Grants:Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund/Conference Fund/WikiCredCon 2026:"Addressing Reliability in an Era of Information Erosion"
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 application. 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.
Applicant details
[edit]- A. Are you applying as a(n)
Nonprofit organization with Wikimedia mission
- B. Full name of organization presenting the proposal.
Hacks Hackers, Inc.
- F. Do you have an account on a Wikimedia project?
Yes
- F1. Please provide your main Wikimedia Username.
User:NevinThompson
- F2. Please provide the Usernames of people related to this proposal.
User:NevinThompson User:JamieF User:Dominic User:superhamster User:Ocaasi User:Jenny8Lee
- G. Are you legally registered?
Yes
If you are applying as an individual or your group is not a legally registered nonprofit in your country, we require that you have a fiscal sponsor.
- I. Fiscal organization name.
N/A
Objectives and Strategy
[edit]- 1. Please state the title of your proposal.
WikiCredCon 2026: "Addressing Reliability in an Era of Information Erosion"
- 2.1. When will the event begin? Please enter the event start date.
2026-04-17
- 2.2. When is the last day of your event?
2026-04-19
- 3.1. When will you begin preparing for your event?
2025-11-06T00:00:00Z
- 3.2. When will you expect to complete your last event payment?
2026-06-30T00:00:00Z
- 4. In which country will the conference take place?
United States of America
- 4.1. In which city will the conference take place?
San Francisco
- 5. Is it a remote or in-person event?
In-person event
- 5.1. What will be the total number of participants at the event? (including scholarship recipients + organizing team + other guests + self funded guests) (required)
60
- 6. Please indicate whether your work will be focused on one country (local), more than one or several countries in your region (regional) or has a cross-regional (global) scope.
Local
- 6.1. If you have answered regional, please write the country names and any other information that is useful for understanding your proposal.
- 7. If you would like, please share any websites or social media accounts that your group or organization has.
https://www.wikicred.org https://misinfocon.com https://www.hackshackers.com
- 8. Do you work with any thematic or regional platforms such as WISCom, CEE, Iberocoop, etc.
Yes
- 8.1. Please describe what platforms and your work with them.
WikiSignals WikiCite MisInfoCon Credibility Coalition
- 9. Please describe the target participants for this event.
Wikipedians who work on credibility issues
Wikicred-curious Wikipedians who have been working on adjacent issues and want to get involved
Those outside Wikimedia communities who work on topics that depend on Wikipedia’s sourcing, such as Internet Archive and incumbent and emerging platforms
Outside researchers who work on the reliability of sources
Wikimedia Foundation and Enterprise staff focus on community and credibility
Technology journalists focusing on platform policy and information integrity.
- 10. Please provide the link to the event's page if you already have one.
Not yet available, but here is our 2025 event page: WikiCredCon 2025 - Meta, https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiCredCon_2025
2026 event page will be similar.
The following questions (11-14) will refer to the Community Engagement Survey which is required in order to submit a proposal. Here is the survey form that you can copy and use (if the link does not work): https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1ieEI8EFf2vxjD9wN_h8-srYeRCp4fhSp7_1_wiR2jh8/edit. This survey is required to access a Conference grant.
- 11. How many people did you send the community engagement survey to?
71
- 11.1. When did you conduct the survey, and for how long?
The survey was launched Wed, Aug 20, and concluded Thursday, September 4, 2025.
- 12. How many people responded to the survey?
13
- 13. What are the main objectives of the event?
1) Addressing content-gaps on English-language Wikipedia, including considering strategies like growing a more diverse community of editors by improving editor safety and inclusivity on the platform.
2) Discuss and solicit feedback for the software tools that are being developed to help editors address credibility (e.g., Cite Unseen, Citation Watchlist), share updates about other ongoing credibility projects, and spark new WikiCred collaborations.
3) Address the impact of AI tools and other emerging technologies on Wikipedia editing, and update best practices when using AI for fact-checking.
4) At a time when federal agencies are being reconfigured, address the deprecation of reliable sources and identify ways to preserve government data and other public information.
5) Discuss emerging challenges to credibility and safety on the platform with Wikimedia Foundation staff, and strategies for addressing these issues.
- 14. Based on survey responses, what are the most important things your community should do at the conference to achieve these objectives?
According to survey respondents, “combating harassment and escalating attempts to dox Wikipedia editors” was identified as the most important topic that the WikiCred community needs to discuss in person at WikiCredCon 2026. This was followed by “building and incorporating citation tools for Wikipedia’s global network of volunteer contributors” and “enhancing efforts and systems that protect against disinformation.”
Addressing the impact of AI tools and technologies on Wikipedia editing, as well as addressing the deprecation of reliable sources, and finding alternatives were identified as the most important challenges the WikiCred community should focus on in the next 12 months. “As sources previously considered reliable are lost, disinformation and weaponized/misguided use of machine learning is likely to take its place,” noted one survey respondent. “As such, we should work with libraries, museums, archives, universities and other knowledge institutions to safeguard information integrity.”
Therefore a successful WikiCredCon should provide a forum to explore these themes.
In terms of activities, instead of presentations, a majority of survey respondents indicated they would prefer opportunities for collaboration and exchanging information, such as networking, hackathons and tool-building – activities which, survey respondents said, can be done better in-person than online.
According to the survey, a successful in-person conference should also be based on opportunities for building trust, live collaboration, and incubating tools related to credibility and misinformation. One respondent noted that an in-person conference would make it easier to build connections with and strategize with other editors and those outside of Wikipedia to address credibility and combat, and address needs for reliable sources: “A regular (yearly) face-to-face meetup would propel these projects forward and stimulate new projects.”
Identifying and evaluating the online information credibility as reliable sources erode and synthetic content increasingly dominates the Internet was identified as a key skill to be explored at an in-person convening.
Survey responses also emphasized the importance of informal or unstructured time, and social time when planning a conference:
> One-on-one and small group discussions (highest priority across respondents). Collaborative sessions for community building. > Group tours and informal host-city events – in other words, a culture crawl of some kind that provides an opportunity to make connections with others while sharing experiences. > Quiet spaces for reflection and recharging.
Eating meals together was also identified as a critical in-person conference activity by respondents – eating good food was noted as a key to a successful in-person conference.
When asked to present additional thoughts at the conclusion of the survey, one respondent said, “WikiCred 2025 was one of the most productive conferences I've ever attended.”
With the insights from 2025 conference attendees, and from those who responded to this survey, we hope to make WikiCredCon 2026 even better.
- 15. Please state if your proposal aims to work to bridge any of the identified CONTENT knowledge gaps (Knowledge Inequity)? Select up to THREE that most apply to your work.
Content Gender gap, Cultural background, ethnicity, religion, racial
- 15.1. In a few sentences, explain how your work is specifically addressing this content gap (or Knowledge inequity) to ensure a greater representation of knowledge. (optional recommended).
Safety on Wikipedia related to gender: How gender impacts editor experience on Wikipedia, and how gender affects perceptions and experiences of safety as an editor. WikiCredCon will continue to explore these issues with an aim to surface ideas for improving experience and safety.
- 16. Please state if your proposal includes any of these areas or THEMATIC focus. Select up to THREE that most apply to your work and explain the rationale for identifying these themes.
Advocacy, Open Technology, Diversity
- 17. Will your work focus on involving participants from any underrepresented communities?
Gender Identity, Sexual Orientation, Ethnic/racial/religious or cultural background, Digital Access
- 18. Do you intend to invite or engage with non-Wikimedian individuals or organizations? If so – can you explain your intention for this outreach?
10 attendees from Internet Archive in 2025 SimPPL research team Tech journalists (e.g., Verge) Local researchers at UC Berkeley and Stanford Other researchers from the Credibility Coalition and MisInfoCon list
- 19. What will you do to make sure participants continue to engage in your activities after the event?
Following WIkiCredCon 2025 there have been monthly Zoom calls that discuss projects, plus the future of WikiCred June 2025 call focused on WikiCredCon 2026 An active Slack channel Regular newsletter contact WikiCred track submissions at WCNA 2025 Invite to MisinfoCon newsletter Community survey for this proposal
- 20. In what ways do you think your proposal most contributes to the Movement Strategy 2030 recommendations. Select a maximum of THREE options that most apply.
Improve User Experience, Coordinate Across Stakeholders, Innovate in Free Knowledge
Logistical Aspects
[edit]- 21. Do you have any proposed venue for the event?
Internet Archive in San Francisco is a partner in the event, providing a free venue that regularly hosts gatherings of over 100-200 participants. The Internet Archive is well-served by Muni buses. The 5 Fulton and 31 Balboa lines both have stops nearby. The 5 Fulton line, in particular, runs along Fulton Street, with a stop close to Funston Avenue. From downtown San Francisco, the bus ride is about 20-30 minutes.
While there are nearby hotels, we will most likely reserve Airbnb accommodations again, in order to save costs and promote opportunities for interaction and discussion all through the weekend. The Inner Richmond area, particularly along Clement Street, offers a diverse range of dining options, from casual cafes to international cuisine.
- 22. Is the event venue and hotel accessible for people with physical disabilities?
Yes
- 23. How many scholarships would you like to offer?
As in 2025, 25 scholarship stipends averaging US$1,000 USD will be offered to select attendees to cover travel to the event as well as accommodations. How this is usually executed is we book housing though a centralized manner and reimburse flight and ground transport through Brex.
- 24. What expenses will the scholarship cover?
Travel, including local transit Accommodation
- 25. How will scholarship recipients be selected?
Active WikiCred participants, including those who present at the WCNA 2025 WikiCred track
Expert Wikipedians who have been in credibility space and want to help with Reliable Sources
Non-Wikipedians who have been active in the mis/disinformation space and who can add fresh, relevant insights
- 26. In which ways can Wikimedia Foundation staff support your event onsite?
We would like to once again invite Wikimedia Foundation staff involved from Enterprise, Future Audiences, Research, Edit Check, and Administrator Tools to be present if possible, to improve product development and impact. As in 2025, we will collaborate on developing a speaking format that meets the needs of WMF staff.
- 26.2. Do you intend to invite any WMF staff members to your event? (please note that all WMF staff travel and accommodation costs will be covered by the foundation). Please indicate what is the limit number of WMF staff members you would like to welcome at your event.
As in 2025, we would like to invite up to 15 WMF representatives, though if more would like to come, we would enthusiastically welcome them. We just have to plan for the catering budget.
- 27. Please outline the roles and responsibilities of the organizing team for the conference.
Foundation Liaison (Nevin Thompson)
Event planning and production, including group catering and accommodation planning (TBD)
Venue logistics (Internet Archive)
Scholarship evaluations (Nevin Thompson, Jamie Flood, volunteers from WCNA)
Programming team (WikiCred members)
Communications (Nevin Thompson)
- 28. Do you have plans to co-organize the event with other Wikimedia communities, groups or affiliates?
No
- 28.1. If yes, can you please explain how you are going to co-organize the event and what responsibilities each partner will have.
- 29. What kind of risks do you anticipate and how would you mitigate these?
1) RISK: Event is either too “busy”, or too unstructured, leading to dissatisfaction and a lack of energy by attendees afterwards. MITIGATION: Pay attention to comments from 2025 attendees about structure, and structure the event accordingly
2) RISK: Difficult to predict extent of the ongoing deterioration of online and in-person safety by the time of the conference MITIGATION: Create venue safety plan MITIGATION: Prepare online safety guidelines prior to event MITIGATION: Offer safety training at the event
3) RISK: These are generally hard problems and may not have easy answers MITIGATION: If hard to implement, develop a draft roadmap or needs analysis
4) RISK: Lack of funding to build solutions MITIGATION: Identify and prioritize funding gaps
5) RISK: Lack of Foundation buy-in to adopt solutions MITIGATION: Invite WMF staff to event for in-person discussion.
6) RISK: Perception that we're fighting misinformation from a leftist perspective against the right MITIGATION: Develop communications strategy that identifies potential contentious language and that develops clear and non-inflammatory language to describe our solutions.
7) RISK: Attendee safety, in-person (at the event) and online (following the event) MITIGATION: We will develop a safety plan with the Wikimedia Foundation. MITIGATION: Streaming will be carefully considered in order to protect participant safety. MITIGATION: The participant list will be kept private (e.g., no Media-Wiki documentation) MITIGATION: Email addresses will also be kept private and secure.
8) RISK: Adversarial media are invited who do not align with the Wikimedia movement. MITIGATION: Carefully consider which media we invite, and invite the Foundation to provide insights about our media list. MITiGATION: Clearly identify media with a lanyard etc.
9) RISK: Participant dissatisfaction about format. MITIGATION: Arrange fewer speakers than 2025, provide more opportunities for unstructured time for networking and info-sharing. In order to preserve energy, focus, momentum coming out of WikiCredCon, plan a shorter “unconference” session.
10) RISK: WMF staff are surprised by WikICredCon program MITIGATION: Communicate with WMF in advance about the programme and known attendees.
- 30. Friendly space policy - Please add the link to the friendly space policy that your community will be using for this event.
https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Policy:Friendly_space_policy
Learning, Sharing, and Evaluation
[edit]- 31. What do you hope to learn from your work organising this conference?
An in-person event facilitates more conversations, deeper collaborations, and stronger and lasting connections aimed at addressing credibility and reliability on Wikipedia.
The discussions facilitated by WikiCredCon will result in future collaborations and tangible next steps, including updates at a WikiCred track at WCNA 2026
There is support within the Foundation for integrating more tools focused on reference quality. WikiCred has the energy, focus, momentum and community to achieve affiliate status.
WikiCred has the energy, focus, momentum and community to achieve affiliate status.
- 32. Main open metrics
| Main Open Metrics | Description | Target |
|---|---|---|
| Community focus (1/2) | Total attendees | 50 |
| Community focus (2/2) | Total Event Satisfaction Score regarding Importance and Focus of the Convening (as a percentage) | 85 |
| Next steps | Average monthly WikiCred call attendees (over 6 months) | 6 |
| Deeper collaboration | WikiCred track proposal suggestions at WCNA 2026 | 3 |
| N/A | N/A | N/A |
Financial Proposal
[edit]- 33. What is the amount you are requesting from Wikimedia Foundation? Please provide this amount in your local currency.
75000
- 34. Select your local currency.
USD
- 35. Please upload your budget for this proposal or indicate the link to it.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KWa-Qb087jBeqZBZwxyOTpR0eP6k-4KEsZNnZw-iayQ/edit?usp=sharing
- 36. Do you expect to receive funding for this conference from other organizations to support your work?
No
- 36.1. If yes, what kind of resources are you expecting to get?
- We/I have read the Application Privacy Statement, WMF Friendly Space Policy and Universal Code of Conduct.
Yes
- Please use this optional space to upload any documents that you feel are important for further understanding your proposal.
- Other public document(s):
Endorsements and Feedback
[edit]Please add endorsements and feedback to the grant discussion page only. Endorsements added here will be removed automatically.
Community members are invited to share meaningful feedback on the proposal and include reasons why they endorse the proposal. Consider the following:
- Stating why the proposal is important for the communities involved and why they think the strategies chosen will achieve the results that are expected.
- Highlighting any aspects they think are particularly well developed: for instance, the strategies and activities proposed, the levels of community engagement, outreach to underrepresented groups, addressing knowledge gaps, partnerships, the overall budget and learning and evaluation section of the proposal, etc.
- Highlighting if the proposal focuses on any interesting research, learning or innovation, etc. Also if it builds on learning from past proposals developed by the individual or organization, or other Wikimedia communities.
- Analyzing if the proposal is going to contribute in any way to important developments around specific Wikimedia projects or Movement Strategy.
- Analysing if the proposal is coherent in terms of the objectives, strategies, budget, and expected results (metrics).