Grants talk:PEG/Amical/GLAM & outreach (II)/Report

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


This page is for discussing this report. Looking forward to it :-)--Kippelboy (talk) 05:10, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[]

Report Accepted[edit]

Thank you for your clear and comprehensive report! Your report has been accepted. We have a few follow-up questions/comments and would appreciate your response. Please note your responses do not impact the status of your report as accepted.

  1. How did you compile the data in the Joan Miró audit? What tools did you use and if you developed your own tools, can they be shared for use by other projects in the community? Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 23:01, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[]
Report itself included a space called Conceptes 20analitzats (analyzed concepts) that describes what we analyzed and which tools we used for it. Also we describe criterias. This table includes the external links to the source tools, basically toolserver and WMFlabs links, so others can benefit from it. Actually, we are drafting now a new collaboration with Antoni Tàpies Foundation to do the same kind of audit with this other Catalan artist.--Kippelboy (talk) 06:54, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[]
  1. How did the Joan Miró Foundation respond to your research? How do they plan to use your data? If they were pleased with the outcome, do you have a testimonial you could share? Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 23:01, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[]
They liked it a lot and they are now studying it. Basically, the first step was including a Wikipedian in Residence for two months so she could draft a mid term project. After some stratgey meetings with the museum, User:ESM spent 2 months in the museum as a Wikipedian in Residence. Among other things, she was looking for references and preparing some projects that will take place during 2014, like a Joan Miró Global Challenge. We had some finantial support from the Foundation to support this position (strategy and preparing project), but the best of it all is that the actual project will run during the year by the community of volunteers. We think that this model is quite good. If you need so, we can ask Miró proffessionals to leave some messages here with their opinion.--Kippelboy (talk) 06:54, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[]
  1. What strategy has been most effective in terms of workshop follow-up? Mentorship? New editor due dates? "1 article 1 month"? Can you create a learning pattern around this? Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 23:01, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[]
To be sincere, we still do not have a "more effective" system. We are just drafting and learning. Once we have our "techcnique" we will be glad to share our experience, but we think it is still on a draft mode (we are learning from it)--Kippelboy (talk) 06:54, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[]
  1. What kind of activities are libraries self-organizing? Can we share this success through a learning pattern? Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 23:01, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[]
Sure! We will create one sharing this experience. Basically, librarians are self-organizing: Wikimedia wokrhops, Wiki takes their town, Wiki Reading Clubs, Edit-a-thons and Writing activities for documenting local heritage. It is great for us because after some invest of time now we have a network of local ambassadors, whose actual work is the spread of information among citizenship :-)--Kippelboy (talk) 06:54, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[]
  1. We definitely agree that we need more standard measures of success and look forward to discussing this further at the Wikimedia Conference in Berlin and on the Evaluation Portal. Thank you for raising this important issue. Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 23:01, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[]
  2. It looks like you received significantly more additional funding than what was expected at the time of the proposal. It would be helpful to know if this grant helped mobilize other funders. Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 23:01, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[]
I can't tell you that there is a direct relation, but you know that Projects call projects. Our GRANT was quite general in scope (promoting "Libraries" or "museums") so while collaborating with Institution A, Institution B see it via social media and ask us for a collaboration, with some related funding. Amical has become an important agent in Catalan cultural life (we have received some national awards for our protection of Catalan Language on the net), and this also helped on being more recognised by other institutions, and to bringing new project proposals on the table. Without this and the previous GRANTs our project activities would have been significatively lower, so probably we didn't had "called the attention" to other GLAMs. I think it is a combination of it all.--Kippelboy (talk) 06:54, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[]
  1. Regarding the unspent funds, it is simplest if you just absorb the remaining 75,17 € into your general operating funds. Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 23:01, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[]
Ok, I'll talk with our treasurer.--Kippelboy (talk) 06:54, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[]

Congrats on a successful project and please let us know if you have any questions. Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 23:01, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[]

Thank you for your kind words. For us is very important feeling supported by Wikimedia Foundation team. Really looking forward to meet you in Berlin, and good luck with this new position. Best, --Kippelboy (talk) 06:54, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[]
Thanks so much for all your helpful reponses. I look forward to meeting you in Berlin as well. If and when you develop learning patterns, please let me know if you need any assistance. Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 21:43, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[]