Grants:Project/Rapid/Hindi Day Article Contest 2017 on Hindi Wikipedia/Report

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Report accepted
This report for a Rapid Grant approved in FY 2017-18 has been reviewed and accepted by the Wikimedia Foundation.


Goals
[edit]

Broadly speaking we are satisfied with the outcome.we targeted for

  • Number of expected participants =50
  • Number of registered participants =32
  • Number of registered participants who created articles =16
  • Number of registered participants whose articles met the set standards =14
  • Number of expected articles to be created =300
  • Number of articles created =245
  • Number of articles qualified =238

above data as per the Fountain tool link for the contest and registered participants and articles created as per event page

  • Note : All participants didn't signup for fountain tool

Outcome
[edit]

Target outcome Achieved outcome Explanation
Add Quality content 238 quality articles were created,with a prerequisite of atleast 4000 bytes,2 references and 1 category.Addition of infobox,picture and links earned extra points Though it was a broad expectation that 300 articles would be created,nevertheless ,quality should always prevail over quantity.Hence we got 238 standard articles.all 6 prize winners together created 175 articles (with the set standards)
Recruit new editors 2 new editors participated though the figure is below expectation still we feel that even 2 totally new editors (creating articles as per wiki standard) is fairly good.
Engage existing editors 14 existing editors participated. Here also the quantity was below expectation but quality of articles compensated it.14 Top 6 contestants created 176 quality articles.


Learning
[edit]

*What worked well?

  • We tried to touch every Hindi wikipedian and encourage them to take part in the contest.few of the things which worked well are
  1. Site notices on Hindi Wikipedia=though published late,it worked well
  2. Notifying all the local Indic language communities, for making sure that the news is spread to as many as possible=Few of the non-Hindieditors also took part in the contest and created quality articles
  3. Through Official Hindi Wikipedia Whats-app/facebook Group=Publicizing the event on whats-app/facebook group helped a lot for the turnout of participants.
  4. Setting up of fair standards for qualification of an article proved to be very useful in getting 238 standard quality articles.

*What did not work so well?

  1. Introduction of Fountain tool was new to the community,since this contest was first of its kind so all participants didnt signup for the fountain tool.This can be improved in future since fountain tool is very helpful for the organizers for evaluation.
  2. Though we tried to publicize the event well,we were late in putting up the Site notices on Hindi Wikipedia.We learnt that site notice is very helpful in promoting the event and we will certainly try to ensure that site notices are put up on time.
  3. we had only 2 evaluators who acted as coordinators also,this resulted in heavy load on both the members (since evaluation is tedious and time taking job).
  4. Target set for 50 participants and 300 articles didn't proved to be realistic for first of its kind event.though we got 16 participants with 238 quality article.

*What would you do differently next time?

  • Lesson learnt
  1. Event promotion through publicity plays a big role in the total turnout of the participants,next time we will try to reach all mediums of publicity in a more refined and targetted way.
  2. Though ,use of Helping tools like "Fountain" facilitates the organizers a lot,but in this contest points were awarded on different criteria in order to create standard quality article,though we used it but it proved to be of limited help.We will try to incorporate such tools in future with some loose criterias.
  3. In future we would definitely like to have 2 different teams for evaluation and coordination with a member strength of 3 at-least.
  4. In the beginning we limited the event for 15 days but later on due to overwhelming response and requests from contributors we have to extend it for 30 days (such enthusiasm was unexpected).We learnt that such events must be given ample time to be executed.
  5. Though ,fair standards for qualification of an article didn't proved to be a hurdle for seasoned wikipedian,new participants (who were unaware of the wiki standards) lost (6 articles failed to qualify).In future we can have separate category for new participants.

Finances
[edit]

Grant funds spent[edit]

  • Approved grant money was spent as proposed
Item Proposed Budget Expenses Leftover
Miscellaneous expenses (Packaging & Shipping reserve for 60 Tshirts) INR 5,500 INR 500 INR 5,000
Prizes INR 15,000 INR 13,000 INR 2,000
e-Certificates to all participants INR 0 INR 0 INR 0
T-Shirt 60Pc (revised from 50) INR 18,750 INR 23,700 INR -4,950
Incidentals INR 5,000 INR 0 INR 5,000

Remaining funds[edit]

Remaining funds have been used or will be used for other approved mission-aligned activities. This use has been requested in writing and approved by WMF.
  • An amount of Rs 7,050 is left with us ,of which Rs 2,000 were left over since consolation prizes were cut short to 3 instead of 5 since the criteria for prize was not met and only 3 of 5 consolation prizes were distributed.Rs 5,050 is kept in reserve for packaging and shipping of 60 Tshirts (which are proposed to be distributed in future events).
  • As discussed with आर्यावर्त (talk · contribs), (convener and one of the Judge) we are planning for an editathon ,dedicated only for the articles created in this competition and we plan to utilize the remaining fund in that event.

Anything else
[edit]

  • Since this contest was first of its kind for Hindi wikipedia ,all of the feedback were new to us.We as a team certainly consider this as a success.
  1. We strongly recomend that community should organise such events every 3 months (quarterly).
  2. Prizes for the events act as motivating agent.Variety and number of prizes should be increased to motivate new and existing editors.
  3. Fountain tool didnt proved to be very helpful to the judges since the criteria set by the organisers was different from the method adopted by fountain tool.In this contest,points were awarded according to this criteria
  4. We are planning for periodic editathons for correcting and enhancing articles created in such events here,one such editathon has already started.We also plan to spent the remaining fund of Rs 2000 in promoting and organizing related editathon.
  5. One of the participant Jayprakash12345 declined to accept the prize money in good faith (declaration here).

Calculation of points[edit]

Size in bytes calculation points
4000 + 1 1 point
10,000+ 2 + 1 3 point
20,000+ 3 + 2 + 1 6 point
30,000+ 4 + 3 + 2 + 1 10 point
  • Infobox and gallery pics attract 1 point each ,since the distribution of points is different from fountain tool ,it didnt helped in calculating the final result.
  • we would like to share some statistics for the event
User Points Prize Articles created
राजू जांगिड़ 766 First 65
Dharmadhyaksha 219 Second 56
ArmouredCyborg 108 Third 25
Jayprakash12345 100 consolation 29
Raavimohantydelhi 80 consolation 12
Sushma Sharma 62 consolation 25
Saroj Uprety 8 consolation 10
  • longest article created is 80000+ bytes.