From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
< Grants:IEG(Redirected from Grants talk:IEG)
Jump to: navigation, search

Individual Engagement Grants

Go ahead, add a topic and ask us anything you like about Individual Engagement Grants! We may use these for building out FAQs later.

« open project proposals are in committee review, decisions will be announced december 4  »

« need help with your idea? start your proposal in IdeaLab! »

for a grant


open proposals

IEG key lightblue.png

current grants

IEG Committee
Questions about IEG
IEG labcat white.svg
rules contact us top

MediaWiki extensions[edit]

"Any technical components must be standalone or completed on-wiki. Projects are completed without assistance or review from WMF engineering, so MediaWiki Extensions or software features requiring code review and integration cannot be funded."

I don't think that's true. There are plenty of volunteers with +2 on extension repositories and core so major projects could easily be completed without any assistance from WMF engineering. It's a shame that IEG restricts people to working on gadgets, when they could and should be real MediaWiki extensions. Legoktm (talk) 23:33, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

This restriction, at least, does not promote complying with MW's coding conventions and using a peer-review system (which probably should be endorsed). -- Rillke (talk) 17:23, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
@Legoktm: Definitely, also considering that gadgets could have security issues too. A more in-depth discussion can be found in the archive. --Ricordisamoa 16:47, 11 February 2015 (UTC)


Please pay attention to categories, at very least the IEG's own categories! It was impossible for me to find the current proposals, and I had almost given up, until I discovered that Category:IEG 2015 round 2 existed, despite not being included in Category:IEG/Proposals‎. If you make things so hard for reviewers don't be surprised if some of them are a bit grumpy while commenting. ;) Nemo 15:26, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for catching this, Nemo. We encourage most reviewers to use the lists of drafts and proposals here, but good to know you're finding the category helpful as well. Some proposals from past rounds end up being updated for a new round, and the round info doesn't always get added immediately for all those while we're still figuring out who is coming back and who has abandoned their proposal, so that's why we use status rather than round to generate the lists on the IEG page. Cheers, Siko (WMF) (talk) 16:32, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
I am unable to use Grants:IEG for lack of a TOC. When I open Grants:IEG#ieg-reviewing, my screen doesn't show any open proposal. It would be helpful to know what categories are supposed to work. Nemo 17:29, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Not requesting a grant[edit]

Please consider this feedback on your talk page. This is the page I was send to when I clicked on your talk page. If this is not the right place, feel free to move it to the correct location.

I wanted to start a project. Until I read this. This is bureaucracy. If you want to start a project, you have to wait 15 months. Moreover you can only ask at specific times in the year, so you actually have to wait 15-27 months. And the support is only for 6 months (or 12 if a second request is granted). This means the project could already have been done 3 times. And moreover people have to spend time on the request forms, with an extensive project to support request forms, and monthly reports, and midterm reports, and final reports. And why do you put a limit on the duration of a project. What problem is created if people spend less money over a longer period. Time limits are probably caused by the monthly reports. Drop the monthly reports and ask for a certain amount spread over the period and you are fine too.

If I ask my local chapter for support, I can start my project tomorrow. And the project has no time limit. There are two dozen requests here. Sit down, check a request a day. See you in a month. Maybe some delay, see you in 2 months. Or start a second commission if it is too much. Or a third. Anything, but don't make people wait 20 months. Wikipedia celebrates 15 years soon, and these people spend 10% of that time, waiting for a grant. Wikimedia is supposed to support the volunteers. Spending volunteers on bureaucracy is actually taking away volunteer time. Instead of writing these volunteers are in discussion for 20 months or waiting in line for 20 months. Being open is great. Delaying projects that can help us, is not.

Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 11:13, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

And for the record, my project idea was to start local Wikipedia communities at Universities and Highschools. Send 1 email to 10.000 students, put up some flyers, if 1/1000 people is interested you maybe get 2 people who stay. Have them start a Wikipedia student organisation (not a Wikipedian in resident or ambassador, just students being students), and meet monthly. Give them 5 dollar per meeting for drinks, food or flyers; and let the students gather more students. Call the meeting a Wikipedia helpdesk and the entire university has instant access to Wikipedians. Most Wikipedians live within 30 miles of a university/highschool (in my area at least) so every (non-student) wikipedian would have a local meeting they could attend. Schools already have internet, computer, rooms. A grant would only be needed to set it up. Once in place, everything is free. Two people at 20 universities/highschools and a local Wikipedia would have a huge boost in volunteers. I am doing this in the Netherlands without a grant. Sure it is a long term plan, and it cannot be done in 6 months, but it is a plan and a grant request would have stopped me. If someone wants to start this in their own country, tell me and you have my support. Taketa (talk) 11:42, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello Taketa, Thanks for sharing your thoughts about the IEG program. I'm offering some responses below:
  • I'm not sure that I understand what you mean when you say that you'll have to wait 15 months to start a project. From the submission deadline, the community and committee review of proposals takes around two months to the announcement of grant awards. Assuming grantees are responsive in their communication, it usually takes another 2-4 weeks for funding to be disbursed.
  • We do think that providing some budget and timeline guidelines helps many grantees to organize their projects into manageable phases, but we have always been flexible about project cost and duration when grantees communicate needs that require it.
  • That said, we think you're right that some projects would benefit from a quicker and lighter-weight application process, and that it would be better to offer more opportunities to apply for funding. We're working on restructuring our grants programs now and we'll be making changes that will improve our structure in relation to both these points. You can read more about the changes we're considering in this report. There, you'll see that we're planning to launch a quick, lightweight Rapid Grants program with a rolling application process. We're also doubling the number of open calls each year in the new Project Grants program (replacing IEG) so that people don't have to wait so long between opportunities to apply.
  • If you'd like to reconsider your decision to submit a grant proposal, I'm happy to talk with you about your project or offer support with putting together an application. There's still time to apply by the September 29 deadline.
Warm regards, --Marti (WMF) (talk) 22:21, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
Dear Marti, thank you for the clear response. You are ofcourse correct, I must have had a bad evening if I misread a december 2015 as december 2016. Also good to hear you will be increasing the amount of dates a year. Let me put it in perspective. The good thing is the idea of a 15 month wait pissed me of enough that I have started a writing week. I made some calls today and made agreements. Next week several newspapers will anounce the writing week to 100.000 homes, Wikimedia Netherland already supports it and has announced it on their website, Wikipedians have expressed support, I have cooperation of a library which will hold a meeting, 3 newspapers, probably a television crew, municipal politicians, etc. Tomorrow I am calling the governor, provincial media and a local school (all of this on the other side of the country, with two other Wikipedians manning the meeting in the library). Oh, and some of the articles written during the week will be published afterwards in a newspaper with 70.000 copies, to reward Wikipedians who write articles. It is that easy, it takes no time at all. I will give it another thought whether or not I should try the grant system or stay out of it. At least thank you for your time and for your clear explanation. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 21:15, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
Wow, it sounds like you've been very busy, Taketa! Good idea to have the local newspaper publish some of the articles as an incentive to participation! You may already know this, but I want to make sure you are aware that there is funding available to support events through the Project and Event Grants (PEG) program. That program has a rolling deadline, so even if you don't apply for IEG by September 29, you may still want to seek support from that program. Either way, I wish you luck with the awesome work you are doing! Cheers, --Marti (WMF) (talk) 17:24, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

How the univesity can officialy undorse my grant ?[edit]


I have an important question about my grant submission process.

Today, I've met a professor and president of social and political science school of University of Louvain-la-Neuve. This professor was my teacher during my master in anthropology and my thesis promoter. HE is very interested by my project and ready to send an official email to endorse my grant and explain how the university can contribute in the partnership with Wikimedia. Concretely, he tell me about a possibility of funding from university in the context of development of pedagogic project, and he tell me also about a FNRS policy witch put under creative commons licence all academic works financed by them. That's mean a huge opportunity to increase contain of Wikiversity projects but also Wikibooks, Wikisources, Wikispaces with academic researches.

So here are two questions :

  • How can I deal for transmitting an official university's announcement of endorsement including crucial informations about my grand submission ? A scan of an official letter, mail or email upload on commons ? Asking the university to send email to OTRS ?
  • How many time I have, if it's not to late, to organize this ?

Thanks a lot helping me with this questions.

Have a pleasant day,

Lionel Scheepmans Contact French native speaker, désolé pour ma dysorthographie 02:43, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Lionel Scheepmans,
That's great news that you're getting such strong support for your proposal!
  • Since the IEG committee is scoring proposals now, I would start by having your professor endorse your proposal as soon as possible in the endorsements section with a concise summary of the specific nature of the support being offered (ask your professor to be as specific as possible). This way, you don't miss the brief window of opportunity to have this endorsement considered by the committee during their review period. Sending the information to OTRS is not necessary. It's much better to provide the information directly in your proposal where the relevant reviewers will see it.
  • Depending on the nature of your Professor's interest, he might also want to sign on as an advisor to your project.
  • If I'm understanding you correctly, funding support is only a possibility at this point, correct? If that's the case, then providing the link to the potential funding source in the endorsement is probably sufficient. If the funding support is certain, however, then it would be worth including that information in other areas of your proposal. Please let me know if that is the case and we can discuss further what to do. Keep me updated about progress with this lead! :-)
Best regards, --Marti (WMF) (talk) 21:09, 28 October 2015 (UTC)