Grants:Project/Wikimedians of CEE/Wikimedia CEE Spring 2018/Final

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

Project Grants This project is funded by a Project Grant

proposal




final report


Report under review
This Project Grant report has been submitted by the grantee, and is currently being reviewed by WMF staff. If you would like to add comments, responses, or questions about this grant report, you can create a discussion page at this redlink.


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]

Summary[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 2018 was conducted between March 21st and May 31st of 2018 - the main focus was on writing articles about the countries and regions of CEE, which took place in 25 languages, writing about 28 countries or regions.
  • Additionally to the main contest, we (and in this case especially User:Spiritia) created a side challenge for articles about notable women in the CEE region, that helped create additional 314 articles in mostly non-CEE-languages. The prizes consisting of postcards from many different places in the world were especially appreciated because they had a personal touched you couldn't buy with money.
  • During the contest, every week was dedicated to 2-4 other countries/regions and 1 broad topic (i.e. culture, food, etc.) which were highlighted on the Facebook page each week. The blog posts were then also spread on other social media channels, mostly Twitter.

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.

Quantitative[edit]

Should[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.

  • Total number of participants from CEE: 450
  • Total number of participants worldwide: 550
  • Total number of female participants from CEE: 20% (90)
  • Total number of female participants worldwide: 20% (110)
  • 35% of all newly created and significantly edited biographies are about women
  • At least 100 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

Could[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
  • At least 3 new editors in every language version of Wikipedia with less than 70 regular editors

Strategic[edit]

  • 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

Qualitative[edit]

Results[edit]

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.

Targets[edit]

  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"| |-


|}

-->

Story[edit]

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.

Learning[edit]

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.

Acknowleding 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]

Finances[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
Reimbursements Wikimedians of Romania and Moldova User Group 250.00 286.02 250.00 286.02
Wikimedia Community User Group Turkey 269.50 308.33 31.67 36.23 301.17 344.56
Wikimedians of Albanian Language User Group 82.00 93.82 31.45 35,98 113.45 129.80
Wikimedians of Bulgaria 431.19 493.32 431.19 493.32
Wikimedians of Erzya language User Group 400.00 457.64 23.50 26.89 423.50 484.53
Wikimedia Russia 390.00 446.19 31.45 35,98 421.45 482.17
Wikimedians of Bashkortostan User Group 400.00 457.64 31.45 35,98 431.45 493.62
Wikimedia Community User Group Greece 287.38 328.79 287.38 328.79
Prizes bought by Wikimedia Austria Wikimedia Community User Group Georgia 344.60 400.00 344.60 400.00
Azerbaijani Wikimedians User Group 405.34 465.94 405.34 465.94
Wikimedians of Latvia User Group 278.10 318.17 278.10 318.17
Prizes on international level
CEEspring Women – postcards 33.30 38.10 33.30 38.10
CEEspring Hall of Fame – barnstars 107.23 122.68 107.23 122.68
other
WMAT staff / overhead 500.00 572.04 500.00 572.04
Total expenditures 4,178.64 4,788.68 149.52 171.06 4,328.16 4,959.74

notes:

  • For the conversion between EUR and USD we used www.oanda.com/lang/de/currency/converter/ with the conversion rates of 2019-01-31. If the purchases were paid in USD or AUD (Georgia/Amazon, Azerbaijan/ebay) the respective dates of the original purchases apply.
  • Macedonia Shared Knowledge wrote: "please be informed that prizes for local contest in Macedonia will be delivered from Shared Knowledge, as we include awards for CEE Spring in our annual plan and grant for 2018"

Remaining funds[edit]

Expense Approved amount Actual funds spent Difference
Prizes on international level 750 EUR (930 USD) 140.53 EUR (160,78 USD) 609,47 EUR (769.22 USD)
Prizes on local level 8,000.00 EUR (9,915.00 USD) 3,538.11 EUR (4,055.86 USD) 4,461.89 EUR (5,867.09 USD)
Bank transfer costs and risk 600 EUR (744 USD) 149.52 EUR (171.06 USD) 450.48 EUR (572.94 USD)
overhead 500.00 EUR (572.04 USD) - 500.00 EUR (572.04 USD)
Total 9,350.00 EUR (11,589.00 USD) 4,328.16 EUR (4,959,74 USD) 5,021.84 (6629.26 USD)

notes:

  • The amounts in EUR to USD in the first row ("Approved amount") are taken from the proposal, where they were calculated with the conversion rates of 2018-01-31. For all the other conversions in this table the rates of 2019-01-31 were used.
  • WMAT recieved the 1st Payment for CEE Spring from Wikimedia Foundation Inc. on 2018-06-07 with an amount of EUR 4,716.82 (EUR 4,727.50 minus transfer fees of EUR 10.68).

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:

Documentation[edit]

Did you send documentation of all expenses paid with grant funds to grantsadmin@wikimedia.org, 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!