - - $55.000 - USD3.235 n/a
In-kind donations ARS $239.198 $2.000 $32.000 - - $34.000 USD16.162 USD2.000 We will detail our In Kind donations in the Impact Report

* Provide estimates in US Dollars

  • During the first half of 2017 we have applied 4 international funds. We are waiting for the answers.

Spending during this six-month period[edit]

Please use the exchange rate in your APG proposal.

Table 3 Please report all spending in the currency of your grant unless US$ is requested.

(The "budgeted" amount is the total planned for the year as submitted in your proposal form or your revised plan, and the "cumulative" column refers to the total spent to date this year. The "percentage spent to date" is the ratio of the cumulative amount spent over the budgeted amount.)
Expense Currency Budgeted Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Cumulative Budgeted ($US)* Cumulative ($US)* Percentage spent to date Explanation of variances from plan
Staff Expenses ARS  $ 1.880.170 $ 525.814  $ 521.987 - -  $ 1.047.802  $ 127.039 USD 65.405 56% n/a
General Administration ARS   $ 534.256 $ 133.285  $ 105.842 - -  $ 239.128  $ 36.098 USD 14.926 45% n/a
Education program ARS   $ 284.100 $ 23.714  $ 135.985 - -  $ 159.699  $ 19.196 USD 9.968 56% n/a
GLAM program ARS   $ 359.151 $ 30.336  $ 118.383 - -  $ 148.720  $ 24.267 USD 9.283 41% n/a
Community Support program ARS   $ 511.200 $ 108.403  $ 294.006 - -  $ 402.410  $ 34.541 USD 25.119 79% This item also includes plane tickets and accomodattion expenditures for Wikiconference and Wikimania.
TOTAL ARS 3.568.877 821.554 1.176.205 - - 1.997.759 241.140 124.704 56% n/a

* Provide estimates in US Dollars


Compliance[edit]

Is your organization compliant with the terms outlined in the grant agreement?[edit]

As required in the grant agreement, please report any deviations from your grant proposal here. Note that, among other things, any changes must be consistent with our WMF mission, must be for charitable purposes as defined in the grant agreement, and must otherwise comply with the grant agreement.

  • YES

Are you in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations as outlined in the grant agreement? Please answer "Yes" or "No".

  • YES

Are you in compliance with provisions of the United States Internal Revenue Code (“Code”), and with relevant tax laws and regulations restricting the use of the Grant funds as outlined in the grant agreement? Please answer "Yes" or "No".

  • YES

Signature[edit]

Once complete, please sign below with the usual four tildes.

Resources[edit]

Resources to plan for measurement[edit]

Resources for storytelling[edit]