Grants:Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund/Rapid Fund/Expanding Wikipedia Editors in Kenya (ID: 22451155)/Final Report

Expanding Wikipedia Editors in Kenya

Rapid Fund Final Report

Report Status: Accepted

Due date: 17 August 2024

Funding program: Rapid 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

Applicant username: RosPost
Organization name: N/A
Amount awarded: 4100
Amount spent: 4144 USD, 521178

Part 1: Project and impact

1. Describe the implemented activities and results achieved. Additionally, share which approaches were most effective in supporting you to achieve the results. (required)

This grant was active from mid-April through the end of August 2024, with four months of intense activity. We planned in April and May. Planning meetings included identifying editors, discussing criteria for notable matriarchs and finding sources. By June 2024, we were meeting every week and the Kenyan team had extra meetings in the mornings.

The summary of meetings for the 4.5 months are as follows: 12 - Online one-on-one editing sessions 16 - Online Group meetings in Kenya focused on editing and reviewing progress 17 - Online editing meetings with US team 1- Wikimedia User Group, Kenya meeting sharing our Rapid Grant and their experiences of Wikipedia. 3 - eight hour in-person editathons for skills development: May, June and August Summary meeting

The results of these meetings are as follows: 1. Mapped current and prospective editors for inclusion in the project. Only one of the new editors dropped out and ten editors have been actively involved in the project’s activities. 2. Identified four Circle matriarchs for compilation of articles/biographies and to close existing information gaps. 3. Ten Kenyan editors sourced the articles in teams. 4. Learned Wikipedia editing, researching and sourcing information for articles, and learned how to identify authoritative secondary sources. 5. Set up editing teams combined of skilled and unskilled editors who successfully compiled four new articles, developed two stubs, improved four existing articles and edited the Circle Wikipedia page. 6. Skills development: Set up logins, user pages, sandboxes, talk pages and published from sandboxes. 7. Editors learned various additional skills such as signing our names, linking from red to blue, citing articles, linking internally and externally. Editors learned how to use source and visual editors, find history, find user contributions, create headers and understand article formatting. We added and sourced info-boxes and templates, and learned to use banners 8. Editors learned how to upload photos on Wikimedia commons and generate 3rd party templates for photo authorization. 9. Editors earned the difference between the levels of quality of articles and levels of importance of a Wikipedia subject. 10. Editors learned how to link articles so they are not orphaned. 11. Eight (8) U.S. editors worked on the teachings, 4 met weekly and behind the scenes to teach, review and edit; 4 worked behind the scenes to help move the project forward.

Before the rapid grant began, when we worked together in 2022 and 2023, 28 people wanted to be Wikipedia editors but many realized that they could not keep up without regular internet acces and they could not afford to pay for internet access. With this 2024 Rapid Grant we could pay for some of the internet access and we could hold together a more coherent team between the U.S. and Kenya, and within Kenya. Kenyan editors began working in teams, rather than as individuals to gather information on each matriarch and edit together in one particular sandbox. We put experienced people with new editors so that we could learn from each other. In July, Christine Meyer, an experienced U.S. team member,suggested we move to stubs so that we could work with the limited secondary sources we often have in Africa.We then began stub articles and learned about stub templates, having already learned to drop in infobox templates. Christine Meyer and Rosalind Hinton also began to review articles on talk pages for participants to improve editing skills and follow a more neutral Wikipedia writing style. We will begin with teamwork in the future and start with stubs.

One of the major challenges in expanding edtors in Kenya is gaining access to data packages for reliable internet connection. Editors need data packages to work online in Kenya. They will volunteer their time, but cannot afford to pay to be online when they have limited resources and competing expenses. The data packages and the team work are a huge step forward in gaining commitments and editors. We have now heard from many who dropped out in previous years who are interested in continuing, but we are at the end of the grant cycle and have used up our data packages. The lack of data packages, again, are a barrier to expanding project editors. Even with this grant the Kenya team absorbed some of the internet data costs. We have heard from Circle members in Zambia, and South Africa, who wish to be trained. We will continue those conversations in an effort to find workable training and editing solutions.

Over the four months, team members have gained in confidence and understand the Wikipedia processes of give and take and article oversight. Some of the closing comments from team members reflect the growth and change of attitude: Christine: “Wikipedia has given me my voice.” Kenya team: “Wikipedia is a conversation that never ends.” Kenya team: “Knowledge is created in community!”

A summary of quotes are in the Rapid grant google folder with a Moving forward document. Below are the links:

Quotes:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/10yg9N5OGZ0_-aKygx4LUwmJv80gp4-iQL3eE35SeE5A/edit?usp=sharing

Moving forward:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mXcZ5hR5sp5Kl8mcOSxDgZP8YjhAxtrazOh7l-Uj3YA/edit?usp=sharing

2. Documentation of your impact. Please use space below to share links that help tell your story, impact, and evaluation. (required)

Share links to:

Project page on Meta-Wiki or any other Wikimedia project
Dashboards and tools that you used to track contributions
Some photos or videos from your event. Remember to share access.

You can also share links to:

Important social media posts
Surveys and their results
Infographics and sound files
Examples of content edited on Wikimedia projects

Project Page: The Expanding Wikipedia in Kenya Rapid Grant Project Page includes 1) lists of African and African Diaspora Notable Names for Wikipedia and their Wikidata status and VIAF numbers; 2) The banner template; 3) current editors; 4) training information.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Kenyan_Circle_of_Concerned_African_Women

Generated articles and stubs - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Wangeci_Kinoti; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damaris_Seleina_Parsitau; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazel_Ong%27ayo_Ayanga; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eunice_Wanjiku_Kamaara https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Nkirote_Kubai

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Wamue_Ngare

Improved existing articles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musimbi_Kanyoro https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philomena_Njeri_Mwaura https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esther_Mombo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Nasimiyu_Wasike https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyambura_Njoroge

Link to Circle of Concerned African Women Theologians article in Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circle_of_Concerned_African_Women_Theologians;

Wikicommons links and tags:

We also created acategory for wiki commons photos: African Women theologians

Photos of Events https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1C7WzvbSPBDnzLPQmlIeRke0zL8vx4wVZ?usp=share_link

Summary Documents https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1OVdaHfBAATIAlmAMq_Mq2e-Lt3z7829r?usp=share_link

Additionally, share the materials and resources that you used in the implementation of your project. (required)

For example:

Training materials and guides
Presentations and slides
Work processes and plans
Any other materials your team has created or adapted and can be shared with others

Project implementation documents:

You Tube of American Academy of Religion Session: Wiki Women in Religion: Publicly Engaged Scholarship to Address Systemic Bias in Online Resources. On June 26, the AAR/SBL had a session of six scholars discussing aspects of the Women in Religion WikiProject, including the Kenyan Scholar and Wiki organizer Telesia Musili who presented the Rapid Grant:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzZcasHzvqw

Editathon training powerpoint:

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1FNjr5kU_vqdTH0aGrXUmXTGM-QCFKSt9WklCGgAMFi8/edit?usp=sharing

Christine Meyer Video on how to find stubs:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VU2VPJuit9-ZMHLFrZ6i9-KKDYp0A1QJ/view?usp=sharing

Citation User guide, a short course:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KVRcXncoOC7YG1nevmIgHxCVYgnYu2ymJELW3jYE2Uk/edit?usp=sharing

Christine Larson shared a link to a Google docs page of notes for the Circle of Concerned AfricanTheologians related to Wikidata that will be useful when adding new articles.

       https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n7ZhaVvDk_2NKdFjzU64_-johw_HP10Z/edit

The google drive link – has all the minutes, unedited Zoom summaries, chats, list of participants, photographs, summaries, the original grant, actual budget folder. etc. (Some of the individual links are included. thought this document as well. This is the compilation google link:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1ClC0zwT--3DV5Ku9Q0_shDUpbI0RHKM1?usp=sharing

3. To what extent do you agree with the following statements regarding the work carried out with this Rapid Fund? You can choose “not applicable” if your work does not relate to these goals. Required. Select one option per question. (required)

Our efforts during the Fund period have helped to...
A. Bring in participants from underrepresented groups	Strongly agree
B. Create a more inclusive and connected culture in our community	Strongly agree
C. Develop content about underrepresented topics/groups	Strongly agree
D. Develop content from underrepresented perspectives	Strongly agree
E. Encourage the retention of editors	Strongly agree
F. Encourage the retention of organizers	Strongly agree
G. Increased participants' feelings of belonging and connection to the movement	Strongly agree
F. Other (optional)

Part 2: Learning

4. In your application, you outlined some learning questions. What did you learn from these learning questions when you implemented your project? How do you hope to use this learnings in the future? You can recall these learning questions below. (required)

You can recall these learning questions below: What are the cultural and social challenges to Wikipedia editors in Kenya and how do we overcome them? What new Wikipedia leadership exists and who can be cultivated as leaders. What does a shared leadership model look like in Kenya? What are the skills needed beyond editing to sustain a Kenyan chapter of Wikipedia? Who are the current Wiki editors interested in Women in Religion? How do we best communicate our Women in Religion goals and mission to increase the visibility of Kenyan scholars, activists, and leadership? What is the best way to pair skilled and unskilled Wikipedia editors in order to reduce the frustration and learning curve for participants? What are the cultural issues and communication styles that will enhance US/Kenyan communication around Wikipedia? What are the values that the two groups are forging together? What are the criteria for long term Wikipedia editors for recruitment purposes? What is the best way to go about gathering resources of oral cultures and find out-of-print publications and information on scholars activists and religious leaders in Kenya?

The questions are listed and answered with both learnings and solutions and we will take forward:

What are the cultural and social challenges to Wikipedia editors in Kenya, and how do we overcome them? 1. Most of the editors are conversant with British English which uses the passive voice. Wikipedia articles use the active voice. Solution: In the future we may discuss more clearly the difference in these styles and have participants find examples from their own writing vs Wikipedia articles. 2. Most of the women we write about have their works in hard copy and this requires traveling some distance to access the hard copies. Solution1: In the future, prioritize stubs for matriarchs who already have secondary sources. Find where the hard copies exist and see who lives near these libraries or scholars in order to borrow the books for citations. Solution 2: Look for Wikipedia grants that include time and expense to research and collect secondary sources. 3. Obtaining photos has been a challenge. Solution1: Discovering templates that grant permissions to third parties is a great help, especially if there are photos already available online. Solution 2: Moving forward, have sessions with matriarchs to create awareness on the need to publicize their achievements and show them other women in religion articles, their number of views and uses. 4. There were cross-cultural differences in communication styles during editing, planning and training sessions that were challenging. Varied and multiple interpretations of what is necessary for an article to be published also confused editors. Wikipedia tagging can be interpreted as very negative and upsetting to new editors. What is notable in the Global South is often not notable on English Wikipedia. Navigating these cultural differences of communication verbally and in writing is very important. For instance U.S slang and critique can often sound more negative than intended. Solution: Leading with positive feedback is important. Discussing differences as cultural not personal is important in gaining trust and confidence. Working together so that each of us find our voice is a "ah hah" moment for all. We learned to create our own justifications for materials together and discuss the multiple interpretations of concepts like notability and relevant citations in a group. When one finds their voice we all find our voice. 5. It is important to understand that knowledge production as individual is a Western idea. In fact Western women are often seeking to break out of these individualistic notions of learning. In Kenya knowledge production is communal. U.S. editors can become for aware of their individualism and unilateral teaching styles and create knowledge from the wisdom of each group member.

What new Wikipedia leadership exists and who can be cultivated as leaders? 1. Although the project had a coordinator, a team approach and peer-to-peer learning was adapted for drafting articles. Teams were set up to draft agreed upon articles and each member of the team had a specific task. Sharing sandboxes where the article was drafted and team members could access and edit helped with the team process. Organizing events was also critical as a group in case one person suddenly had another obligation. 2. In the future we will begin with team sourcing and a team approach to leadership. 3. We under budgeted administrative time and data packages. In future grants we will more carefully evaluate these needs.

What does a shared leadership model look like in Kenya? 1. As the team members are professionals in diverse fields, a collective/horizontal leadership model was adapted that allowed peer-to-peer learning and sharing of competencies. Skilled editors helped the new editors learn how to navigate Wikipedia. Sources were gathered communally. Events will be organized with this team approach in the future.

What are the skills needed beyond editing to sustain a Kenyan chapter of Wikipedia? 1. Cross-cultural communication skills are perhpas the most challenging skills in Wikipedia and in life, and are continuing to develop within our communities. Solution: These skills are actually values that need to be lived into and practiced daily. 2. Another challenge that editors faced was finding authoritative sources for citations as many of the primary sources have not been archived, and do not qualify to be secondary sources. Solution: Library research techniques such as using primary sources to find secondary sources must be developed. Finding librarians that want to work with our team and going to them for focused help is important. Working with more experienced editors and librarians is constructive in learning new research techniques. Also working in groups to resource articles is helpful. Allowing Rapid Grant members to access the Wikipedia library of resources earlier than 500 edits would be helpful. Also consider allowing the Global South access to the Wikipedia library resources. 3. There is a need for continuity in training so that editors improve research and editing skills and are better able to train others. Solution: We had access to a university zoom link that did not time-out and could be used by the Kenyan team even when the U.S. was not on zoom meetings. This zoom link allowed for one-on-one meetings, group meet-ups and local editing sessions. Theme-focused editahons and meet-ups will also be useful moving forward.

Who are the current Wiki editors interested in Women in Religion? 1. The current wiki editors comprise professionals from academia, librarians and civil society organisations who have an interest in writing biographies of Circle members and are committed to enhancing the visibility of women in religion and creating secondary sources for marginalized women in Kenya. We will also begin to add other Circle members from the African continent as we gain in skills and resources. 2. We thought that retirees might be interested in editing as this population makes up the majority of the U.S Women in Religion editors, but many people in Kenya retire to rural areas with little internet and often they do not have computers. Many also retire to larger family obligations such as childcare or older family members’ healthcare. Solutions: It will be interesting moving forward to see how we can find and expand our editor pools. More recently Zambia and South Africa Circle members are interested in training.We now have enough experience to work with other African Wikimedia groups. Solution1: More data packages are critical to expanding Wikipedians in Kenya. Solution2: Cell phone editing will be added to the skills development of the U.S. and Kenya teams. 3. One of the difficulties for academic scholars is the need to publish and teach multiple courses, leaving little time for Wikipedia entries. Wikipedia entries do not count towards tenure in Western modeled universities unless it is part of a scholar's theoretical focus. Solution: Women in Religion has partnered with ATLA and the Parliament of the World’s Religions to publish biographical essays on women leaders, scholars and activists in the various religious traditions broadly construed and we invite Kenyans and other African scholars to publish essays in these volumes. Below is the latest Call For Papers:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Religion/Women_in_Religion_series

“Here Our Voices” is the first volume of essays from the African continent and will be edited by Wikipedians Telesia Musili and Rosalind Hinton. This publication will provide secondary sources for Wikipedia entries.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iQOQ9MkAbexcsDSYSTpzwBNgyiOGEmau/view?usp=sharing

How do we best communicate our Women in Religion goals and mission to increase the visibility of Kenyan scholars, activists, and leadership? 1. Link orphan articles to other relevant Wikipedia articles to increase visability and notability. 2. Create online and in- person teaching sessions that highlight articles that have been published or edited. 3. Use the project page to highlight ongoing activities. 4. Develop regular online meetings for editors to share experiences and challenges. 5. Communicate across African Wikimedia Groups 6. Submit requests for panels to various Wikmedia Conferences globally. See our work on this in question six.

What is the best way to pair skilled and unskilled Wikipedia editors in order to reduce the frustration and learning curve for participants? 1. As we move forward, editors can select the matriarch about whom they want to write biographies and invite those Wikipedia members who have similar themed research foci to form teams and work together. 2. Set goals and timelines to finish work and meet regularly together online and in person 3. Have training sessions with experienced editors who can answer questions. 4. Develop theme based meet-ups and trainings.

What are the cultural issues and communication styles that will enhance US/Kenyan communication around Wikipedia? 1. The crosscultural teams are developing a learning environment that encourages editors to share both progress and challenges so that editors trust the process and one another. The almost anonymous nature of editing on Wikipedia can feel like hurtful criticism and a put down, rather than constructive criticism that helps improve articles and writing. Also U.S styles of writing and speach can feel overly critical. Through mutual review of constructive and destructive criticism on Wikipedia and in person both teams better understand cultural styles and working processes and have improved communication. Solution: Improved communications on both sides improved all editors’ writing skills as well as the Wiki articles, and also strengthened the social interactions of Wiki editors. Through this grant we are all finding our voice within the African value system of “communality", creating knowledge communally. 2. Wikipedia has to accept that it is freighted with colonial assumptions that make publishing and writing from other parts of the world more difficult. The encyclopedia itself is a Western colonial project of categorizing and naming the “other” that is linear, it does not like oral histories and privileges male voices over women’s voices in standards for notability. Women’s activism is a very difficult category to cite as notable, so is women’s influence. We have had tags placed on project publications within minutes of the publication. The U.S. team has helped to overcome tags such as: editor is too close to the subject (This was untrue in the case of the Wiki editor. She had one published article about a subject she did not know personally.); writing in too lauditory of a style (Kenyan scholars use a form of praise for their foremothers that has been called “promotional.” It is therefore necessary to take out all adjectives, which is not a typical writing style.) and, ; We had an immediate tag that one Wiki subject was not notable even though the subject was a senior scholar with 40 or more publications. The tagging issue is one reason we turned to stubs, so that we can invite other Wikipedia editors to fill out the articles.There are varied interpretations of what qualifies as notable and how a woman’s notability can be documented and highlighted. Solution: Continue conversations with the Global South to maintain the quality of Wikipedia criteria, but push for more types of sources. 3. At the beginning, many editors had not worked cross-culturally. Getting together locally and working in teams helped the Kenyan community to develop trust among one another and navigate between Wikipedia and Zoom and as well learn to navigate Wikipedia independently. Eventually the Kenyan team developed trust in the U.S. editors, and the U.S team softened their communication style to start with something positive and disuccess changes as cultural differences, not mistakes. Also the Kenyan team learned that experienced editors “had their backs” and would go to bat for them on talk page critiques. 4. Zoom Breakout rooms will be used in the future, but navigating and toggling between Wikipedia and Zoom and a browser can be a challenge. Moving forward, the breakout rooms need to be carefully facilitated spaces in order to not lose valuable time in sharing materials. Using a university zoom even when the U.S. team was not present was a great help to working in Kenya.

What are the values that the two groups are forging together? 1. Peer-to peer-learning – Teamwork 2. Patience/empathy when providing feedback; no shame-based criticism 3. Openness to new experiences. 4. Recognizing/acknowledging progress made by editors. 5. The African value of "Communality", communal knowledge creation and sharing, must be lived into, not just discussed.

What are the criteria for long term Wikipedia editors for recruitment purposes? 1. Availability of time 2. Willingness to learn. 3. Commitment to Wikipedia training 4. Commitment to enhancing the visibility of notable yet marginalized/underrepresented women in religion whose contributions have not been publicized or document "in traditional Western formats" 5. Commitment to taking oral histories and archiving them in university and public archives so that they can be considered secondary sources. 6. The ability to regularly access a stable Internet connection through usable zoom links and data packages is crucial. 7. Having stable and regular access to zoom links that do not time out and can be used when individuals and groups need to meet. 8. Developing more agility in on-phones editing tools for the Global South and the U.S. teams working together.

What is the best way to go about gathering resources of oral cultures and find out-of-print publications and information on scholars’ activists and religious leaders in Kenya? 1. We hope that oral histories collected in university archives can be defined as both a notable and a verifiable source because it is created with more than one person and worthy enough to be collected in a university or public archive. 2. Group resource development leads to new ideas about how to research a subject. 3. There are multiple resources that are needed prior to a Wikipedia publication that a rapid grant cannot cover unless the grant is strictly for resource research, collection and development. Solution: As mentioned above, Women in Religion is working with various groups to create edited volumes that provide open-access essays that become verifiable secondary sources. Links are (again) below:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Religion/Women_in_Religion_series.

“Here Our Voices” is the first volume of essays from the African continent and will be edited by Wikipedians Telesia Musili and Rosalind Hinton. This publication will provide secondary sources for Wikipedia entries.

Here Our Voices https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iQOQ9MkAbexcsDSYSTpzwBNgyiOGEmau/view?usp=sharing

5. Did anything unexpected or surprising happen when implementing your activities? This can include both positive and negative situations. What did you learn from those experiences? (required)

Positive – Forming teams to draft an article in one sandbox and sharing roles was a positive outcome and learning to reduce fear, gain confidence and increase problem solving. We will start here. Negative - Some of the articles were subjected to intense scrutiny and lengthy comments on the Talk pages. If the articles were not deleted, tagged or removed, the Kenyan editors continued to improve them. The U.S. team helped make arguments for keeping articles. We will start with stubs and invite others to add to articles.

Positive and Negative - Again, move to stub-articles to reduce tagging and the taking down of articles. This is positive because the stubs allow for more visibility of matriarchs and increases the range of learning skills for each article and each editor. It also allows for more research practice and discussions of primary and secondary sources, orphan articles, etc. It is negative when a Wiki editor takes down an article within a few minutes of a new editor's publication.

6. What is your plan to share your project learnings and results with other community members? If you have already done it, describe how. (required)

We have had a wrap up meeting that reviewed what the Kenyan team learned, the skills acquired, the challenges faced and how the Kenyan team addressed challenges. We are developing a Kenyan Editathon template to share in future meetings with the Wiki universe, and through email. As stated earlier, Circle members in Zambia and South Africa are interested in learning how to publish and edit on Wikipedia. We are reviewing how best to answer their request. We will invite other Circle members and wiki users to share experiences and learn from one another in meet-ups and editathons. Below the Summary documents link (already shared in question 2).

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1OVdaHfBAATIAlmAMq_Mq2e-Lt3z7829r?usp=share_link

Kenyan members will attend in person and online at Wikimedia North America in Indiana October 2024. See acceptance: “The program committee of WikiConference North America 2024 is pleased to inform you that your In depth Session titled Women in Religion: Expanding the Crossroads Across Continents using Rapid Grants, the Case of Kenya. has been accepted! About your session: DAY: Your session is scheduled on Sunday, Oct 6, 2024. TIME: The program schedule (work in progress!) has been posted here: https://wikiconference.org/wiki/2024/Schedule Please check your session's spot on the schedule, and let us know if you cannot make your time slot, if there is a conflict, etc. Please note that the schedule is subject to change as sessions are moved around, canceled, etc.”

3.    Members will participate in the AAR/SBL Editathon in San Diego on Friday, November 22, 2024 @ 10 AM PST.

4. As stated before we are working on multiple editions of collected biographical essays and editors can use these for creating Wikipedia articles.

Below is the latest Call For Papers:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Religion/Women_in_Religion_series

“Here Our Voices” is the first volume of essays from the African continent and will be edited by Wikipedians Telesia Musili and Rosalind Hinton. This publication will provide secondary sources for Wikipedia entries.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iQOQ9MkAbexcsDSYSTpzwBNgyiOGEmau/view?usp=sharing

Part 3: Metrics

7. Wikimedia Metrics results. (required)

In your application, you set some Wikimedia targets in numbers (Wikimedia metrics). In this section, you will describe the achieved results and provide links to the tools used.

	Target	Results	Comments and tools used
Number of participants	47	20	We had eight editors working in various capacities from the U.S. and three returning editors from Kenya 2022 - 2023. Because of the limited number of data packages we could offer, we asked Kenyan members to commit to a four month period (May to August). This was a core group of 10: 7 new editors and 3 returning editors with very limited experience. The paid coordinator and the Kenyan Circle coordinator bring our grant target to 20. The Parliament of the World's Religions (PoWR) cancelled their editathon in April. The Kenyan group decided on three in-person editathons that were 8 hours long with their core group. They also met weekly online.
Number of editors	41	18	As stated above, the number of data packages we could afford called for a change of plans. We began working intensely with a committed group. There were 18 editors working on this project. There were 46 different meetings requiring data packages in addition to the 3 in-person 8 hour sessions. These were dedicated and showed up almost every meet-up. Some U.S. editors did work behind the scenes on Wikidata, Wikicommons, creating templates and videos, and reviewing work on talk pages and sourcing articles. The 8 Kenyans produced 2,149 edits; the U.S. members had 239 edits for a total of 2388 user contributions for the Rapid Grant. Additionally their were administrative hours donated to the project that have been absorbed by both teams.
Number of organizers	6	7	There were six organizers from the U.S. and Kenya that participated weekly in addition to the 7 new editors. Organizers are all editors. There was one additional organizer from the Circle who is not an editor.

Wikimedia project	Target	Result - Number of created pages	Result - Number of improved pages
Wikipedia	10	6	5
Wikimedia Commons	10	11	0
Wikidata	10	2	0
Wiktionary
Wikisource
Wikimedia Incubator
Translatewiki
MediaWiki
Wikiquote
Wikivoyage
Wikibooks
Wikiversity
Wikinews
Wikispecies
Wikifunctions or Abstract Wikipedia

8. Other Metrics results.

In your proposal, you could also set Other Metrics targets. Please describe the achieved results and provide links to the tools used if you set Other Metrics in your application.

Other Metrics name	Metrics Description	Target	Result	Tools and comments

9. Did you have any difficulties collecting data to measure your results? (required)

No

9.1. Please state what difficulties you had. How do you hope to overcome these challenges in the future? Do you have any recommendations for the Foundation to support you in addressing these challenges? (required)

Part 4: Financial reporting

10. Please state the total amount spent in your local currency. (required)

521178

11. Please state the total amount spent in US dollars. (required)

4144

12. Report the funds spent in the currency of your fund. (required)

Provide the link to the financial report We used the template from a revised budget after the grant award of $4000 plus $100 for transaction fees. Because the money was held in a Fidelity money market account, we were able to add $44 in interest earned to the grant. The total spent is $4,144. The back up materials, final budget and narrative are found at the link below.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Br-ybIkxc9x-RklwmS1j1r6WokCGQytk?usp=share_link

12.2. If you have not already done so in your financial spending report, please provide information on changes in the budget in relation to your original proposal. (optional)

The budget materials are contained in the Red Actual Budget Folder on google docs. 1) itemized fund requests 2) Fidelity and Mpesa/Sendwave transfer of funds document,3) final budget that includes line items with changes and an explanatory.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Br-ybIkxc9x-RklwmS1j1r6WokCGQytk?usp=share_link

13. Do you have any unspent funds from the Fund?

No

13.1. Please list the amount and currency you did not use and explain why.

N/A

13.2. What are you planning to do with the underspent funds?

N/A

13.3. Please provide details of hope to spend these funds.

N/A

14.1. Are you in compliance with the terms outlined in the fund agreement?

Yes

14.2. Are you in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations as outlined in the grant agreement?

Yes

14.3. 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

15. If you have additional recommendations or reflections that don’t fit into the above sections, please write them here. (optional)

Thank you for this very important Rapid Grant award. We appreciate the Foundation's thoughtfulness and patience.

Review notes

Review notes from Program Officer:

N/A

Applicant's response to the review feedback.

N/A