Grants:Project/Rapid/Wiki From Above 2016/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 2015-16 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/Rapid/Wiki From Above 2016.
  • You may still comment on this report on its discussion page, or visit the discussion page to read the discussion about this report.
  • You are welcome to Email rapidgrants at wikimedia dot org at any time if you have questions or concerns about this report.


Did you meet your goals? Are you happy with how the project went?

Yes, goals were met and we are generally happy with how the project went. However we are disappointed by the lower submission rates. See details below for a breakdown of the overall project.


Please report on your original project targets.

Target outcome Achieved outcome Explanation
Increase number of aerial photographs available on Wikimedia Commons Success (limited) The project increased the number of aerial photographs and media footage on Commons by 84 files. Thereby increasing the cumulative total of aerial content submitted through both the WFA 2015 and WFA 2016 projects to 218 files. The estimated value of the content submitted in 2016 was $435.32 in photographs (72 photographs x $6.06) and $720 in video media (12 videos x $60) totalling $1,156.32. This is based on the private sector cost of R3200 ($273) for 35 aerial pictures and a video or $6.06 per aerial photograph and $60 per aerial video. This however was a limited success as the competition produced less content than the WFA 2015 where 134 images and videos were submitted. This was made up for by a much higher rate of use on Wikipedia but that is expanded upon below.
Increase the quality of articles on Wikipedia and Wikimedia projects by the use of submitted content. Success (limited) Submitted content was used on 81 Wikipedia articles. Given the high value of aerial content for illustrating certain topics on Wikipedia this has increased the quality of most of these 81 articles significantly. This is however a decline from the 119 articles that use content from WLM 2015 however that content has been available for use on Wikipedia for over a year longer than content from the WLM 2016 event.
Increase proportion of submitted photographs and videos that are used on Wikipedia. Success (great) The number of unique images and videos used on Wikipedia articles has increased noticeably from 2015 with 58.33% of the 84 files submitted being used on Wikipedia in some way. This is an increase from 38.8% in 2015. This represents a large increase in the usability and quality of submitted images for use on Wikipedia.

Participants at the WFA 2016 workshop on the 15th June. At the event members of Cape Town's drone flying community met to discuss and learn more about participating in the competition.
The WFA 2016 display at the Cape Town Science fair.
Site Images used 2016 Images used 2015
en.wikipedia 55 46
nl.wikipedia 8 0
de.wikipediauk.wikipedia 2 19
wikidata.wikipedia 2 6
pt.wikipedia 2 1
zh.wikipedia 1 0
ckb.wikipedia 1 0
es.wikipedia 1 1
af.wikipedia 1 4
sl.wikipedia 1 0
it.wikipedia 1 2
cs.wikipedia 1 0
el.wikipedia 1 0
fr.wikipedia 1 7
tr.wikipedia 1 0
Total images submitted 84 134
Total image usages 81 119
Distinct images used 49 (58.33% of all images of category) 52 (38.81% of all images of category)


The awards will be handed out at the Cape Town Maker Fair on the 27 August 2016 at the Cape Town Science Centre. The best use on Wikipedia category was announced in early December 2016.

Best video[edit]

Best photograph[edit]

Best use on Wikipedia[edit]


Projects do not always go according to plan. Sharing what you learned can help you and others plan similar projects in the future. Help the movement learn from your experience by answering the following questions:

  • What worked well?
  • The overall concept of the project -aerial photographs for use on Wikipedia- worked well and a very high proportion of the media submitted was used to effectively illustrate articles on Wikipedia. Additionally the targeting of professional and hobbyist drone pilots worked well and produced high quality submissions just as it did in the 2015 competition.
  • What did not work so well?
  • The workshops did not work as well as in 2015, the feedback we got that this was largely because of new aviation rules regarding drones in South Africa thereby demotivating people from participating.
  • What would you do differently next time?
  • Due to recent changes in the regulations regarding the taking of aerial media using drones in South Africa, thereby making it more difficult to run and effectively regulate the competition thereby decreasing the appeal of the public to participate it has been decided to discontinue it for the foreseeable future.
  • If we did run it next time we would a) reduce the size of the advertising budget as person-to-person outreach was more effective and b) we would decrease the value of the prizes the feeling is that it did not play a significant enough role in incentivising members of the public to participate.


Grant funds spent[edit]

Please describe how much grant money you spent for approved expenses, and tell us what you spent it on.

Description Requested Funds Spent Funds Remaining/Unspent
Total (ZAR) Total (USD) Total (ZAR) Total (USD) Total (ZAR) Total (USD) Notes
1 Prizes R12,421 $800 R11,650 $750.64 R771 $49.68
2 Workshops R2,158 $137 R696.80 $44.90 R1461.2 $94.15
3 Advertising R1,552 $100 R1201.51 $77.42 R350.49 $22.58
TOTAL R16,131 $1,027 R13,548.31 $872.96 R2,582.69 $166.41

US dollar figure based on the exchange value in the grant application of R15.52 for $1

Remaining funds[edit]

Do you have any remaining grant funds?

Yes: a total of $166.41 or R2,582.69

Anything else[edit]

Anything else you want to share about your project?