Grants talk:IEG/A graphical and interactive etymology dictionary based on Wiktionary/Renewal

Connect travel/work activities to goals and funding

If I read carefully and do a lot of scrolling, I can almost track what itemized funds are associated with what goals. It would be great if the proposal could be rewritten to provide explicit references between goals, activities, and itemized funds. --EpochFail (talk) 14:12, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Please add a short lead paragraph

2-3 sentences. Basically, "We're looking to renew a past grant. There's this etymology visualizer. We're going to (1) fix some stuff, (2) improve some stuff and (3) do some outreach." or something like that with. --EpochFail (talk) 14:12, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Comments

I have some comments and suggestions:

1. I advise you to write a much shorter and less technical summary of your renewal application.
2. I am not sure that per Grants:Project/Learn the international travel in such amount is supported.
3. Participation to one international conference, or application to at least three international conferences I am not sure that this can be a measure of success itself.
4. Should not double-clicks on circles with language codes in clouds create new clouds?

Ruslik (talk) 17:49, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

@Ruslik thanks a lot for your comments. Hopefully I have fixed what you mentioned:

1. I have changed the text, in particular I moved sections on how to use etytree to the final report, and added some more descriptive material in the text. Please let me know if you think I need to improve the text more.
2. I thought that maybe I can remove funding for conferences and possibly ask for a travel grant at a later time
3. When users search for a word they get a disambiguation page (which I call cloud). Then they can choose the word they are interested in, to visualize the full network of etymological connections of the word (which I call network or graph, as it's made of circles connected by arrows). Users can double-click only on disambiguation pages because the current visualization visualizes the complete graph of etymological relationships without filtering (as it was in the demo, i.e., with trees).

unsigned comment by Epantaleo on 17:50, 8 April 2017‎ UTC

I actually meant "Should not double-clicks on circles with language codes in graphs create new clouds?" Ruslik (talk) 11:12, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

Renewal request approved

Dear Epantaleo,

Thank you for submitting this renewal request. Based on the value of your initial work and on the positive feedback about the work now proposed, the committee has given favorable feedback about your renewal request. I am approving your request now, with the caveat that we would like to continue to discuss the best focus point for your efforts with this round of funding--as discussed in our phone call in regard to the renewal.

Our grants administrator will be in touch with you regarding your funding disbursement.

Warm regards,

--Marti (WMF) (talk) 04:29, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Aggregated feedback from the committee for [IEG Renewal Request] A graphical and interactive etymology dictionary based on Wiktionary

Scoring rubric	Score
(A) Impact potential Does it have the potential to increase gender diversity in Wikimedia projects, either in terms of content, contributors, or both? Does it have the potential for online impact? Can it be sustained, scaled, or adapted elsewhere after the grant ends?	7.2
(B) Community engagement Does it have a specific target community and plan to engage it often? Does it have community support?	7.3
(C) Ability to execute Can the scope be accomplished in the proposed timeframe? Is the budget realistic/efficient ? Do the participants have the necessary skills/experience?	6.3
(D) Measures of success Are there both quantitative and qualitative measures of success? Are they realistic? Can they be measured?	6.5
Additional comments from the Committee: Yes, it has a potential for an online impact and can be sustained or scaled. Yes, it is an innovative project with easily measured success. The risks are minimal. I believe the grantee has an ability to execute the project (based on the report from the earlier phase) and has necessary skills and experience. The budget is realistic except the travel part (conferences) which seems excessive. It has a specific target community (Wiktionary) but the community engagement can be improved. The tool will be worth the money spent on it only if it is actually used. Define clear deliveries. This is a proven project and has exposed Wiktionary contributors to the validity of WikiData for their work. I would like to see more work on integration with WikiData instead of a separate RDF store and SPARQL setup, but if she succeeds with the publicity that she is doing then this may take care of itself. It will be wise to extend this grant, as the grantee has made significant progress and the completion of the tool's development and its wide adoption will aid the Wiktionary community -- though the travel budget should probably be reduced. Scholarship for Wikimania ? The budget looks high. Big benefit for applicant (8 months full time paid job) and not so big/important for wiki community.

Hi Epantaleo,

I thought I would post this feedback that came back from the Project Grants Committee, who reviewed your renewal request. You do not need to do anything in response--just thought you might appreciate seeing the scores, which are on the high end by the norms of this scoring process.

Warm regards,

--Marti (WMF) (talk) 22:51, 9 June 2017 (UTC)