Grants talk:IEG/Wiki Makes Video

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
IEG IdeaLab review.png

This project has not been selected for an Individual Engagement Grant at this time.

We love that you took the chance to creatively improve the Wikimedia movement. The committee has reviewed this proposal and not recommended it for funding, but we hope you'll continue to engage in the program. Please drop by the IdeaLab to share and refine future ideas!

Comments regarding this decision:
We're interested to see where video goes - wishing you luck with the upcoming contest! Hope to see your involvement again in a future round.

Next steps:

  1. Review the feedback provided on your proposal and to ask for any clarifications you need using this talk page.
  2. Visit the IdeaLab to continue developing this idea and share any new ideas you may have.
  3. To reapply with this project in the future, please make updates based on the feedback provided in this round before resubmitting it for review in a new round.
  4. Check the schedule for the next open call to submit proposals - we look forward to helping you apply for a grant in a future round.

Questions? Contact us.

Aggregated feedback from the committee for Wiki Makes Video[edit]

Scoring criteria (see the rubric for background) Score
1=weakest 5=strongest
Potential for impact
(A) The project fits with the Wikimedia movement's strategic priorities 3
(B) The project has the potential to lead to significant online impact. 4
(C) The impact of the project can be sustained after the grant ends. 3
(D) The project has potential to be scaled or adapted for other languages or projects. 4
Ability to execute
(E) The project has demonstrated interest from a community it aims to serve. 3
(F) The project can be completed as scoped within 6 months with the requested funds. 3
(G) The budget is reasonable and an efficient use of funds. 3
(H) The individual(s) proposing the project have the required skills and experience needed to complete it. 4
Fostering innovation and learning
(I) The project has innovative potential to add new strategies and knowledge for solving important issues in the movement. 3
(J) The risk involved in the project's size and approach is appropriately balanced with its potential gain in terms of impact. 3
(K) The proposed measures of success are useful for evaluating whether or not the project was successful. 3
(L) The project supports or grows the diversity of the Wikimedia movement. 3
Comments from the committee:
  • Focus on video seems valid, and the proposer seems to have enough skills and experience. We trust the proposers competence to do what they propose.
  • Unsure how this project aligns with the current priorities.
  • Image and video processing and design and is not easy to learn, difficult to achieve these goals within a six month timespan.
  • Potential sustainability issues and measures of success are vague.
  • The app needs reconsideration, given the overlapping efforts by WMF Mobile.
  • This is an expensive project with, relatively speaking, modest strategic benefit - notwithstanding the importance of video.
  • Not sure it can be replicated on other wikis - creating video requires certain equipment, not just knowledge.
  • Not a very cost-effective use of the money and the time of the proposed members to have workshops and competitions over the world, could possibly achieve similar impact online. Suggest online trainings (even Google Hangout w/ YouTube recording), and a training workshop at Wikimania.
  • Would like to see deeper community consultation (particularly on Commons).


I really like idea here. Building a baseline for how to do video effectively is long overdue, and catalyzing video contributions with WLM-style competition is a worthy goal. (The first try at it from a few years ago didn't go deep enough in terms of videography, and the technical how-to parts are largely out of date now.)

On the issue of the Android app, have you talked with the WMF mobile team? A Commons app for Android is now in a working state, and will be released on the Play store soon. I'm not sure if/when video transcoding will be on the roadmap (either for the mobile apps, or server-side transcoding on Commons), but you should probably touch base with Yuvipanda; it might be that the Commons app will already be able to do what you have in mind by the time you got to the mobile prototype phase. The Commons app should definitely be set to work for WLM-style campaigns by then.--Ragesoss (talk) 03:46, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello! The Mobile App team definitely will be doing Video Uploads at some point in the future - but definitely not inside 6 months (and possibly even longer). Transcoding videos on low power low CPU mobile devices causes a lot of technical / power problems that we do not have the bandwidth to deal with, so we'll simply wait for server-side transcoding to be enabled before we get there. On the other hand, if you want to simply prototype a video capture / upload / edit app, feel free to poke at the Commons App's code and take what you want :) You can also poke us on the mobile-l mailing list or #wikimedia-mobile on IRC. Good luck with the proposal! Yuvipanda (talk) 21:17, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I propose to start a GLAM-wiki sister project, that reaches out to audiovisual archives that might be willing to contribute to Wikimedia too. See for instance the Open Images project ( they are contributing hundreds of videos already. I see much potential here.


I have some conserns regarding uploads of videos in this proposal, which lead me to several questions.

  1. In your workshops how are licence issues going to be handled?
  2. Could you name an example of "Wikimedia Commons upload complication and confusion" ?
  3. By mentioning "low barrier" in this sentance "a mobile app would be ideal, so that there is a very low barrier to entry.", what exactly are you referring to?

--Snaevar (talk) 13:04, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

What's a PI ?[edit]

and the PI has used this extensively in the classroom

Principal Investigator? Raspberry Pi? Wikipedia's disambiguation page doesn't have an obvious answer.

-- S Page (WMF) (talk) 22:11, 21 March 2013 (UTC)