Grants:Project/Wikimedians of CEE/CEE Spring 2019/Final

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Project Grants This project is funded by a Project Grant



final report

Draft report
This is a draft of a Project Grant report for a grant funded for fiscal year 2018-19. Please do not respond or comment on it until its status has changed from draft to under review. To read the approved grant submission, please visit Grants:Project/Wikimedians of CEE/CEE Spring 2019

For grantees: When this report is complete and ready to review, please contact with the subject line Ready to review.

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]


In a few short sentences, give the main highlights of what happened with your project. Please include a few key outcomes or learnings from your project in bullet points, for readers who may not make it all the way through your report.

  • CEE Spring 2019 was conducted between March 21st and May 31st of 2019 - the main focus was on writing articles about the countries and regions of CEE, which took place in 27 languages, writing about 29 countries or regions.
    • Esperanto and Slovakian returned after one or more years of absence from the contest
    • Republika Srpska did not participate this year
  • Like last year, we (and in this case especially User:Spiritia) created a side challenge for articles about notable women in the CEE region, that helped created 267 articles in mostly CEE languages. The prizes consisting of postcards from many different places in the world were especially appreciated because they had a personal touch you couldn't buy with money. This is probably one of the main takeaways: Prizes with small monetary value sometimes have a better draw and effect than expensive prizes
  • During the contest, every week was dedicated to 2-4 other countries/regions and 1 broad topic (i.e. culture, food, etc.). Contrary to previous years, the social media engagement on an international level was severely limited due to other commitments of the international team. Interestingly enough, this had no effect on the results, making it questionable how effective this was in the first place. Of course, long term effects of this social media absence might not be as beneficial.

Project Goals[edit]

Please copy and paste the project goals from your proposal page. Under each goal, write at least three sentences about how you met that goal over the course of the project. Alternatively, if your goals changed, you may describe the change, list your new goals and explain how you met them, instead.

Plan vs. Reality[edit]

These goals have been set based on expectations based on quantitative data analysis from the international organising team and last year's results and will be used as a measure of success.

Numbers based mainly on Wikimedia CEE Spring 2019/Statistics/Authors list

  • Total number of participants from CEE: 450 500 (11% over goal)
  • Total number of female participants from CEE: 20% (90) 48 (47% under goal)
    • As a side note, it is still difficult to discern the female participants because it requires users to change the default setting
  • Total number of participants worldwide: 500 ~510 (many CEE Women users are also CEE users)
  • Total number of female participants worldwide: 20% (110) same result as above
  • 40% of all newly created and significantly edited biographies are about women
    • 2033 articles about women - which is most likely significantly more than 40% (since it makes up about 17% of all articles)
  • At least 50 new articles on topics of every CEE community participating
    • Achieved by adding international prizes for every editor who manages to write articles on all CEE communities, which was more emphasised this year. The lower number of articles on every CEE community is based on the issue that some communities lack the proper English article base to provide enough articles to translate, which only gets lower when adding minority languages this year
    • Achieved for all participating communities - some non-participating communities like Repulika Srpska and Sorbia are lower. Source

Have the nice to have goals been achieved?[edit]

These goals have been set based on qualitative estimations by the international organising team.

  • 10% of the participants in all countries are new users
    • 127 new users, 25% of all users - the reasons for this surge are unknown so far, will update here when we get to the bottom of this astonishing number
  • At least 3 new editors in every language version of Wikipedia with less than 70 regular editors


  • Closing the content gender gap (correlates with the quantitative goal about biographies about women)
  • Adding more content on minority groups in the CEE region and expanding the list of topics in order to diversify the content created
  • Further development of the regional partnership Wikimedia Central and Eastern Europe



Unused metrics[edit]

See Grants:Evaluation/Program_resources/Writing_competitions#Metrics Metrics from the Program resources.

We would compute these global metrics but will not define goals for them

  •  % increase in contribution rate per participating user as compared to user's contribution rate outside the competition timeframe
  • # of participants editing X months after the event:
  • # of participants who are active editors (5 edits/month) X months after an event:

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.

|- | style="background-color: #FFFFFF; padding: .5em 2em"| | style="background-color: #FFFFFF; padding: .5em 2em"| | style="background-color: #FFFFFF; padding: .5em 2em"| |-

|- | style="background-color: #FFFFFF; padding: .5em 2em"| | style="background-color: #FFFFFF; padding: .5em 2em"| | style="background-color: #FFFFFF; padding: .5em 2em"| |-




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 antecdotes 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.

Methods and activities[edit]

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

  • The setup is similar to last year - every participating language/country/region has a local organiser who makes sure that the tasks were completed on time.
  • The timeline for the project was defined to illustrate the different stages of the project. Every week of the contest was reserved for 2-4 participants to highlight their treasure trove of articles and focus on interesting aspects of their cultures.
  • Similar to last year, the statistics helped participants judge how well or how badly they were doing or which participating community wasn't doing that well in order to write more articles about the community in question.
  • In order to work towards specific goals we set for this year, we created a few side challenges mentioned above to help out with those metrics.

Project resources[edit]

All resources on stats in detail, participants, results, and organisational information can be found at Wikimedia CEE Spring 2017.


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.

Acknowledging our differences[edit]

CEE region is all about the differences: in both our languages, writing systems, demographics, religious and historical background, as well in our local Wikip/media performance and community specifics. In the region we have both language versions with more than a million articles (Russian with 1.4 M and Polish with 1.2 M) and versions with less than 10 thousands articles, like Crimean Tatar and Erzya Wikipedia. The differences in the size of the local encyclopedia and the internal dynamics of the respective wiki community determine to a great extent the differences in the localization and the stricter or looser implementation of the CEE Spring contest rules.

What worked well[edit]

What did you try that was successful and you'd recommend others do?

What can we do differently in the future (or didn’t work well this time)[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.

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.

Part 2: The Grant[edit]


Actual spending[edit]

Prizes on local level
Local usergroup Amount in EUR in USD Transfer/Western
Union charge in EUR
in USD Total EUR in USD

Remaining funds[edit]

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, according to the guidelines here?

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

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.

  • Yes

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!

Expense Approved amount Actual funds spent Difference