Grants:Project/NCTE/CCCC Wikipedia Initiative 2020-21/Final

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Report accepted
This report for a Project Grant approved in FY 2020-21 has been reviewed and accepted by the Wikimedia Foundation.
  • To read the approved grant submission describing the plan for this project, please visit Grants:Project/NCTE/CCCC Wikipedia Initiative 2020-21.
  • You may still review or add to the discussion about this report on its talk page.
  • You are welcome to email projectgrants(_AT_) at any time if you have questions or concerns about this report.

Welcome to this project's final report! This report shares the outcomes, impact and learnings from the grantee's project.

Part 1: The Project[edit]


Scholars in the humanities and Wikipedians share a goal of working to provide reliable and equitable public knowledge. As one of the largest globally viewed and searched knowledge platforms online, Wikipedia is a key disseminator of the information that defines public understandings of the humanities and humanities research. Yet, many scholars do not edit Wikipedia and many notable marginalized scholars remain unrepresented on the platform, affecting equitable understandings in the vital articles on topics their scholarship contributes to; articles like “writing,” “linguistic discrimination,” and “literacy” remain persistently underdeveloped.

The Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC) Wikipedia Initiative has built the infrastructure needed for a sustained group of writing scholars actively editing Wikipedia within their field of expertise. We addressed barriers to entry, curated better understandings of Wikipedia editing practices, and documented learning patterns and outcomes that present the CCCC Wikipedia Initiative as a model for how academic professional associations might engage with Wikipedia. Most notably, we have created a growing culture of scholars editing Wikipedia as a form of professional responsibility for combating knowledge inequities and providing global public access to the knowledge of our fields.

Project Goals[edit]

Develop skills and understanding, community support structures, and professional recognition that reflect the value of global public scholarship on Wikipedia, in a larger effort to increase public, global, and equitable understandings of the humanities.

Project Impact[edit]

Important: The Wikimedia Foundation is no longer collecting Global Metrics for Project Grants. We are currently updating our pages to remove legacy references, but please ignore any that you encounter until we finish.


  1. In the first column of the table below, please copy and paste the measures you selected to help you evaluate your project's success (see the Project Impact section of your proposal). Please use one row for each measure. If you set a numeric target for the measure, please include the number.
  2. In the second column, describe your project's actual results. If you set a numeric target for the measure, please report numerically in this column. Otherwise, write a brief sentence summarizing your output or outcome for this measure.
  3. In the third column, you have the option to provide further explanation as needed. You may also add additional explanation below this table.
Planned measure of success
(include numeric target, if applicable)
Actual result Explanation
Establish an active and inclusive community of academic editors in writing, literacy, and language studies.

Total participants:

  • 60-90 faculty members and PhD students registered on the initiative dashboard and trained via online editing workshops and courses.
  • 50+ faculty members and PhD students registered on the initiative dashboard and editing with support from our digital training materials and resources, WikiProject Writing, and Wikimedian-in-residence.
  • 63 faculty members and PhD students registered on the CCCC Wikipedia Editing Activity dashboard (December 31, 2020 - December 31, 2021).
  • 69 faculty members and PhD students trained via online editing workshops (September 25, 2020 - December 31, 2021).

CCCCWI Workshop Participation
  • Despite the onset of COVID-19 at the beginning stages of our grant period, we were able to reach most of our original participation goals and created a burgeoning community of writing scholars editing Wikipedia.
  • We’ve had to adjust how we measure our impact from looking solely at P & E dashboard registration to include Eventbrite registration. We have had difficulty with (1) getting workshop participants to click the link to register and (2) measuring growth from our standalone resources that don’t require registration with our dashboard to participate (See more at ‘What didn’t work’).
  • The grant proposal outlined two (2) 12-week courses (in partnership with the Wiki Education Foundation) for 60-90 faculty members and PhD students. This was not funded and therefore did not contribute to our overall participation numbers.
  • The grant application originally outlined 100+ faculty members and PhD students registered on the initiative dashboard and introduced to Wikipedia editing at the CCCC 2021 editing workshop and edit-a-thon. Due to the cancellation of these two key in-person events with the 2021 CCCC annual convention’s shift to an online format, we had to adjust our numbers.
Improve articles related to writing, rhetoric, literacy, and language studies with particular attention to issues of knowledge equity.
  • 41 new articles, 379 articles edited, and 456 new references added with a focus on mostly biographies of minoritized scholars and vital articles within writing studies. These articles have been viewed 25.6 million times (December 31, 2020 - December 31, 2021).
  • WikiProject Writing’s importance assessment rubric was adjusted to reflect the knowledge equity goals of the CCCCWI, addressing equity-related knowledge gaps in vital, general-interest articles; high traffic, field-specific articles and articles that directly represent content gaps in the coverage of marginalized topics as high and top priorities.
Share outreach, training, and teaching materials to support academics editing Wikipedia with particular attention to issues of knowledge equity and professional recognition.
  • Developed WikiProject Writing as a central hub for sharing resources, events, vital information about the state of writing studies topics on Wikipedia, and collaborative organizing and editing tasks aimed at creating a more equitable understanding of the field on Wikipedia.
  • Created a central CCCC Wikipedia Initiative meetup page to organize upcoming and past events.
  • Performed outreach and collaborated with CCCC member groups/standing groups to help define and address content gaps related to their subfields of writing studies and train them on how to conduct individual and collaborative projects using our resources.
  • Hosted 20+ workshops, led by the CCCC Wikimedian-in-residence, introducing scholars to Wikipedia editing and WikiProject Writing catered to some of the specific concerns scholars face on Wikipedia including navigating self-citation, privacy concerns, and getting started with editing field-specific and vital, general interest articles that need a lot of work.
  • Hosted 10+ CCCC Wikipedia Initiative Coffeehouses where the CCCC Wikimedian-in-residence live edits Wikipedia/Wikidata on a different knowledge equity-driven topic via Twitch (May 2021 - December 2021).
  • Held individual and group office hours hosted by the CCCC Wikimedian-in-residence to further support scholars with individual projects, questions, and concerns.
Contribute to research on Wikipedia, knowledge equity, collaborative writing, and writing pedagogy. Documented and restructured training materials and programs to adapt to new Wikipedia discoveries and attitudes of scholars:
  • Focus on biographies of academics first: Notable marginalized teacher-scholars and their scholarship are reverted/deleted from vital, general interest articles because the scholars do not yet have Wikipedia articles. To make it easier for other editors to assess the significance of these figures, we modified WikiProject Writing’s content development spotlights to focus more on creating biographies of academics.
  • Scholars want to see how different people edit Wikipedia: The CCCC Wikipedia Initiative Coffeehouse changed from a drop-in group Wikipedia editing hour to a Twitch stream, where scholars can drop in to see how the CCCC Wikimedian-in-residence edits Wikipedia. The initial coffeehouse format received no turnout in the three months it was hosted (May 2021-July 2021). In the five months we’ve hosted the coffeehouse on Twitch, we’ve received 72 views total on our streams (August 2021-January 2022). Changing the format to see how others edit Wikipedia proved more successful in engaging scholars to start editing Wikipedia.
Present the CCCC Wikipedia Initiative as a model for how academic professional associations might engage with Wikipedia, address content gaps and issues of knowledge equity, and recognize the value of public scholarship.
  • Created and hosted the presentation on “Wikipedia and the Collaborative Humanities” at Wikimania 2021. The session outcomes focused on Wikipedia and scholars in the humanities’ shared goal of knowledge equity-driven teaching and learning, pathways to engage scholars to edit Wikipedia, and how the work of the CCCC Wikipedia Initiative can be used as a blueprint for the whole of the academic humanities.
  • Established a CCCC Wikipedia Graduate Fellowship focused on developing skills and understanding of Wikimedia projects, aimed at providing a Wikimedian-in-residence (WiR) guided mentorship pathway for other humanities-oriented organizations, programs, and initiatives to use.
  • Established the NCTE/CCCC Wikipedia Scholar Award to be awarded for the first time at the 2022 CCCC Annual Convention (Online; March 9-12th). The recipient will be awarded a plaque and receive professional recognition for their Wikipedia-related research and contributions on the CCCC website.


Looking back over your whole project, what did you achieve? Tell us the story of your achievements, your results, your outcomes. Focus on inspiring moments, tough challenges, interesting anecdotes or anything that highlights the outcomes of your project. Imagine that you are sharing with a friend about the achievements that matter most to you in your project.

  • This should not be a list of what you did. You will be asked to provide that later in the Methods and Activities section.
  • Consider your original goals as you write your project's story, but don't let them limit you. Your project may have important outcomes you weren't expecting. Please focus on the impact that you believe matters most.
CCCC Wikipedia Initiative Committee Meeting - February 2022

What a year it has been! Although the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has demanded more time, labor, and ongoing emergent solutions to new and existing problems, we are grateful for the space we’ve been given to discover, learn, and utilize best practices for scholarly workflows and think more critically about systemic knowledge inequities prevalent within Wikipedia and Wikidata. Here are the key insights we’ve learned throughout our time working with scholars in writing studies and investigating Wikipedia content related to notable writing studies’ terms, concepts, and research, as well as scholarship and activism composed by marginalized teacher-scholars.

Wikipedia’s current academic notability criteria reproduces the exclusion of marginalized teacher-scholars in the humanities

Wikipedia’s academic notability criteria reproduces structures of discrimination that exist in traditional academic reward systems and leans too heavily on metrics catered to scholars in STEM fields. Within the eight basic criteria listed, six of them (1-3, 5, 6, and 8) compare notability to achieving the highest or most distinguished posts in academia or heavily allude to a high citation count. The latter is more specific to scholars in the humanities, where citation counts are not considered as important for professional development than in STEM fields, and therefore should not be taken as a sign of notability. Many of these metrics are historically entrenched academic reward systems that tend to undervalue the labor and scholarship of marginalized academics. In line with the Wikimedia Movement’s strategic direction towards knowledge equity, we have been exploring alternative possibilities for establishing notability and highlighting nuance in the current guidelines. We recognize that change cannot come solely from Wikipedia and as scholars in the humanities, we are actively trying to overcome these histories and modify exclusionary rewards systems. By continuing to document notability issues that arise as scholars edit and create articles on notable marginalized scholars, mutual collaborative change can occur.

Very few composition/rhetoric scholars exist on Wikidata

It has been a dream of the CCCC Wikipedia Initiative to create Wikidata-generated lists of composition/rhetoric scholars in need of edits and creation on WikiProject Writing to showcase content gaps within writing studies both on English Wikipedia and across language Wikipedias. As we began to develop Wikidata queries focused on individuals whose main field of study is composition and rhetoric, we were surprised to find very few documented in Wikidata. Improving Wikidata statements and creating more items related to scholars in the humanities is critically important to create a more globally equitable understanding of the field of writing studies. We’ve added a Wikidata organizational task to WikiProject Writing’s ‘open tasks’ page and have been focusing our efforts on improving the representation of writing scholars by enlisting the support of the CCCC Wikipedia Graduate Fellows.

Dr. Matthew Vetter (User:Matthewvetter)—CCCC Wikipedia Initiative committee member—wrote a more extensive blog post on the Wiki Education Foundation’s website about his experience editing Wikidata and the issue of missing composition and rhetoric scholars.

Faculty liaisons provide friendly incentives to edit

With the support of a faculty liaison at the University of California, Santa Barbara, we’ve been able to gather a group of 12 faculty members at the UCSB Writing Program committed to completing different Wikipedia editing tasks twice a month. The group is led by Dr. Jennifer Johnson (User:JayKatJay), who is able to commit her time to the CCCC Wikipedia Initiative thanks to (2) two course releases awarded by the Charles Bazerman Faculty Fellowship for Professional Development in Writing for the Spring 2022 quarter. This model is particularly engaging for scholars since it is facilitated by a colleague and space is provided in the form of a writing group to complete edits and ask questions. The idea of training potential future faculty liaisons is something we have been exploring with the CCCC Wikipedia Graduate Fellows (See learning pattern: Wikimedian-in-residence mentorship pathway).


If you used surveys to evaluate the success of your project, please provide a link(s) in this section, then briefly summarize your survey results in your own words. Include three interesting outputs or outcomes that the survey revealed.


Is there another way you would prefer to communicate the actual results of your project, as you understand them? You can do that here!

Methods and activities[edit]

Please provide a list of the main methods and activities through which you completed your project.

The midpoint report documents the methods and activities of the first half of the grant term (June 2020-February 2021).

This report captures methods and activities from the second half of the grant period (March 2021-January 2022).

Developing skills & understanding

Wikipedia as Public Scholarship Workshop - September 2021
Getting Started with WikiProject Writing Workshop - October 2021
  • Two online workshops hosted monthly:
  • Individual office hours by sign-up offered weekly
    • Received moderate turn out (around 1-2 sign ups per month) and were primarily frequented by past workshops participants looking for guidance on individual article drafts. Additionally, the UCSB Writing Program faculty liaison (Dr. Jennifer Johnson) attended a few times to learn about organizing and maintaining the WMF outreach dashboard, utilizing WikiProject Writing’s resources for group work, and individual participant questions.
  • CCCCWI Coffeehouse
    • (May 2021-August 2021): Hosted as a virtual group drop-in writing group where scholars can come to chat about Wikipedia projects with other scholars (Google Meet)
    • (August 2021-present): Hosted on Twitch by the CCCC Wikimedian-in-residence

Creating community support structures

  • Revamped WikiProject Writing
  • Monthly WikiProject Writing Content Development Spotlights:
  • WikiProject Writing Twitter account (@WP_Writing) to share events, resources, and editing tasks.
  • Created (6) six CCCCWI Advice Manuals
  • Collaborated with the CCCC Global & Non-Western Rhetorics Standing Group, European Association for the Teaching of Academic Writing (EATAW), CCCC Transnational Composition Standing Group, CCCC Asian American Caucus, and UCSB Writing Program to plan group projects (e.g. Group article revision or creation) and upcoming WikiProject Writing Content Development Spotlights:
    • CCCCWI committee members conducted initial email outreach to groups to assess interest in a collaboration with the CCCCWI
    • An initial meeting would be conducted with the CCCCWI Chair, CCCCWI committee member, CCCC WiR, and specific group participants/liaisons to review the history of the initiative, discuss potential projects, and provide upcoming workshop links for group members to develop skills and understanding
    • Group liaisons took time to attend workshops and/or discuss potential projects more in-depth with their larger group
    • Group liaisons contacted the CCCCWI committee member/CCCC WiR to discuss their project idea and receive support on questions and problems that arise
  • Established the CCCC Wikipedia Graduate Fellowship
    • Summer 2021: Circulated a call for proposals
    • August 2021: A subcommittee reviewed applications and selected graduate student fellows. We prepared and shared onboarding materials and tasks.
    • September 2021: Held an onboarding meeting with grad fellows and held project scoping meetings with each fellow and their faculty mentor.
    • October 2021-now: We began holding monthly meetings, organizing monthly individual and collaborative tasks, and communicating via a new WikiProject Writing Discord server.
  • Created a WikiProject Writing Discord Community
    • Open to CCCC Wikipedia Initiative Committee members, CCCC Wikipedia Graduate Fellows, and workshop participants to ask questions about Wikipedia. Each group has its own channel, as well as a few shared channels, to communicate on.

Recognizing the value of global public scholarship

  • Created and hosted the presentation on “Wikipedia and the Collaborative Humanities” at Wikimania 2021
  • CCCC Wikipedia Graduate Fellows’(chaired by the CCCCWI Director) proposal accepted for the 2022 Computers & Writing Conference
  • CCCC Wikipedia Initiative proposal accepted for a workshop and panel at the 2022 Conference on College Composition and Communication

Project resources[edit]

Please provide links to all public, online documents and other artifacts that you created during the course of this project. Even if you have linked to them elsewhere in this report, this section serves as a centralized archive for everything you created during your project. Examples include: meeting notes, participant lists, photos or graphics uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, template messages sent to participants, wiki pages, social media (Facebook groups, Twitter accounts), datasets, surveys, questionnaires, code repositories... If possible, include a brief summary with each link.

Outreach dashboard campaigns

WikiProject Writing Spotlight - Asian/Asian American Scholars & Scholarship

CCCCWI Wikipedia Pages

Programs and events meetup pages

NOTE: Workshops were cancelled in December 2021 for the winter break/holiday season.

Workshop presentation slides

CCCCWI Coffeehouse Twitch Stream

Social media


The best thing about trying something new is that you learn from it. We want to follow in your footsteps and learn along with you, and we want to know that you took enough risks in your project to have learned something really interesting! Think about what recommendations you have for others who may follow in your footsteps, and use the below sections to describe what worked and what didn’t.

What worked well[edit]

What did you try that was successful and you'd recommend others do? To help spread successful strategies so that they can be of use to others in the movement, rather than writing lots of text here, we'd like you to share your finding in the form of a link to a learning pattern.

What didn’t work[edit]

What did you try that you learned didn't work? What would you think about doing differently in the future? Please list these as short bullet points.

  • Multiple sign up platforms. When conducting workshops, participants were frustrated by having to sign in on multiple platforms (meetup page, dashboard, WikiProject Writing). We’d like to streamline this process moving forward by having participants provide their username when signing up for an event, in order to sign them in before the workshop (except in the case of WikiProject Writing).
  • Virtual standing group office hours with the CCCC WiR. We noticed that many scholars did not show up for the virtual group office hours (original iteration of the CCCCWI Coffeehouse). We changed the format of this to the Twitch Stream for scholars to observe either the CCCC WiR, CCCC Wikipedia Graduate Fellow, or CCCC Wikipedia Initiative Committee member and received better engagement.
  • Lecture heavy workshops. We found that many workshop participants were excited to meet and chat with other scholars interested in editing Wikipedia. By limiting our workshop size to (10) ten participants and focusing on directing the workshop to more discussion-based questions and activities, workshop participants were able to spend more time editing and asking questions.
  • Producing collaborative drafts in sandboxes. Scholars in the humanities think of Wikipedia editing a lot like publishing rather than revising. In a publish-or-perish professional culture, we often feel overwhelmed by an article that needs a lot of work. Google documents feel safer and allow other scholars to edit and add comments without fear of deletion or editing over others, an issue multiple editors can experience while editing in the sandbox or draft space. For example, the CCCC Transnational Composition Standing Group has been focusing on revising and expanding the Wikipedia article on Translingualism in a google document. The article is nearly complete, with an extensive log of revisions, comments, and edits dating back to August 2021. Yet, none of these edits have made it to the Wikipedia mainspace, largely because the group wants to clean up the article completely before discussing the next steps as a group. It’s harder to ‘complete’ a project on Wikipedia since it is constantly subject to change; this made it difficult to track our total impact throughout the project.
  • Solely email communication with CCCC member groups. When we first started facilitating collaborations with CCCC member groups, CCCCWI committee members would reach out via email with attached shared google documents that asked pointed questions about Wikipedia articles in need of edits and creation, as well as vital scholarship that needs to be added to the site within their field of expertise. We found this didn’t work because member groups were confused by (1) the initiative’s overall project goals, (2) what WikiProject Writing is and how to contribute, and (3) how to navigate Wikipedia to find articles in need of edits. We adjusted our methods by directing interested CCCC member group participants to come to our pre-exisiting workshops and meeting with group liaisons to discuss a few potential options for Wikipedia projects. This gave groups the freedom to find their own fit in the initiative’s goals and taught us more about the preferred collaborative workflows of scholars.

Other recommendations[edit]

If you have additional recommendations or reflections that don’t fit into the above sections, please list them here.

Next steps and opportunities[edit]

Are there opportunities for future growth of this project, or new areas you have uncovered in the course of this grant that could be fruitful for more exploration (either by yourself, or others)? What ideas or suggestions do you have for future projects based on the work you’ve completed? Please list these as short bullet points.

Our goals to continue developing this project are:

  • Begin to develop a plan for documenting community-driven notability standards within the humanities to aid in representing marginalized teacher-scholars and their scholarship on Wikipedia, eventually expanding upon and modifying the current academic notability criteria.
  • Continue coordinating monthly content development spotlights on WikiProject Writing in collaboration with CCCC member groups and professional organizations including the Asian/Asian American Caucus, Black Caucus, Latinx Caucus, Queer Caucus, Feminist Caucus, Global & Non-Western Rhetorics Standing Group, Standing Group for Disability Studies, Transnational Composition Standing Group, and the European Association for the Teaching of Academic Writing (EATAW).
  • Establish a translation task force (as part of WikiProject Writing) created by CCCC Wikipedia Graduate Fellows to engage scholars to translate and contribute targeted content across English, Russian, Arabic, and German Wikipedia.
  • Continue streaming on Twitch for the CCCC Wikipedia Initiative Coffeehouse, exploring more diverse topics and keeping past streams as a repository of resources for scholars to use.
  • Improve the categorization and exposure to field-specific articles across multiple language Wikipedias by implementing Wikidata-generated lists using ListeriaBot and improving Wikidata items and statements.
  • Build up the CCCC Wikipedia Initiative meetup page with embedded expert-focused resources, with an emphasis on addressing knowledge equity goals.
  • Support individual community-oriented goals led by the CCCC Wikipedia Initiative Graduate Fellows with a focus on engaging a diversity of faculty members and graduate students to take up ongoing Wikipedia editing projects.
  • Continue providing twice-monthly editing workshops, focused on editing Wikipedia as an academic and engaging with WikiProject Writing.
  • Develop workshops specifically catered to translation and interacting with the WikiProject Writing translation task force with international scholarly communities developed and curated by CCCC Wikipedia Graduate Fellows.
  • Facilitate an editing workshop and an edit-a-thon at the 2022 CCCC Annual Convention (March 9-12, 2022, Online).
  • Survey CCCC members on their experience and likelihood to continue editing post-workshops.

Part 2: The Grant[edit]


Actual spending[edit]

Please copy and paste the completed table from your project finances page. Check that you’ve listed the actual expenditures compared with what was originally planned. If there are differences between the planned and actual use of funds, please use the column provided to explain them.

Expense Approved amount Actual funds spent Difference
Wikimedian-in-Residence contract $36,000 $36,000 through 12/31/2021 $0
Two graduate student fellowships $4,000 $4,000 through 12/31/2021 $0
Administrative costs @ 15% $6,000 $6,000 through 12/31/2021 $0
Total $46,000 $46,000 through 12/31/2021 $46,000

Remaining funds[edit]

Do you have any unspent funds from the grant?

Please answer yes or no. If yes, list the amount you did not use and explain why.

  • No, there are no unspent funds from this grant.

If you have unspent funds, they must be returned to WMF. Please see the instructions for returning unspent funds and indicate here if this is still in progress, or if this is already completed:


Did you send documentation of all expenses paid with grant funds to grantsadmin(_AT_), according to the guidelines here?

Please answer yes or no. If no, include an explanation.

  • No. Our understanding of the guidelines is that documentation only needs to be submitted if it is requested.

Confirmation of project status[edit]

Did you comply with the requirements specified by WMF in the grant agreement?

Please answer yes or no.

  • Yes

Is your project completed?

Please answer yes or no.

Grantee reflection[edit]

We’d love to hear any thoughts you have on what this project has meant to you, or how the experience of being a grantee has gone overall. Is there something that surprised you, or that you particularly enjoyed, or that you’ll do differently going forward as a result of the Project Grant experience? Please share it here!

Although COVID-19 required adjustments to in-person events and continued adaptation to new technological bandwidth and labor within the scholarly community, we are proud to have established a burgeoning community of scholars who contribute, create, and revise both field-specific and vital, general interest Wikipedia articles across the subfields of writing studies. As of February 1, 2022, the 2022 CCCC Editor Activity Dashboard has already documented 8 new articles created, 48 articles edited, and 55 references added in 2022!

The 2020-21 CCCC Wikipedia Initiative Project Grant has allowed us to create much of the infrastructure needed to support scholars in this work while affording us the opportunity to learn from the resources, events, and new technologies that worked and didn’t work. We’ve thought a lot about how to reach younger generations of scholars by implementing new platforms (e.g. Twitch and Discord) into our monthly programs and events and investigated different scholarly pathways for sustained editing past the WiR’s end date (e.g. Wikimedian-in-residence mentorship model).

We’ve developed a foundation of collaborative resources focused specifically on scholarly communities within the humanities through our efforts, slowly striving towards our goal of becoming a blueprint for organizations to use and modify our curricula to facilitate Wikimedia-driven participation. We have already had the pleasure of not only working with CCCC member groups but also an international organization—the European Association for the Teaching of Academic Writing—to begin modeling the different forms public scholarship can take on Wikipedia.

This grant period has taught us the importance of emphasizing how powerfully aligned the educational mission and knowledge equity goals of the Wikimedia Foundation are with those of scholars in the humanities.While we created an inclusive editing community of scholars, we also discovered and documented a key set of exclusive guidelines and practices that profoundly effect equitable understandings of the humanities. Prominent figures in writing studies like Jacqueline Jones Royster, Beverly J. Moss, Vershawn Ashanti Young, and Tamika L. Carey, as well as their scholarship, continue to remain unwritten from public understanding on Wikipedia. There is a long way to go to ensure an equitable knowledge ecosystem on Wikipedia, but we are proud to have contributed to a larger repository of work highlighting next steps to move towards that.