Grants talk:PEG/AddisWang - Wikimedia User Group China/Wikipedia Asian Month/Report

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

Thank you for submitting a report on the work and funds you managed, AddisWang. Ricky Setiawan, please let us know when you will be able to send in the documentation of expenses from the portion of grant funds you managed. --KHarold (WMF) (talk) 16:46, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Request for reallocation[edit]

Hi Kacie, there are total of $141.91 remaining fund of my portion of fund. I wish to use $36 to make additional 30-50 buttons and mail expense from China to U.S., will bring it to Wikimania to encourage more people to collaborate with us in this year WAM. Any money remains after that (likely to be around $10) will be used to print poster and introduction sheet which will be brought to Wikimania as well. We want to re-purpose other remaining fund ($105.91) for this year Wikipedia Asian Month (mostly will be spent on stamps), will submit a new grant proposal in Rapid Grant and integrate these fund into it. Thanks!--AddisWang (talk) 17:12, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi AddisWang, your request to spent $36 on buttons and a poster to share the success of your project are approved. Please hold on to the remaining $105.91 for the next few weeks until you apply for a Rapid Grant, which will be open starting May 15th. --KHarold (WMF) (talk) 17:25, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Thank you!--AddisWang (talk) 17:30, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Kacie, I've used total of $29 for printing materials and additional buttons. Request to hold remianing $7 until I apply the rapid grant for this year's WAM. Thanks!--AddisWang (talk) 18:45, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

WMF comments[edit]

Hi AddisWang. Thanks so much for this great report and all your efforts on the project. We are happy to approve this report. We also have a few follow-up questions and look forward to your responses:

  1. In what ways did you help the smaller Wikipedia communities? What kind of help did they need? How did the contest or organizers support them? What advice would you give to other contest organizers who want to support/engage smaller communities?
  2. It is great to hear that the contest was a successful collaboration between so many communities. Are people still talking on the mailing list? Are you aware of new collaborations being planned?
  3. ”Our movement focuses more on newcomers and super editors, which is totally make sense. But Wikipedia Asian Month offers them, who in the middle, an opportunity to participant, involving, and rewarded within the community.” I’d love to hear more about this. Are there ways we can better support, engage or reward the ‘middle’ editors, outside of contests?
  4. You wrote that “Asian Month let them [editors] find a place that shares with their's idea.” Did participants communicate with eachother on mailing lists, Facebook pages or on talk pages? It would be interesting to look at how user-to-user communication increases during contests.
  5. We are very impressed by how successful the contest was - you significantly exceeded your goals for the number of communities and editors involved. How did you promote the event?
  6. You wrote that WAM was the, “First succesful Asian Wikimedian collaboration; 13 Wikimedia affiliations Involved.” Why do you think the collaboration was succesful? What advice would you give project leaders who want to learn how to have a successful regional collaboration?

Thank you again for all your work on this successful contest! Cheers, KHarold (WMF) (talk) 23:10, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Kacie:

  1. In what ways did you help the smaller Wikipedia communities? What kind of help did they need? How did the contest or organizers support them? What advice would you give to other contest organizers who want to support/engage smaller communities?
    Many smaller communities does not have the capability to plan and build an Edit-a-thon such as WAM, or not worth it, nor deliver souvenir to active Wikipedians. While WAM has everything designed and planned, which just need some translation effort to make it come alive, rather than coding some event page etc. Also as a global event, it feels different to participants, comparing with a local event with serval people participating, Wikipedians able to join an event with some hundreds of Wikipedians. These do not have significant effect on larger Wikipedia communities but would be something important for smaller communities.
    I think one of the major concerns of running an event in small communities is not worth it. So by providing assistance of a developed event mode and framework, there is not much effort need to make, then there is no longer the concern on if the effort worth it. Recognition is also less in smaller communities, simply because it's a small community. You don't have all kinds of awarding system, honor system like EnWp has. Thus, we introduced "Wikipedia Asian Ambassador" is a unique recognition goes beyond the local communities, and I believe that motives Wikipedians.
    I think my advice would be: easy to do, no specialty required, and simple method.
  2. It is great to hear that the contest was a successful collaboration between so many communities. Are people still talking on the mailing list? Are you aware of new collaborations being planned?
    Mailing list is not as functional as I thought it would, guess one of the reasons is not everyone familiar with it. And receiving broadcasting is much easier than talk in mail list, which MassMessage does a better job on it. And rather than asking about new idea and thoughts, providing some choices to pick, and asking small advice can get better response rate. I've heard there is a WikiUral event inspired by WAM. Also there is a local event going on DeWp foucsing on expanding articles in (Asian) countries, since it was not included in our 2016 edition.
  3. ”Our movement focuses more on newcomers and super editors, which is totally make sense. But Wikipedia Asian Month offers them, who in the middle, an opportunity to participant, involving, and rewarded within the community.” I’d love to hear more about this. Are there ways we can better support, engage or reward the ‘middle’ editors, outside of contests?
    Contests play a good role of identifing the Wikipedia editors in the middle, as well as a good cause to deliver souvenirs. It does not make sense if the movement start to become giving out souvenirs for certain amount of souvenirs. People need to make effort to get souvenirs beyond their noraml editing makes souvenir itself much more meaningful. Inflation of souvenirs also need to avoid. I would say instead of make something specifically focus on editors in the middle, we could grant more sense of participation in all kinds of event. A better explation would be the example of 2016 editon WAM. We recognize more particpants and only require 4 new articles with some requirments. But we also recognzing top contributors or those who cotribute more than 15 new articles. When we look it backwards and if we set the goal at 15 articles in the beginning, there is no sense of participation for majority of the editors. Another example would be, rather than ask users finish a comperhensive survey that need some 15 miutes, WAM uses a survey which may only take 1 or 2 minutes. We simply asking fedback by providng choices and welcome advice from all level. Thus, our partipantes can feel their opinion matters while without making too much effort.
  4. You wrote that “Asian Month let them [editors] find a place that shares with their's idea.” Did participants communicate with eachother on mailing lists, Facebook pages or on talk pages? It would be interesting to look at how user-to-user communication increases during contests.
    I noticed some Wikipedians find WAM as a good place to meet their desired way to contribute Wikipedia. And we received many opinion on the talk page and facebook discussion about how should the event becomes to esecially before the first edition since no one knows the direction. There are particpants asking question on the talk page who are not an organizer, which I think they have build their recognation to the WAM.
  5. We are very impressed by how successful the contest was - you significantly exceeded your goals for the number of communities and editors involved. How did you promote the event?
    Banner takes the largest credit. Besides that I send inviation to many active Wikipedians to run the event on their wikis, as well as encourage local organizers invite Wikipedians to help organize and contribute. I think in many way a private invitation still makes a lot of differences compare with boardcasting.
  6. You wrote that WAM was the, “First succesful Asian Wikimedian collaboration; 13 Wikimedia affiliations Involved.” Why do you think the collaboration was succesful? What advice would you give project leaders who want to learn how to have a successful regional collaboration?
    WAM itself could not be successfully without supporting from Asian affilates who made comment to send postcards to Wikipedians around world. If take a deep look to the intention, there is not a lot of motiations since sending postcards to another side of the world will not help the growth of its own organzaiton. But their organaztion may benfit from the event since the Asian Wikipedias are our main targets. These affilates chose to support the event, rather than take a free ride, is in my opinion, a successfully collboration. I think regional collaboration, or other kind of stuff, is all about brand building. WAM has more recognation in 2016 than in 2015. People notice it, recognize it and want to particpate into it, if the brand has built. It's really important to have that project leaders breakup all the barriers and make something happens in the first place. Like a snowball effect. --AddisWang (talk) 06:34, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Report accepted[edit]

We have accepted the report and appreciate all the work put into organizing this great contest. However, we never received the portion of expense documentation from Ricky Setiawan. He will be ineligible to receive funding in the future unless the documentation is submitted. Best, Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 22:40, 23 March 2017 (UTC)