Grants talk:PEG/WM BE/Wiki Loves Art 2016/Report

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

Hi Romaine. Thank you and everyone who worked on Wiki Loves Art! From your reports and our conversations we understand it was a huge undertaking and required a lot of coordination, communication, and organization. We're happy to read that you met both your short-term goals around content and participation, and that the longer-term, more meaningful goals of expanding your volunteer base and establishing good relationships with local GLAM partners are promising. We have a few comments on the report below:

  1. The brochures look great -- nice design, useful content, and clear language. Have you gotten feedback from the GLAMs about the brochures?
  2. HUGE congrats on supporting the adoption of Freedom of Panorama in Belgium!
  3. 17 partners for Wiki Loves Art is very impressive! Are there any learnings or ideas you can share about why those 17 institutions (out of the 70 contacted) decided to engage with WMBE on the project? You also wrote that "more and more institutions start to reach out to us". Is this since the project ended? Will you be able to partner with them?
  4. One of the challenges you wrote about was staying in touch with and continue the collaboration in the coming months and years. Can you give us an idea of where you want to or plan to take some of these partnerships?
  5. We understand the educational part of the project did not proceed as planned. We can guess that it has something to do with leadership, but what are the future plans? Will you continue this work or focus efforts elsewhere?
  6. Thank you for the well-organized expense documentation. It really makes review a lot easier and quicker for us. And it's impressive to see the number of partnerships/sponsorships that supported the project.
  7. For future reference, it is not necessary to list every activity you completed. If you want to list that much detail so that we understand the full scope of the work the team had to do to complete the project, then that is of course fine and gives us a fuller picture of the work. However, broad categories are fine for us and may save you time.
  8. The reallocation request is approved. Please return the remaining EUR 3,912.87 to WMF following these instructions here and we can close the grant.

Thank you again for all your work. Best, Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 22:48, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi Alex Wang (WMF), To answer your comments and questions:
  1. Yes, we got some feedback, but limited. They are happy to have an overview of what is possible and like to see the specific examples.
  2. Thank you!
  3. There are, I think, two factors that matter. 1. Organisations want to be visible online and are aware that being present on Wikipedia means more people can learn about them and their materials. 2. To have luck to find the right person at the right moment. The project ended about two weeks ago and it is now holiday season here. The reaching out already started directly after the contest ended, and some even indicated not able to participate in the contest but want to collaborate.
  4. If you are asking for having a vision or something like that, we haven't. We exist to support local volunteers and also institutions to share knowledge on Wikipedia/etc. It sounds perhaps basic, but supporting them sharing knowledge in the various forms is our intention. There are ideas for GLAM ambassadors ("we want more Olaf's" was a phrase from the Sharing is Caring seminar, referring to Olaf from the Royal Library in the Netherlands), people in institutions who are working on getting materials on Wikipedia/etc, supported by us.
  5. The main person who wanted to build this up has left due circumstances we have communicated about in 2016. Future plans are to support where requests are to help them, but not by extensively search for it. For that, as said, we have no capacity as WMF does not want to fund translation support.
  6. We have no reference material to know if it is impressive or not. But we are happy with the results.
  7. If it would be left out, it gives easily the feeling that there has been done some things, but not that much. That is an error because not having an overview of all the work that is needed to get something done successfully. By making an overview and going back in my mind to the past activities and work needed for it, helps to get a better understanding. Also it can give insight for ourselves and others in how much work it will need to organise something like this. I think the time is worth it, certainly for such a large project as this in what easily is forgotten what has been done, due time and amount of work.
  8. Will do now.
Romaine (talk) 00:45, 18 July 2017 (UTC)