Grants:PEG/User:Nattes à chat/Let's fill the gender gap Workshops/Report

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

Report accepted
This report for a Project and Event grant approved in FY Pending has been reviewed and accepted by the Wikimedia Foundation.
  • You may still comment on this report on its discussion page, or visit the discussion page to read the discussion about this report.
  • You are welcome to Email grants at wikimedia dot org at any time if you have questions or concerns about this report.

Project status[edit]

Did you comply with the requirements specified by WMF in the grant agreement?
Is your project completed?

Activities and lessons learned[edit]


  • The project was supported by 4 sessions (HES-SO funded an extra set of workshop that we added on the project page) over the course of a year, with 6 workshops per bloc, participants met up twice a month on Tuesdays from noon to 2 pm. All the information related to dates, programs and participants were available on the project page (in French):here. The first session was carried during the autumn 2015 and the second session has begun in January 2016. Also, a conference was organized back in September 2015 to kick off the initiative and to inform the local Geneva community of the existence of these workshops. All the information pertaining is available on the Wikipedia project page.
  • At the end of each bloc of 6 workshops, each participant can edit an article on wikipedia, is comfortable to exchange with the Wikimedia community, developed competencies on providing adequate references for articles, fully understands the founding rules of Wikipedia and is empowered to solve the gender gap on Wikipedia. Each session follows the following organization in terms of content:
  • Workshop 1: Presentation of the Wikimedia movement, Wikipedia and the gender gap
  • Workshop 2: How to contribute and write an article from scratch
  • Workshop 3: How to look for sources and include pertinent references in an article?
  • Workshop 4: Tenacity: how to interact with the community online?
  • Workshop 5: Introduction to gender inclusive language (in French)
  • Workshop 6: Group presentation of the published articles: knowledge & experience sharing workshop

Each workshop was divided in two: first hour was devoted to a general presentation, the second hour to practical exercices. We found out that giving homework from session to session improved the participants level of activity between each session.

Last workshop on the 28th of June in Geneva
During a workshop "Let's Fill the Gender Gap" session 3
Wall of fame "Let's fill the gender gap"
Wikipedia conference at the University of Geneva on the topic of the gender gap 29.09.2015


At the end of the project, we organized a conference on non sexist language in Paris with academic presentators. This conference was a succes and received media coverage from le Monde and the TV5 French television.

WikiConvFr 2016 (28670781894)

A swiss artist performer gave one of her artwork and downloaded it on Commons. She was wearing a T shirt that we had specially designed for the occasion. This was a good way of closing the adventure!

WiKiconvention-Langage epicene-Angela Marzullo

Media coverage[edit]

list of participants[edit]

  1. Nattes à chat
  2. Gasteletzwane
  3. LaMèreVeille
  4. Olliebrius
  5. Transmission1971
  6. Olhdumi
  7. Asdiams
  8. Arcipelago7991
  9. Charlotteandrewiki
  10. Morningbastet
  11. Edirules
  12. Censoribus
  13. Softenpoche
  14. Thinkingbird
  15. Binezo
  16. Charlotte_Bruckner
  17. Trendia
  18. Elorac2
  19. Machapeau
  20. Monchapeau
  21. Amelmahfoudh
  22. Caroline Ansel
  23. Smar6ty4
  24. RosaSchnabeltierl
  25. Fabgir
  26. Chris16Genève
  27. XeniaLullah
  28. Nahidahub
  29. Jorge Gajardo
  30. Lamaguanaco
  31. Alexey M.
  32. Irene Gisler-Garcia
  33. Lamogoya
  34. Phénice Racine
  35. Spillandra
  36. Amelia_Morante
  37. Clos_de_b
  38. Rhinorataxes
  39. Cicrilette
  40. IIIElieLeeIII
  41. Sykacxi
  42. 2lunes
  43. Lezecoto
  44. Magatim
  45. IIILazarusIII
  46. Chapa78
  47. Emi.pasquier
  48. Wikilapin
  49. VeroniqueBS
  50. Otarie69
  51. Suzy1919
  52. Sidar Chilane
  53. MacAreux
  54. Tagada09
  55. Aoz70
  56. Rimiliz
  57. Ditesleaveclesourire
  58. ModPomo
  59. Chardon bleu
  60. Chelseagirl79
  61. Tatie Thérèse
  62. Aneses
  63. Tulipanos

Lessons learned[edit]

What worked well?
  • We were able to complete the 3 scheduled workshops and add a fourth one to the project as well. The HES-SO, University of Applied Science and Art asked us to run another workshop in Lausanne as a trial to future workshops.

Following this workshop, in which three women engaged in uncovering women history in the canton of Valais

  • we were able to teach to much more participants than scheduled in the first place (
What didn't work?
  • Engaging the swiss local contributing commnity was hard. We managed to have only one member of WMCH to come regurlarly (User:GastelEtzwane and one member of the contributing community Softenpoche. However at the end of the project, local members started to join the project virtually as our work had been aknowledged ( Abbadon, Quadrien, Yann). Anthere also send us Laurent Jerry, an experienced contributor to assess the written articles, as the particpants were getting discouraged by the multiple banners and the harsh comments received.
  • Although the bannering and harsh comments were disrupting in the first place, it forced us to reach out for support to the French community met during the Festicabale, and these people were extremly supportive in the long run, providing ressources and contacts with supportive people within the community even if they did not engaged themselves on the project.
What would you do differently if you planned a similar project?
  • We would advertize much earlier on to the online contributing community to get them interested in the project (this was not possible as were newbies ourselves!). By advertising we mean going to other wikipedian events and actively talking about the project (this is the way it works best, our community is not so virtual). Actually this is the method used for the new project les sans pagEs, and the result is that there are already 229 articles published since the page was created in Esiso Lario.
  • We would design the project page differently, allowing spaces for the online community to propose changes (like we did in the new project), and also having a kind of "news section"
  • We would envisage create a twitter account early on, to promote the project, as most wikipedian are very active on twitter
  • We would manage expectation of institutional partners better and relations with the press more carefully regarding press coverage. Nobody foresaw the project would be such a great success (not even us, we were caught by surprise). The fact is that each party wanted to achieve media coverage, but journalists do not easily include long lists of partners in their articles (too fastidious for the reader). Also most journalists, as well as the general public, do not make the difference between Wikimedia and Wikipedia, so they easily write Wikipedia and think they are done with the mentionning of the partnering team. The mediatic coverage was rewarding but also at times challenging, because we had not realized covering a wikipedia theme would bring us regurlarly in the mediatic arena. For us, being on television during the first workshop was great but challenging: when you have never given a wiki workshop, that you are somewhat new, and TV pops in it is quite a challenge! Also the effect was time consuming, and this had not been planned in advance.
  • We would budget travel expenses for the participants, and would even ask more for rapid grants if unexpected exepenses pop out.
  • We would ask for project management and coordination fees: this is time consuming, and a lot of efforts. We underestimated that part, as well as the nessecity to promote a project within the community.
  • we would try to use portable computers instead of fixed stations, because this recreates a hierarchy between the participants and the "teachers", which is not what is experienced within a usual editathon. Its somehow stops new participants to reach for solutions within themselves and is time consuming for the teachers.

Learning patterns[edit]

Outcomes and impact[edit]


Provide the original project goal here.
  • Get more women to contribute to wiki articles
  • Review existing articles on famous women from the french speaking part of Switzerland
  • Build a network and community of female contributors in the Geneva Lake area
  • Build a community of wiki contributors in Geneva interested in gender issues
  • Empower women to step forward as experts, to "lean in" as defined by Sheryl Sandberg
  • Bring gender awareness to male contributors
  • Bring awareness to female contributors about the stereotypes that sometimes slow them down
  • Teach participants to become contributors
  • Promote equality of chances on internet and among workshop participants
  • Empower female experts-to-be by helping them to step forward in their field of research
  • Promote confidence and self-esteem by a learn-by-doing approach
  • Provide a series of workshops with professional coaches to teach how to contribute to Wikipedia

These were the measures of success we initially planned:

- we aim at 15-20 participants per workshop and will target 5 gained active wikipedia contributors per session
- we aim at completing all the entries of the swiss women listed in 2 books: "Pionnières et Créatrices en Suisse Romande", éditions Slatkine, and Mantilleri & Hervé, "Histoires et Visages de Femmes", collection Archives vivantes, Cabédita, 2004
- the ultimate objective is to create a pool of a dozen active contributors interested in filling in the Wikipedia Gender Gap who will continue after the first year
Did you achieve your project goal? How do you know your goal was achieved? Please answer in 1 - 2 short paragraphs.
We targeted 60 participants (15 by workshop) and this was achieved, in fact we had many more, but only retained the active contributors on the project page.
We were very optimistic at targeting 5 active wikipedian per session (we just did not realize what it meant) , but we do now have 12 rolling editors. Interestingly, some "offline" editors have taken other roles : Mrs Mantilleri moderated the Wikiconvention conference in Paris, Tatie Thérèse was one of the linguist intervening in this same conference, and Spillandra has given great ideas offline about what articles are missing to document the history of women's right in Switzerland (and wrote an article in the medias on the subject). Actually two enthusiastic participants who were journalists ended up writing an article on the project!
We are continuing, even now without regular funding, and meeting every week at the University of Geneva to work qualitatively on the project that was born from the first one, les sans pagEs.So the initial goal of achieving a local contributong community on the gender gap, is not finished, but in good progress.

Furthermore, we had nearly every participant publishing their article, and were able to promote self confidence among the participants. Furthermore, some senior wikipedians are now engaging in the project, feeling motivated and not taken aback by the idea of writing women bios. What is probably the best, is that we achieved results that we never expected:

- being nominated as one of the coolest project of the year in the wikimedia movement thanks to our retention rate and to our involving an institutional partner
- appearing on television thrice and having more than 21 articles in important mainstream medias
- getting other institutions to run a workshop (and some are now on the waiting list)
- continuing with a project which is of international scope after organizing a regional project
- organizing a conference on non sexist language at the French Wikiconvention and organizing a workshop comparing experiences working on the gender gap across the globe
- last but not least : establishing links with the women in Red and starting to RT our articles both ways! Meeting Rosisstep in Esino Lario was inspiring and lead to the creation of les sans pagEs.

Progress towards targets and goals[edit]

Project metrics

Target outcome Achieved outcome Explanation
60 participants to the workshop 54 more than 60 registered, and we kept 54 until the very end
15 active editors retained 12 we were a little ambitious on that one!Newbies ourselves$
compleating all entries of 2 books honnestly we did not count but we did not achieve it we did not realize that we could not force a new contributor on a subject, and that the best way to motivate is to quickly forget about a target which is not so great. Problems: lack of sources, admissibility, and participant wanting to taclke other subjects. we did not force them

Global Metrics[edit]

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.

  1. Next to each required metric, list the actual outcome achieved through this project.
  2. 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.

, WMCH progress report Hereunder you will find a pasted version of the WMCH metric report on the project. Gabrielle Marie has been in charge of collecting metrics for the whole session of the project and we really thank her for that. Unfortunately, due to a problem with wikimetrics, we cannot calculate the retention rate after 90 days. The problem has been reported by Gabrielle, but apparently not solved.
The impact of this project exceeded by far our expectations both on quantitative and qualitative metrics. Out of 4 workshops, which include the data from the last quarter in 2015, 74 people participated in the courses, which in effect enabled the creation of 54 accounts. 704 pages were created out of which 89 biographies involving women in Switzerland: the language here was mainly in French but also English, Spanish and Hungarian. Hereunder you will find the detailed metrics that we have collected for each session:
Metric Achieved outcome Explanation
1. # of active editors involved 74
2. # of new editors 54
3. # of individuals involved 300 only on wikipedia, but if we add the UNIGE and Wikinconvention conference (approx 200 persons), the people working around the project (5 to 10), plus the media coverage (approx 10 journalists) this figure is much higher
4a. # of edits 9 161
4b. # of active rolling new editors 12 ( as of 25.10.2016)
5. # of pages created on Wikimedia projects 1213
6. Absolute value of bytes added to or deleted from Wikimedia projects 1177280.0
Session Participants Accounts created Pages created Articles created Total edits 30 day retention rate
October/December 2015 (1) 27 17 203 21 6320 48%
January/April 2016 (2) 28 18 128 22 3950 22%
March/May 2016 (3) 13 9 89 11 3034 46%
April/June 2016 (4) 20 10 284 32 3940 Not available yet
Note: The 30 day contributor retention rates are impressive and WMCH will be calculating the 90 day retention rate during autumn 2016 to be able to analyse the impact of the workshops in depth.
  • Qualitative metrics
Following each workshop, a questionnaire was sent to the participants to improve the teaching approach of the program and its content from session to session. The learning curve was steep and most of the participants provided excellent feedback; here is a snap shot of their results:
Session Net Promotor Score Appreciation of the trainers (average) Intention to carry on contributing (average) Improved awareness on the theme of Equal opportunities (average)
October/December 2015 (1) 54.67 8.6/10 40% 7/10
January/April 2016 (2) 81.8 9.1/10 90.9% 7.7/10
March/May 2016 (3) 57.2 8.3/10 100% 7
April/June 2016 (4) 50 8.5/10 75% 7.8/10
Note: we decided to opt for the NPS as a qualitative metric in order to be able to compare the results from one session to the next, as it is a useful tool to provide a sense of growth. Participants had to answer the following question: "How likely is it that you would recommend our workshops to a friend or colleague? " on a scale from 0 to 10. A calculation is then required and the final figure, as detailed in the Wikipedia article, can be interpreted as such "NPS can be as low as −100 (everybody is a detractor) or as high as +100 (everybody is a promoter). An NPS that is positive (i.e., higher than zero) is felt to be good, and an NPS of +50 is excellent."
The project was contacted 21 times by media over a period of 10 months: not only written press but also radio and tv coverages were the result, thanks to an efficient communication strategy which of course also contributed to spreading the Wikimedia name in the local area. All the links to the articles, podcasts and videos are available on the project page.
We believe that the success of this initiative was on one hand due to the diversity of strong institutional stakeholders which invested financial resources and in kind contributions. On the other hand, without the hard work and dedication of the users User: Nattes à chat and User:LaMèreVeille this initiative could not have had such a high impact. Last but not least, a strong communication strategy also enabled the project to gain visibility. Following the completion of the project, we hope that the participants of the workshops remain motivated to carry on contributing to the Wikimedia projects on the long term. We are also confident that they will be joining future offline community get-togethers which will enrich the discussions and exchanges. A detailed official report is currently being compiled together with all the partners of the project. It will be included in the final 2016 impact report.
Learning question
Did your work increase the motivation of contributors, and how do you know?
We know we have been able to attract interest from the senior contributing community from the participation in our new project, les sans paGes. There are 21 online participants, among which well established members of the community.The amount of articles created (as of 27.10.2016) is 237 between July and october 2016. Although at first the project was perceived as a criticism of sexism on wikipedia voicing some criticism, the media coverage gave contributors the satisfaction of knowing Wikipedians are capable of adressing the gender gap and taking care of criticism constructively. The conference on non sexist language at the Paris wikiconvention, which is a direct consequence of the project also provoqued interest a will to contribute. the result is taht our new project looks much much better, has a flow discussion functionnality anda series of lists to find interesting missing articles.

The new participants of the project on the other hand, were extremely pleased to be part of this adventure well covered in the medias. We also know because we calculated the Net promoter Scores for our project after each workshop. The average NPS for the whole project is


What impact did this project have on WMF's mission and the strategic priorities?

Option A: How did you increase participation in one or more Wikimedia projects? The project was oriented towsrd new contributors and therefore led to the incresase of participation mostly on the French wikipedia, but also on Commons (pictures to illustrate an article), wikidata, and to a lesser extent, as trere was some amount of translation done : the english wiki, the spanish wiki, the caltalan wiki.

Option B: How did you improve quality on one or more Wikimedia projects? We were mostly preoccupied in welcoming new contributors (promoting Wikilove) and reducung the gender gap in both ist editorial and content aspect.

Option C: How did you increase the reach (readership) of one or more Wikimedia projects? There was a large media coverage which led to people reading about the mentionned women biographies. We even sometimes received mails informfing us of mistakes, and people wanting to participate ti the workshops.

Reporting and documentation of expenditures[edit]

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".

receipts were sent to Alex Wang.


Please list all project expenses in a table here, with descriptions and dates. Review the instructions here.
Number Category Item description Unit Number of units Actual cost per unit Actual total Budgeted total Currency Notes
1 promotion, communication participation to the graphic design costs in total by Unige 650.00 500.00 CHF The University of Geneva kindly provided photocopies so that writing materials were ot needed. However, the promotion part was higher than expected with the printing of flyers. So we added 150 chf of the writing material initially budgeted to the 500 chf promotion and communication
2 library various books (see list below) 19 1500 711.55 CHF we had a discount rate ont the books from the library, and some of the books ordered turned out not to be available anymore. Then we found other ways of finding sources, and also, the fact that we needed more for caternig meant that we shifted the budget for catring needs
3 Food&catering sandwiches + tea + coffee + fruits workshops 20 participants in average 18 239.83 3500 4317 CHF we asked for a shift in the budget as we had more participants than expected (15 was the initial number projected) and a slight increase but never got an answer. The issue was resolved by 1 - cutting off coffe & Tea in the 2nd and 3rd workshop 2 - because we were not delivered for one of the workshops, 3 - we shifted budget from library and writing material to make sure we could welcome participants with the same quality during our workshops held over lunchtime.
4 Writing material 0.00 500.00 CHF As the University of Geneva provided most of the material and photocopying facilities, we did not really use that line. As the promotion was more expensive we shifted 150 CHF of the 500 CHF budgeted to a participation in the layout design for the promotionnal flyers. The rest was used for the catering

List of the library books provided for the participants:

1- DEVOUARD, Florence et PAUMIER, Guillaume "Wikipedia, Découvrir, utiliser, contribuer" , Presse Universitaires de Grenoble, 2009: 5 X 18.50 CHF

2- "Pionnières et créatrices en Suisse Romande, XIXe et XXe siècle", SPPE, editions Slatkine 2004, ISBN: 2-8321-0152-6 (éventuellement 2 exemplaires) : 5 X 45 chf

3- VIENNOT, Eliane, "Non, le masculin ne l'emporte pas sur le féminin! Petite histoire des résistances de la langue française", éditions iXe 2014, ISBN : 979-10-90062-20-7, 22 chf

4- MOREAU, Thérèse, Pour une éducation épicène, ed. Réalités sociales, 1994 , 32 CHF

5- DEUBER ZIEGLER Erica & Tikhonov Natalia (éds). Les femmes dans la mémoire de Genève, éd. Suzanne Hurter, 2005 : 85 chf

6- DALLERA Corinne & LAMAMRA Nadia. Du salon à l'usine, vingt portraits de femmes, un autre regard sur l'histoire du canton de Vaud., 2003 : 28 chf

7- Histoire oubliée. Chronique illustrée du mouvement féministe 1914-1963, Staämpfli, 2000, 2 vol.: 80 chf

8- HERVÉ Florence & MANTILLERI Brigitte. Histoires et visages de femmes, Cabédita, 2004.: 40chf

9- KÄPPELI Anne-Marie. Sublime croisade. Ethique et politique du féminisme protestant, 1875-1928, Zoé, 1990.: 29.50 chf

10- LAROUX, Ariane, Portraits parlés, éditions l'Age d'homme, 76.50 chf

11 - Histoire de la littérature en Suisse Romande, éditions Zoé, 57.60 chf

Total project budget (from your approved grant submission)
Initial budget as notified in the grant:

In kind contribution: ●room provided by University of Geneva : 5400 CHF ●professional coach specialized in gender issues provided by UNIGE: 5400 CHF ● Wikimedia project manager to teach technical editing aspects : 5400 CHF ● a teacher of internet information searching tools provided by UNIGE : 5400 CHF

Other contributions needed for 18 sessions of 3 X 6 workshops throughout one year ●sandwiches and refreshment for 18 workshops: 3500 CHF ●books on wikipedia and Swiss Women 15 each: 1500 CHF ●promotion, communication: 500 CHF ●writing material for workshops: 500 CHF

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)
6 000 chf
Total amount spent on this project
38 263 chf
11784.91 (conference paid by Unige) + 5679.05 (WMF contribution) + 10 800 (2 teachers hired just for the projet and paid by Unige + Emilie Gourd) = 28 263.96

If we add the 4th workshop funded by HES-SO and the travel expenses not initially planned in the project we get close to : 38 263.96

This does not include inkind contributions such as : - WMCH employee detached for one serie of workshops and offering her help for the project - 4 UNIGE employes of the Equal opportunity office (worked on communication, accounting, logistics and the design of the conference)

if we include the HESSO and Natacha Rault travel expenses (see below) this amounts to 26 479 chf approximatively. This does not include all inkind contribution of the project (salary of the person detached from WMCH, salary of the persons of the Equal Opportunity office of the University of Geneva).

Total amount of Project and Event grant funds spent on this project
Are there additional sources that funded any part of this project? List them here.
  • HESSO :8 000 chf for the 4 th workshop not initially planned

The fourth workshop was held at the HES_SO in Lausanne but was financed entirely by them, and not actually planned in the initial grant, so although we put it up on the project page we did not include it in the actual financial report. We actually found out that the amount for the two persons intervening was underestimated, as we spent quite a lot of time in between workshops looking how to solve editing issues raised by the participants. In fact the hours of volunteering for the two teachers who worked from the beginning to the end of the project exceeded the amount of paid hours. We also learnt in December that the WMCH person detached for us could not continue for the next workshops. Fortunately, we were able to have participants come from the first workshop to help us. We want to thank specially Softenpoche, Rosaschnabeltier, Trendia and Transmission21.

  • Travel expenses paid personnally by Natacha Rault: 1400 euros approx.

The fact that the local community did not really help at the beginnig of the project, and that we even faced quite a lot of adversity, meant that Natacha Rault decided to find support and responses in the French community. She got involved in the wikimooc, which meant travelling once to Paris for the shooting (approx. 300 euros of transport and hostelling), she went to the workshops held at the Mutinerie twice (600 euros) and participated in the Art+Feminism editathon in Paris in March 2016 (another 300 euros). Another time Camille Gevaudan from Liberation proposed a numeric TV interview in Paris (200 euros). The outcome was worth it: we would never have learnt how the wikipedia community is functionning, and had lots of ressources to give to the participants (the Wikimmoc videos were extremely valuable). This means we underestimated the expenses at the start of the project, not aware of all aspects like the need to plan travelling expenses to stay in touch with the community. We discovered the possibility to ask for scholarships when we registered to participate to Wikimania.

Remaining funds[edit]

Remaining funds from this grant have been returned to WMF in the amount of 320.95 CHF.
Are there any grant funds remaining?
Answer YES or NO.
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.)
320.95 chf
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.
request for reallocation