Grants:Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund/Conference Fund/WikiCon Brasil 2025/Final Report
Report Status: Accepted
Due date: 25 December 2025
Funding program: Conference Fund
Report type: Final
This is an automatically generated Meta-Wiki page. The page was copied from Fluxx, the web service of Wikimedia Foundation Funds, where the user has submitted their midpoint report. Please do not make any changes to this page because all changes will be removed after the next update. Use the discussion page for your feedback. The page was created by CR-FluxxBot.General information
[edit]- Title of proposal: WikiCon Brasil 2025
- Username of applicant: JPeschanski (WMB)
- Name of organization: N/A
- Amount awarded: 108046.91
- Amount spent: 111020.83 USD, 581416.64 BRL
Part 1: Understanding your work
[edit]1. Did your event have any impact that you did not expect, positive or negative?
We were positively surprised by the level of community engagement. The conference welcomed 166 people, which is a significant increase in comparison to the previous edition, in 2022. The rate of satisfaction remained high for WikiCon Brasil 2025. 36,5% of attendees said their expectations were positively met, and 63.5% said their expectations were exceeded, according to community feedback. The large number of activity proposals submitted for inclusion in the event’s program demonstrates that the conference has become a consolidated and relevant space for the Wikimedia community in Brazil. This important space for community interaction also proved to be significant in promoting social and community engagement in public debates on Internet Governance. Under the theme “Strengthening Digital Public Goods,” Wikimedia Brasil fostered discussions on the need to defend a common good–oriented internet and a digital ecosystem that values free knowledge and is centered on human beings, their diversity of voices, and their rights. The sessions focused on the conference’s central theme were rated as good (15%) and very good (85%) by the 60 respondents who answered this section of the survey. The community presentations fostered an environment of mutual learning and highlighted the protagonism of volunteer engagement. Most of these sessions were rated as very good (76.9%) and good (19.2%), with a small percentage (3.8%) rated as average, mainly due to the limited time available for in-depth discussions during the sessions, as the schedule was optimized to accommodate a larger and more diverse range of activities. The training sessions were also highly rated: 67.4% of respondents evaluated them as very good, 28.3% as good, and 4.3% as average. Participants emphasized the need to extend the duration of these activities but also highlighted how satisfactory and enriching they were to carry out. Following the successful model of its first edition, WikiCon Brasil 2025 made available on the event website recordings (https://w.wiki/FxGE) of the main and community sessions, cultural presentations, and presentation materials (https://w.wiki/FxJF) prepared by each speaker. As part of its ongoing efforts to document and share the learnings and impacts of the event, we also produced the publication WikiCon Brasil 2025: Strengthening Digital Public Goods (https://w.wiki/FxJG), a document that communicates the legacies of this initiative and positions Wikimedia Brasil as a national coordinating actor in defense of digital public goods and free knowledge — in favor of a common good–oriented internet that is human-centered, respectful of human rights, and committed to democratic, participatory, and plural governance.
2. What do you think will be the long term impact of this conference?
The conference served as a key strategic space for defining priorities for the upcoming three-year period (2026–2028). According to respondents of the post-event satisfaction survey, the strategic discussions were rated as very good (77.5%) or good (22.5%). These discussions were highly relevant to the Wikimedia Brasil 2026–2028 Strategic Process, as they allowed us to hear the community’s expectations and concerns while fostering dialogue and collaboration among its members.
Another important long-term impact of the conference was the increased community engagement and awareness of national and global debates on internet governance and their implications for the Wikimedia Movement. In this sense, WikiCon Brasil has become a space for strengthening alliances with partners — including public, private, civil society, academic, educational organizations, and collectives — and for converging toward joint action guided by shared principles that support the strengthening of digital public goods.
One highlight was the participation of Rodolfo Avelino, a member of the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br), who stated:
"Wikipedia is, above all, a concrete expression of social resilience, understood as a digital public good. For this reason, it is constantly cited by the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee as a major digital platform. It represents a consolidated model of collaboratively validated knowledge production — a tangible expression of social resilience in the digital environment, sustained by an open, transparent, and collaborative model of governance”.(https://w.wiki/Fx3b)
In addition to CGI.br, several institutions participated in the event, including InternetLab, DataLab, AqualtuneLab, Art+Feminism, Afropédia, Foto.wiki.br, Grupo de usuários Commons Photographers, Grupo de usuários WikiJournal, Grupo de usuários Wikimedia and Libraries, Grupo de usuários Wikimedia Stewards, Grupo de usuários Wikipedia & Education, Interface de Saberes: Jacobina na Wiki, Musica Brasilis, OpenStreetMap, Projeto Mais Teoria da História na Wiki, Projeto Saúde Auditiva na Wiki, Whose Knowledge?, WikiAcción Peru, Wiki Editoras Lx, Wikimedia LGBT+, Wikimedia Portugal and WikiMulheres+ (https://w.wiki/Fx3M).
The community survey also showed that after the conference: 93.8% of participants felt more connected to the Brazilian Wikimedia community; 64.1% felt more prepared to lead or organize Wikimedia activities in their cities; 78.1% felt more familiar with local and international discussions on internet governance; and 82.8% felt more comfortable interacting with other community members in both online and in-person spaces.
It is also worth noting the presence of highly experienced Wikimedia project editors, including advanced-level contributors such as administrators, who had the opportunity to share experiences among themselves and with newer editors.
As one participant highlighted when asked what worked very well and should not be missing from future events:
“That mix of people! I noticed there was an effort to bring together newer and more experienced users, as well as people who organize Wikimedia initiatives and others who work in the broader free knowledge ecosystem. Having different session formats also worked well because they reflected the dynamics of our community.”(https://w.wiki/Fx3g)
3. Would you say that your work improved participants’ ability to apply new skills and knowledge?
Yes
3a. If yes, please describe how and why you think this was successful. Please describe why you think this is the case.
The training sessions were evaluated by the 66 respondents of the post-event survey as very good by 67.4%, good by 28.3%, and fair by 4.3%. Among participants, 85.4% reported that they successfully developed new skills, while 12.5% of respondents were unsure at the time of the survey.
4. Please use this space to upload media and other files that help tell your story and impact. You can also provide links to them.
Field to type in URLs.
- Post-Event Community Satisfaction Survey - https://w.wiki/Fx3g
- Visual Report of WikiCon Brasil 2025 - https://w.wiki/Fx3b
- Videos from the WikiCon Brasil 2025 sessions (Wikimedia Commons) - https://w.wiki/FxGE
- Videos from the WikiCon Brasil 2025 sessions (YouTube) - https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEmJ1V6HikFRh-JWmXY7nfbex40etGhvy&si=RASI0wl_qx6iUQ3H
- WikiCon Brasil 2025 category on Wikimedia Commons - https://w.wiki/9hrb
5. To what extent do you agree with the following statements regarding the work carried out with the support of this Fund? You can choose “not applicable” if your work does not relate to these goals.
| A. Bring in participants from underrepresented groups | |
| B. Create a more inclusive and connected culture in our community | Strongly agree |
| C. Develop content about underrepresented topics/groups | |
| D. Develop content from underrepresented perspectives | Strongly agree |
| E. Encourage the retention of editors | Strongly agree |
| F. Encourage the retention of organizers | Strongly agree |
6. Please share resources that would be useful to share with other Wikimedia organizations so that they can learn from, adapt or build upon your work. For instance, guides, training material, presentations, work processes, or any other material the team has created to document and transfer knowledge about your work and can be useful for others. Please share any specific resources that you are creating, adapting/contextualizing in ways that are unique to your context (i.e. training material).
- Upload Documents and Files
- Here is an additional field to type in URLs.
7. Is there anything else you would like to share about how your efforts helped to bring in participants and/or build out content, particularly for underrepresented groups?
The governance structure of the conference organization proved to be highly efficient in ensuring that the event reflected the community’s interests. To achieve this, several committees were established: executive coordination, programming, scholarships, and diversity. These committees, composed of volunteer community members, participated in decision-making regarding the overall structure of the conference.
To ensure diverse participation, the Scholarships Committee and the Diversity Committee worked in close collaboration, developing diversity criteria to evaluate scholarship applications. These criteria also considered each applicant’s participation and contribution history in Wikimedia projects.
As a result of the diversity criteria implemented, WikiCon Brasil featured participants from all five regions of the country, representing 49 different cities, as well as participants from other countries, such as Portugal. Among the 69 presenters at the conference, 54% were men, 37% women, and 2% non-binary individuals.
From a racial diversity perspective, conference participants self-identified as follows: 49% white, 23% mixed-race (“pardo”), and 13% Black — meaning that, according to IBGE classification, 36% identified as Black. Additionally, 2% identified as Asian and 1% as Indigenous. Regarding racial self-identification, 12% of participants chose not to declare (https://w.wiki/FxJR).
Part 2: Your main learning
[edit]8. Were there any major challenges or things you found difficult that you would like to share? What would you do differently next time?
Accessibility measures such as sign language interpretation and resources adapted for people with visual impairments involve high costs that require dedicated funding lines to be considered in grant proposals. This is essential to ensure that our community spaces become increasingly diverse and inclusive.
The community survey revealed a desire to expand the event’s participation scope to include Portuguese-speaking communities from other countries (60%). Another point raised by the community during the survey was the expectation of cultural performances focused on Afro-Brazilian percussive rhythms.
An additional aspect to consider from the community feedback concerns the evaluation of the cultural attractions. Among participants who attended the cultural sessions on Friday and Sunday, 60% rated the performances as very good, 25.5% as good, and 9.1% as fair. Among the 55 respondents, two commented that while the performances by educational social projects focused on Brazilian and Bahian music were interesting, the presentation format seemed overly Eurocentric. Nevertheless, the ongoing challenge remains to balance the inclusion of cultural performances that are verifiably in the public domain or under free licenses with community expectations and local cultural expressions.
9. Was there any non-financial support that the Wikimedia Foundation could have provided that would have better supported you in achieving your goals?
No. We were adequately supported by the team, and we are thankful.
10. What would you recommend on a local and/or regional level as the best next step to leverage your success and momentum?
The community survey showed that one of the best ways to expand on this success would be to welcome participants from other Portuguese-speaking countries to the conference (as indicated by 60% of survey respondents).
11. Please add any 3 operational recommendations for future events organizers.
Part 3: Metrics
[edit]12. Open Metrics reporting
In your application, you defined some open metrics and targets (goals). You will see a table like the one below with your metric in the title and the target you set in your proposal automatically filled in.
| Open Metrics | Description | Target | Results | Comments | Methodology |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge gaps | Number of activities that specifically address the gender gap, linguistic diversity, topics for impact and other content gaps. | 10 | 15 | The program included 22 community sessions (7 panels and 15 long presentations); 6 thematic meetings and 4 strategic sessions. Throughout this program, 15 activities addressed knowledge gaps. | Analysis of the themes of the programming activities. |
| Post-event engagement | Number of follow-up interviews or survey responses with attendees, capturing their reflections on sustained engagement, the factors influencing their continued engagement, and the lasting impact of the conference on their collaborations. | 25 | 64 | 64 people responded to the post-event feedback form. | Post-event feedback form |
| Sharing skills and good practices | Number of feedback on the cross-community learning experience and insights gained from participants belonging to diverse communities | 10 | 41 | Among the 48 people who answered this question in the post-event feedback form, 41 responded that they feel they learned something or developed some skill during the training sessions, while 6 are still unsure and 1 says no. | Post-event feedback form |
| Community diversity | Percentage of participants with diverse, intersectional backgrounds | 30 | 43 | 166 participants, from 49 Brazilian cities, from all five regions of the country, and 8 international cities.
From the point of view of gender diversity, the participants self-identified as follows: 43% cis women, 49% cis men, 2% non-binary, 2% other, and 4% preferred not to declare. According to the self-declaration in the registration, 49% of the participants identify as white, 23% as mixed-race, 13% as black, 2% as Asian, 1% as indigenous, and 12% preferred not to declare. |
The data was collected from the registration form (https://w.wiki/FxJR), and the average percentage of racial (39%) and gender (47%) diversity was considered. |
| N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
13. Were there any metrics in your proposal that you could not collect or that you had to change?
No
13a. If you have any difficulties collecting data to measure your results, please describe and add any recommendations on how to address them in the future. Also mention why you felt you had to change some metrics.
N/A
14. Please indicate if you applied any of the following survey and registration tools. Please select all that apply.
1. Standard Registration Form, 2. Post-event participant survey
14a. Please share the result(s) with us, provide the link(s) or summarize the main result(s) and insight(s) from them.
https://br.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiCon_Brasil_2025/Documenta%C3%A7%C3%A3o
14b. If you used other forms, please share them with us, as these forms might be useful for others to use.
Part 4: Financial reporting and compliance
[edit]15. & 16. Please state the total amount spent in your local currency.
581416.64 BRL
17. Please state the total amount spent in USD.
111020.83 USD
18. Please report the funds received and spending in the currency of your fund.
Upload a financial report file.
Please provide a link to your financial reporting document.
As required in the fund agreement, please report any deviations from your fund 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.
19. If you have not already done so in your budget report, please provide information on changes in the budget in relation to your original proposal.
Not all budget lines were fully utilized; consistent with the grant’s allowable flexibility, the remaining amounts in the lines below were reallocated to cover overruns in other lines, with line-to-line shifts not exceeding 20% of each line’s total. The negative Remaining Amount (-R$ 48.516,64) was covered by Wikimedia Brasil.
20. Do you have any unspent funds from the Fund?
No
20a. Please list the amount and currency you did not use and explain why.
N/A
20b. What are you planning to do with the underspent funds?
N/A
20c. Please provide details of hope to spend these funds.
N/A
21. Are you in compliance with the terms outlined in the fund agreement?
Yes
22. Are you in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations as outlined in the grant agreement?
Yes
23. 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 Funds as outlined in the grant agreement? In summary, this is to confirm that the funds were used in alignment with the WMF mission and for charitable/nonprofit/educational purposes.
Yes
24. If you have additional recommendations or reflections that don’t fit into the above sections, please write them here.