Grants:IEG/Senior Citizens Write in Sanskrit Wikipedia/Final

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

Individual Engagement Grants This project is funded by an Individual Engagement Grant

proposal people timeline & progress finances midpoint report final report


Welcome to this project's final report! This report shares the outcomes, impact and learnings from the Individual Engagement Grantee's 6-month project.

Part 1: The Project[edit]

Summary[edit]

In a few short sentences, give the main highlights of what happened with your project. Please include a few key outcomes or learnings from your project in bullet points, for readers who may not make it all the way through your report. - 30 Scholars and 5 wikipedians actively contributed into this project. - Those scholars improved 120 articles of sa.wikipeda.org - Most of them will contribute in future too. - Under this project we expand sa.wikipedia community.

Research[edit]

I provide translation material to scholars and teach them Wikipedia five pillars. So I can say all articles which written under this project are not have any bias. Moreover those articles are grammatically corrected.

Methods and activities[edit]

What did you do in project?

Please list and describe the activities you've undertaken during this grant. Since you already told us about the setup and first 3 months of activities in your midpoint report, feel free to link back to those sections to give your readers the background, rather than repeating yourself here, and mostly focus on what's happened since your midpoint report in this section.

  • As I did explain in midpoint report, I contact with scholars and invite them for this project. I done two programs. 1st is Training program which I took 29th March and 2nd is Editthosn for Scholars which held on 26th May.
  • In project time to make scholar list I travel much. Some scholars told me that their organization or institute wants to outreach programs on sa.wikipedia. So I did some outreach too.

Outcomes and impact[edit]

At the beginning of the project my problem was less community activity. But In this project some Wikipedian did good work and support this project heartily. In every event they helped me to organize and manage things. Fruit of this scholars did more and more content development work.

Outcomes[edit]

What are the results of your project?

Please discuss the outcomes of your experiments or pilot, telling us what you created or changed (organized, built, grew, etc) as a result of your project.

  • Most important outcome is community build up and improvement of stubs articles.
  • We focus mostly content development so no more points on this topic.

Progress towards stated goals[edit]

Please use the below table to:

  1. List each of your original measures of success (your targets) from your project plan.
  2. List the actual outcome that was achieved.
  3. Explain how your outcome compares with the original target. Did you reach your targets? Why or why not?
Planned measure of success
(include numeric target, if applicable)
Actual result Explanation
150 Articles improvement from the stub We did 80 or something Some Articles were very big like this So We couldn't touch 150 number but if we split our contain we done more than 200 articles.
Researched Articles Done Because this was main goal. All articles which written under this project have enough references and other links.


Think back to your overall project goals. Do you feel you achieved your goals? Why or why not?

Global Metrics[edit]

We are trying to understand the overall outcomes of the work being funded across all grantees. In addition to the measures of success for your specific program (in above section), please use the table below to let us know how your project contributed to the "Global Metrics." We know that not all projects will have results for each type of metric, so feel free to put "0" as often as necessary.

  1. Next to each metric, list the actual numerical outcome achieved through this project.
  2. Where necessary, explain the context behind your outcome. For example, if you were funded for a research project which resulted in 0 new images, your explanation might be "This project focused solely on participation and articles written/improved, the goal was not to collect images."

For more information and a sample, see Global Metrics.

Metric Achieved outcome Explanation
1. Number of active editors involved 30
2. Number of new editors 100 to 150 Because most of scholars wrote articles offline and from word they copy and past articles.
3. Number of individuals involved 5 Among five wikipedians three wikipedians were very active.
4. Number of new images/media added to Wikimedia articles/pages
5. Number of articles added or improved on Wikimedia projects 4 new articles and 80 stub improvement Project main goal was stub improvement so we focus more on that.
6. Absolute value of bytes added to or deleted from Wikimedia projects (1st Pahse – 11,50,341 Bytes,2nd phase - 3,86,611) no deletion of our content.


Learning question
Did your work increase the motivation of contributors, and how do you know?

Indicators of impact[edit]

Do you see any indication that your project has had impact towards Wikimedia's strategic priorities? We've provided 3 options below for the strategic priorities that IEG projects are mostly likely to impact. Select one or more that you think are relevant and share any measures of success you have that point to this impact. You might also consider any other kinds of impact you had not anticipated when you planned this project.

Option A: How did you increase participation in one or more Wikimedia projects? A – From the beginning my goal was only sa.wikipedia so I didn’t work other media projects. This scholars will contribute as much as possible and they are teachers, Professors etc so they will inspire their students too.

Option B: How did you improve quality on one or more Wikimedia projects? A – here you can see what was the position? I explained “1,000 articles can't readable or not informative” so we improve articles regarding five pillars. Infobox, image, audio etc… are in the articles. Somewhere no image because we couldn't find them.

Option C: How did you increase the reach (readership) of one or more Wikimedia projects?

  • Every scholar has minimum 10 to 150 students per year. So we can calculate chain of which I started.

Project resources[edit]

Please provide links to all public, online documents and other artifacts that you created during the course of this project. Examples include: meeting notes, participant lists, photos or graphics uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, template messages sent to participants, wiki pages, social media (Facebook groups, Twitter accounts), datasets, surveys, questionnaires, code repositories... If possible, include a brief summary with each link.

  • -- Every time I called scholars and others. So I didn't have this thing. But I want to add here that, https://www.facebook.com/samskritwikigujarat/ this page boost up in this period. Because not only scholars but also their students are liked this page much.

Learning[edit]

The best thing about trying something new is that you learn from it. We want to follow in your footsteps and learn along with you, and we want to know that you took enough risks in your project to have learned something really interesting! Think about what recommendations you have for others who may follow in your footsteps, and use the below sections to describe what worked and what didn’t.

In life every lock has different keys. I was aware about that. So every time when I was going to scholars, I was talking with them as per their like and expectation. For Ex. If one scholar wants to give his content for spread knowledge so I was talking him like that. But if some scholar wanted to work into sa.wikipedia for students so I was talking with them like that. But I did some mistakes too, which showed my weak side. With every person I associated with only oral talk. That was my biggest mistake. I should had done some documentation work, which could support my work and intention. When someone lines that you didn’t tell me this, so you must have some written work, which I couldn’t done. Because I was thing I am doing good work and every one will support. But some time documentation supports our believer and intention.

What worked well[edit]

What did you try that was successful and you'd recommend others do? To help spread successful strategies so that they can be of use to others in the movement, rather than writing lots of text here, we'd like you to share your finding in the form of a link to a learning pattern.

  • Your learning pattern link goes here

What didn’t work[edit]

What did you try that you learned didn't work? What would you think about doing differently in the future? Please list these as short bullet points.

  • In one day you can’t teach Wikipedia to any person. So after first program I had to go to some scholar to teach some point. I explained those points in my presentation but some time it happens.
  • So In future I will do some more training program and I will try to make video like this.

Other recommendations[edit]

If you have additional recommendations or reflections that don’t fit into the above sections, please list them here.

Next steps and opportunities[edit]

Are there opportunities for future growth of this project, or new areas you have uncovered in the course of this grant that could be fruitful for more exploration (either by yourself, or others)? What ideas or suggestions do you have for future projects based on the work you’ve completed? Please list these as short bullet points.

  • I personally believe that this project has more opportunities. But in Mediawiki’s world grantee needs some background. If someone is associated with XYZ, he is more believed person. (This is my personal view) So we should give some opportunities to those persons who didn’t associated with any organization and doing wiki-work properly.


Think your project needs renewed funding for another 6 months?




Part 2: The Grant[edit]

Finances[edit]

Phase 1 -
now in Proposal
Projector = 800 800 500
Laptop = 700 700 500
Computer rant = 500, 500*30 15000 20,000
+ Service tax 2100
Internet = 1500 1500
Room rant (9 am to 5 pm) = 2,000 2000
Total rupees… 22,100 21,000
work now in Proposal
Prearrangement of Scholar list 11520 11520
Contact with scholar 40000 42000
Notepad + Pen 750 750
Foods (Lunch, Snacks, Water) 10400 8000
Transportation 6000 5000
Total rupees… 68670 67270

22,100 + 68,670 = 90,770 Rupees for First phase

Phase 2 –
now in Proposal
Projector = 800 800 500
Laptop = 700 700 500
Computer rant = 500, 500*30 15000 20,000
+ Service tax 2100
Internet = 1500 1500
Room rant (9 am to 5 pm) = 2,000 2000
Total rupees… 22,100 21,000
work now in Proposal
Prearrangement of Scholar list 11520 11520
Contact with scholar 2000 2000
Notepad + Pen 750 750
Foods (Lunch, Snacks, Water) 10400 8000
Transportation 5000 5000
Total rupees… 67670 67270

22,100 + 67,670 = 89,770 Rupees for Second phase

Actual spending[edit]

Please copy and paste the completed table from your project finances page. Check that you’ve listed the actual expenditures compared with what was originally planned. If there are differences between the planned and actual use of funds, please use the column provided to explain them.

Expense Approved amount Actual funds spent Difference
Program Management 86400 Rs. or $1296 51520 34880
Expenses for in-person editathons 70030 Rs.
(36650 + 33380) Rs.
or $1050.45
($549.75 + $500.70) USD
39250 30780
Total 156430 Rs, 2346.45 USD 90770 65660


Remaining funds[edit]

Do you have any unspent funds from the grant?

Please answer yes or no. If yes, list the amount you did not use and explain why.

  • No

If you have unspent funds, they must be returned to WMF. Please see the instructions for returning unspent funds and indicate here if this is still in progress, or if this is already completed:

Documentation[edit]

Did you send documentation of all expenses paid with grant funds to grantsadmin(_AT_)wikimedia.org, according to the guidelines here?

Please answer yes or no. If no, include an explanation.

  • Yes

Confirmation of project status[edit]

Did you comply with the requirements specified by WMF in the grant agreement?

Please answer yes or no.

  • Yes

Is your project completed?

Please answer yes or no.

  • Yes

Grantee reflection[edit]

We’d love to hear any thoughts you have on what this project has meant to you, or how the experience of being an IEGrantee has gone overall. Is there something that surprised you, or that you particularly enjoyed, or that you’ll do differently going forward as a result of the IEG experience? Please share it here!

here as I mentioned participation of scholars and wikipedians. I want to add here after midpoint I fallen in a trouble but Marti and Runaji helped me a lot. If they didn’t help me, I couldn’t be able to finish this project. Thanks with :)