Grants:PEG/Parlour Inc/Women Wikipedia Design/Report
- 1 Project status
- 2 Activities and lessons learned
- 3 Outcomes and impact
- 4 Reporting and documentation of expenditures
- Did you comply with the requirements specified by WMF in the grant agreement?
- Is your project completed?
Activities and lessons learned
The grant enabled two principal sets of activities and deliverables. The first was the WikiD Guide to Wikipedia Editing, published in English and German, the second was a series of Wikipedia editing and writing workshops held in three cities – Berlin, New York and Melbourne. These complementary activities led to a significant increase in the representation of women in architecture and the built environment on Wikipedia, and to an increase in women (and some men) active as Wikipedia editors. This new cohort of editors already had some subject expertise, but typically had little or no prior Wikipedia experience.
WikiD Guide to Wikipedia Editing
- WikiD Guide in English
- WikiD Anleitung in Deutsch
The WikiD Guides are available to be downloaded from the Parlour website (linked from the WikiProject page).
We will also upload them to Wikimedia Commons so that they are available to all. As of Friday 8 January, 2016, the WikiD Guides had been accessed 423 times by 300 people in 15 countries (from 54 cities). As is expected, the highest levels of interest are from Australia, the US and Germany. Other countries that the Guides have been accessed from include: the UK, Hungary, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Sweden, Morocco, Spain, Denmark, France, Kenya and Portugal.
The Guides were written to be readily accessible and understandable for those new to Wikipedia, and include many links to further resources available on Wikipedia and elsewhere. Many new users find the Wikipedia interface and vast body of resources rather intimidating, and the Guides have played an important role in helping these people to engage and learn their way around Wikipedia. We have also received enthusiastic support and comments from experienced Wikipedians who have found the guidelines easy to follow, well organized, and graphically clear and helpful.
The Guides also provide detailed advice on how to edit and write entries to meet Wikipedia criteria, in particular the notability criteria. This has been very successful, and very few (if any) new entries developed through the WikiD program have been deleted. The Guides have also been an important resource for those improving existing articles.
We held a series of monthly Wikipedia writing workshops / edit-a-thons in Berlin, Melbourne and New York.
- Berlin: Saturday, September 12, 2–6pm, Wikimedia Deutschland
- Melbourne: Sunday, September 13, 11.30am–4pm, MADA, Monash University
- New York: Wednesday, September 23, 5-8pm, Center for Architecture
- Berlin: Saturday October 10, 12 noon - 6pm, Wikimedia Deutschland
- Melbourne: Sunday, October 11, 1pm–5pm, MADA, Monash University Caulfield Campus.
- New York: Thursday, October 15, 3:30pm-8pm, Guggenheim Museum
- Berlin: Sunday November 8, 2015 from 12noon-6pm, Wikimedia Deutschland
- Melbourne: Saturday, November 14, 11am–4pm, Australian Institute of Architects
The project used a range of communication channels to access a wide audience, including those with no experiences of Wikipedia. These included:
- A new section on the Parlour website devoted to the WikiD project. This has been accessed 516 times by 344 people.
- News posts on the Architexx websitex
- WikiD page on Facebook, which included images of events and links to relevant material. 
- Detailed WikiProject page.
- A mailing list devoted to WikiD. This attracted 142 subscribers from a wide range of locations.
- Parlour Instagram (including a week of guest hosting by Alysia Bennett, which highlighted some of the work undertaken during the WikiD Melbourne workshops).
- Parlour twitter
- Architexx twitter
- Press releases to a media list of 63.
- Wikimedia Australia also kindly posted notices of the project and events.
The project generated substantial interest from the architectural community, which resulted in a number of unplanned ancillary outcomes. These included further edit-a-thons, which used the resources developed by WikiD, and public presentations where the project and the Guides were discussed.
The Wiki writing parties held on 8 March (International Womens Day) prior to obtaining the grant, and the process of applying for the grant and seeking testimonials, also raised the profile of the problem from the outset. This resulted in a university course in Melbourne requiring students to write Wikipedia entries on women architects. Although it occurred outside our funded project, it can nonetheless be attributed in part to awareness-raising efforts associated with the project. Further work was done on some of the entries created by these students during the course of the project. There has also been interest expressed in Berlin to incorporate writing women into Wikipedia within teaching at the Universitaet der Kunste Berlin and at Syracuse University School of Architecture and Department of Design during this spring semester 2016.
- Wikipedia Edit-a-thons elsewhere
- The Los-Angeles based group AWA+D has established a series of edit-a-thons and is using the Guides and resources developed as part of the grant. Other groups have also expressed interest.
- The October WikiD events were aligned with the global Women in Architecture initiative with the Guggenheim Museum.
- Public talks
- The project timeframe coincided with a number of public talks presented by Parlour and ArchiteXX about the organisation's work. These public presentations included discussion of the WikiD project, the motivations and goals of our efforts, and the WikiD Guides to Wikipedia editing, and became another channel to raise awareness concerning the visibility of women in architecture and the built environment on Wikipedia, alerting a wide audience to the issue and the project. Talks took place at the following fora:
- UQ Research Dialogues, University of Queensland and Museum of Brisbane, Brisbane, Australia
- Women's Leadership Summit, American Institute of Architects, Seattle, US
- City Talks, City Gallery Wellington and New Zealand Institute of Architects, Wellington, New Zealand
- Women in Design, Design Tasmania, Launceston, Australia
- Equity by Design, San Francisco, US
- Association of Architecture School Librarians, Voices From the Field: Researching Women in Architecture, Toronto, ON
- Engendering the Sustainable Development Agenda, GenderSTE, Istanbul, Turkey
Articles about WikiD project and outcomes
- article `WikiD Project helps increase presence of women architects´ on architecture and design
- article "Making sure women architects are on Wikipedia" on The Real Estate Conversation
- article: Sian Johnson, "Wikipedia boost for women architects", on ArchitectureAU
- article: Caitlin Dover, "How Online Activism is Empowering Women in Architecture", Guggenheim blog
- article: Jennifer Duke, "Wikipedia edit-a-thon putting women in architecture back on the record", Domain, Sydney Morning Herald
News alerts about WikiD workshops
- news alert: Nathan Johnson, "WikiD writing workshop engraves women into architecture history on Wikipedia" on Architecture and Design
- news alert: Nathan Johnson, "Monash Uni and Parlour call for WikiD writing workshop participants", on Architecture and Design
- news alert: "Final wikiD Melbourne writing workshop of the year on 14 November", Architecture and Design
- news alert: "Parlour: WikiD writing workshops" on ArchitectureAU, one of the most prominent architectural news sites in Australia
- news alert: "Women and architecture Wikipedia writing workshop" on s-architecture (a blog and bulletin for architectural academics and scholars)
- news alert: "WikiD November writing workshops PARLOUR" Australian Institute of Architects.
- news alert: "WikiD Melbourne - October writing workshop" on Where Event
- news alert: "Wikipedia Edit-A-Thon: Women in Architecture", GSAPP Events
- news alert: "Wikipedia Edit-a-thon: Women in Architecture" , Guggenheim
- news alert: "WIKID:Women,Wikipedia,DesignNewYorkWritingWorkshop", SPACESMITH
- news alert: "The Guggenheim’s third Wikipedia Edit-a-thon spotlights Women in Architecture", Bustler
- news alert: Jeremiah Buden, "Guggenheim Hosting Wikipedia Edit-a-thon for Women in Architecture", Curbed
- news alert: Jen Grosso, "Wikipedia Edit-a-thon: Women in Architecture", ArchDaily
- news alert: "Women.Wikipedia.Design: Writing Workshop at Center for Architecture", Dexigner, September 13, 2015
- news alert: ArchNewsNow
- news alert: "Wikipedia Editathon: Women in Architecture", ArchDaily October 6, 2015
- news alert: "Takeaways from the Guggenheim's Wikipedia Edit-a-thon on Women in Architecture", Architect October 16, 2015
- news alert: "Archtober Preview", The Architect's Newspaper, September 29, 2015
- news alert: "Wikipedia edit-a-thon putting women in architecture back on the record", October 15, 2015
- news alert: "Guggenheim's Women in Architecture Edit-a-thon-October 15", October 14, 2015
- news alert: "Your Guide to Archtober 2015", October 6, 2015
- news alert: "Archtober! What's on Tap for the City's Architecture and Design Month", September 22, 2015
- news alert: "Museums Open Up to Power of Wiki", October 11, 2015
- news alert: "Vanderbilt Libraries to host two Wikipedia 'edit-athons'", October 14, 2015
Articles and news items about or with references to the Wikimedia grant.
- "On Our Radar", Beverley Willis Foundation
- "The AIA Establishes a Commission on Equity in Architecture"
- "Women architects receive $US14,000 Wikipedia grant" Architecture Now
- Sian Johnson, "Women architects receive $US14,000 Wikipedia grant", ArchitectureAU
- "Parlour Inc Soirée" Australian Design Review
- "Project Aims to Raise Profile of Women Architects on Wikipedia", Syracuse University News
- "Parlour", M Pavilion
- Madeline Dore, "Women Transforming the City", ArtsHub
- Geraldine Chua, "US$14,000 grant to help create more Wikipedia pages for women architects", Architecture & Design, 8 August, 2015
- "Women.Wikipedia.Design: Writing Workshop at Center for Architecture", Dexigner, September 13, 2015
- What worked well?
- The events and the WikiD Guides were both very successful, as documented above. Learning to edit in a collaborative environment meant that people stuck at it, while the camaraderie helped build core groups of committed editors. The Guides were particularly helpful in ensuring appropriate topics were selected and that entries were written in the correct tone and style. This meant that very few entries written within workshops were deleted. If at-risk articles were flagged during an event, the issues were worked through with Wikipedians in attendance. Working with experienced Wikipedians in the workshops was a huge advantage.
- Small group workshops were very effective in facilitating learning and generating content. Numbers were not as high as we anticipated (see further details below), however in the end this probably means the results are better.
- The international aspect of the project was very successful. We worked well across geographic locations and timezones, and the sense of participating with those on the other side of the world added impetus and enthusiasm for workshop participants.
- What didn't work?
- We underestimated the time involved in writing high quality entries, especially for inexperienced writers, and underestimated the length of time it takes to get a new editor familiar with Wikipedia interface, rules and protocols. This meant that we were overly ambitious about the number of new entries that we could produce in the timeframe created.
- There was substantial interest in the project from those keen to participate in "women in architecture" events. However, this did not always translate into the writing and editing skills required for working on Wikipedia. While we want to encourage participation from all, with longer lead times it would be good to more fully engage the scholarly, academic and media sections of the architectural community to draw on their subject expertise and writing skills.
- We overestimated our workshop participant numbers. Our initial estimates were extrapolated from attendance at our earlier 8 March action. On reflection this was overly ambitious. The momentum and interest that fueled participation in the original one-day action proved difficult to sustain for repeating sessions throughout the three months. We built a small core of committed and active editors who came to two or more sessions, but a larger group of participants typically came once to learn the basics and try out editing for the first time. In Melbourne the timing of the events also worked against us. Each event fell, by coincidence, on a very sunny spring/ early day. Numbers of actual participants for each event were lower than RSVPs, and we think the enticing weather played a role in this.
- It was difficult to find event times that worked for busy women with multiple commitments. We had quite a few women express interest in coming but family commitments on weekends meant they actually never made it.
- What would you do differently if you planned a similar project?
- We would encourage Wikimedia to fund the costs of designing and editing material such as the WikiD Guides. Graphic design costs were taken out of the budget, so we donated significant in-kind time to ensure that the Guide was still laid out in a professional, polished manner (based in an existing template we had used on other guides). This is important in terms of accessibility of information, as well as appearing engaging and professional for the architecture and design communities. The quality of the design and the ease of understanding has been positively remarked on by a large number of people including Wikipedians, demonstrating that investment in the design is worthwhile.
- We would partner more directly with academic institutions, their librarians and specific classes that can directly engage with research and the writing of entries. This proved to be successful at a small scale but could become a larger participant group in our future efforts. We would also partner with organizations with archival materials to build our entries. This could be a way to work on site with some of the archives and have direct contact with their material and archivists.
- We would plan the spacing and timing of the events differently. The spacing at monthly intervals may have been a contributing factor to lower than expected participation. The timing towards the end of the year also coincided with very busy periods of the academic year, so participation from students and academics was low, despite expressed levels of interest.
- We would arrange childcare (and funding), to better assist women with small children who could not otherwise attend.
We endorse the following learning patterns:
- Use social media for promotion
- Let the media know
- Editing leads to media literacy
- Fostering affinity groups
Outcomes and impact
The principal goal was to increase the number of women in design, construction and the built environment who are active as Wikipedia editors, and thereby to increase the number of articles about female architects and others in the field.
Secondary goals included:
- To build connections between enthusiastic new editors with excellent content knowledge, but unfamiliar with Wikipedia processes and protocols, and experienced Wikipedians who could provide guidance in navigating this new, complicated world.
- To strengthen existing international networks between groups and individuals working to address gender inequity in architecture and the built environment.
- To improve the overall quality of existing articles on this topic. This includes articles that have already been flagged as needing attention.
- To increase the number of articles on gender equity programs, initiatives and activist projects within architecture.
- To create new resources of inspiration for girls and students of architecture
- To recognize female achievements in a field that continues to be male-dominated, in both Wikipedia and the real world
- Did you achieve your project goal? How do you know your goal was achieved? Please answer in 1 - 2 short paragraphs.
We achieved our principal goal of increasing both editor numbers and content, as is demonstrated in Edit-A-Thon participation and the significant increase in Wikipedia entries on women in architecture. This has occurred directly through our writing workshops, and indirectly as a result of the increased profile that the issue received through our initiative. For example, in March 2015, the list of Australian women architects included only 10 names. As of January 2016, it has grown to 65. Another example is that through the Guggenheim collaboration, women in architecture content on Wikipedia increased by 38% by the end of October.
Secondary goals have also been achieved.
- The goal of connecting new editors with experienced Wikipedians was successfully met. The project has been supported by highly experienced and recognised Wikipedians in Melbourne and New York, as well as by members of the existing "Women Edit" initiative in Berlin (a monthly meetup where women edit together in an informal environment). On this front the grant has been instrumental, prompting us - relative newcomers to Wikipedia - to engage with the Wikipedian community, and resulting in valuable relationships that we hope will continue beyond the life of the funded project. We are particularly pleased that the resources developed as a result of the grant have proven useful to other Wikipedians.
Wikimedia Australia was pleased to be approached by the WikiD: Women, Wikipedia, Design project to be involved in their editing events. We were impressed by the enthusiasm, organisation and marketing reach of the project. The three events we attended were well-run, realistic in scope and welcoming to new editors. Despite a dearth of published literature in this area, those involved in the project contributed a significant amount of content on Australian women architects and designers.
The guides produced as part of this project by Alysia Bennett, Justine Clark and Charity Edwards are beautifully designed and I have since used these in other projects, as well as recommending them to those running edit-a-thons.
In addition to approaching and receiving support from local Wikimedia chapters in all three cities, we developed relationships with other networks, including an alliance with the global "Women in Architecture" initiative in October. The project has generated interest among other groups with a similar focus, with some organisations now running their own programs, most notable, that of the Los Angeles group AWA+D.
Pru Mitchell, Vice-President Wikimedia Australia
- A range of articles have been improved by the Melbourne group, where it was strongly suggested that new editors gain initial Wikipedia experience by editing existing articles. This included:
- Editing entries flagged as needing more work, or in danger of being deleted
- Adding existing and new entries to lists and categories so they are easily found
- Correcting attributions on projects to include women collaborators
- These 'minor' actions have had a significant impact on the visibility of women architects. One particularly interesting example was a period of progressive editing over the three workshops to write Marion Mahony Griffin into Wikipedia entries about projects she undertook in collaboration with Walter Burley Griffin, which had been credited to Walter alone on Wikipedia. Adding categories to existing entries, and adding entries to lists of women architects and of architects by geographic location and period was also important, as it enabled these entries to be found, and also shows that women play a prominent part in the profession.
- The goal regarding writing on 'gender equity programs, initiatives and activist projects' was addressed to a lesser extent, as most participants in our workshops opted for biographies as subjects. One article was authored by project team member Eljoch, about the feminist organisation FOPA in Germany, and there is currently another article in process about a Melbourne-based organisation. Biographies seem to make for easier starting points for beginners, given that a large number of possible subjects exist, and there are many existing biography examples to provide guidance in content and structure.
Progress towards targets and goals
|Target outcome||Achieved outcome||Explanation|
|At least 300 participants in our workshops over the six-month period||112 individuals||Considerably lower than expected. Several factors may have contributed, in and out of our control: the close spacing of the events, their coinciding with the busiest time of the year (particularly for many academics and students), competing events, unseasonal warm weather, and a small number of repeat attendees outweighed by a larger number who came once to learn the basics. See more under lessons learned.|
|At least 75 new active Wikipedia editors||33 according to Wikimetrics||Using Wikimetrics. We had had at least 13 more participants whose metrics could not be obtained and there may be more due to our project working between English and German. However, this number seems exceptionally low considering we had 3 locations running workshops and one of those was a collaboration with the Guggeheim Museum's Women and Architecture #wikiD writing session. There is concern this does not accurately reflect the number of people we engaged with.|
|New entries on 200–250 women in architecture, design and the built environment, as well as gender equity programs, initiatives and activist projects within architecture on Wikipedia||Over 200 created, including entries at the affiliated NY Women in Architecture event.||In reality, although the figure is high, numbers varied across cities, with the fantastic participation rate in the affiliated October event a major contributing factor. In reality, we underestimated the time needed by newcomers to produce an entry, and many beginners started out by editing and expanding existing entries instead.|
|Identify and edit 25–50 existing entries on women architects in Australia, Germany and the United States needing improvement||At least 15 biographical articles were edited to varying degrees, with minor edits to a further 56 entries. Content was also added to at least 40 categories.||Numbers were only comprehensively recorded in Melbourne, where this was a major focus, hence we easily met this target.|
|Under 5 deletions of new in-workshop articles per workshop (due to matters within our control, for example questions regarding notability or relevance) by other Wikipedia editors||Only two known flagged deletions over the whole period; one related to an article that was not finished yet, another to an ongoing Wiki disagreement involving a relatively experienced editor.||There may be other deletions not known to us, however generally we think the training provided resulted in few deletions, a significant improvement on the earlier International Womens Day action.|
We are trying to understand the overall outcomes of the work being funded across our 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" where necessary.
- Next to each required metric, list the actual outcome achieved through this project.
- Where necessary, explain the context behind your outcome. For example, if you were funded for an edit-a-thon 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.
|1. # of active editors involved||156||Using Wikimetrics.|
|2. # of new editors||33||Using Wikimetrics.We had at least 13 more participants whose metrics could not be obtained and there may be more due to our project working between English and German. However, this number is exceptionally low considering we had 3 locations running workshops. There is great concern this number does not accurately reflect the number of people the project engaged with.|
|3. # of individuals involved||189||This number was created by combining number of new editors and number of active editors.|
|4a. # of new images/media added to Wikimedia articles/pages||N/A||Not a project goal.|
|4b. # of new images/media uploaded to Wikimedia Commons (Optional)||N/A||Not a project goal.|
|5. # of articles added or improved on Wikimedia projects||12, 410||Using Wikimetrics. Our total edits calculated to be 152,391.|
|6. Absolute value of bytes added to or deleted from Wikimedia projects||29,116,648|
- Learning question
- Did your work increase the motivation of contributors, and how do you know?
- Yes. Anecdotal feedback is very positive. Almost all participants were new to Wikipedia and would not have become involved without the project. We were aware of people returning from session to session. A core group will continue to meet at contribute to Wikipedia and planning has begun for this, including a March International Women's Day wikiD event.
Option A: How did you increase participation in one or more Wikimedia projects?
- Through the creation of the WikiD Guidelines and our three cities' publicity channels, we were able to engage the architecture educational and professional communities to write more women architects into Wikipedia. The multi-city impact was also a strength to our increased participation. The global aspect created an atmosphere of engagement and solidarity.
Option B: How did you improve quality on one or more Wikimedia projects?
- Quality was greatly improved through the creation of our WikiD Guidelines. These benefited both the architecture community and the larger Wikipedia community. Easy to follow, thorough and clear, our Guidelines have helped those new to writing wikipedia entries have an easier transition into writing. As has been noted earlier, experienced Wikipedians are quite enthusiastic about our Guidelines.
Option C: How did you increase the reach (readership) of one or more Wikimedia projects?
Reporting and documentation of expenditures
This section describes the grant's use of funds
- Did you send documentation of all expenses paid with grant funds to grants at wikimedia dot org, according to the guidelines here? Answer "Yes" or "No".
Will be emailed separately.
- Please list all project expenses in a table here, with descriptions and dates. Review the instructions here.
Due to the large amount of currency conversion (3) we´ve made an auto-calculating google spreadsheet here with all required info: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1x1NbxwWXIP5Dv8SuTRnVAqPsPsYpiFFjUXqp7M5j5gw/edit#gid=1150307554
- Total project budget (from your approved grant submission)
- $14,150 USD (excluding venue and catering costs TBC)
- Total amount requested from WMF (from your approved grant submission, this total will be the same as the total project budget if PEG is your only funding source)
- $14,150 USD (excluding venue and catering costs TBC)
- Total amount spent on this project
- $14,153 USD (excluding venue and catering costs TBC)
- Total amount of Project and Event grant funds spent on this project
- $14,150 USD (excluding venue and catering costs TBC)
- Are there additional sources that funded any part of this project? List them here.
- In kind support provided by Wikimedia Deutschland (venue and laptop usage)
- In kind support provided by Australian Institute of Architects (venue)
- In kind support provided by Syracuse University School of Architecture (venue and food)
- In addition to the grant funds, the organisers donated significant amounts of time in in-kind support.
- The costs of graphic design for the Guides were excluded from the grant funding. However, we felt it was important that these be carefully presented, particularly given the high visual literacy of our target audience. We therefore donated time to ensure that they were carefully laid out and visually appealing.
- Are there any grant funds remaining?
- Please list the total amount (specify currency) remaining here. (This is the amount you did not use, or the amount you still have after completing your grant.) N/A
- If funds are remaining they must be returned to WMF, reallocated to mission-aligned activities, or applied to another approved grant.
- Please state here if you intend to return unused funds to WMF, submit a request for reallocation, or submit a new grant request, and then follow the instructions on your approved grant submission.'