Grants talk:Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund/Rapid Fund/Wiki Cagar Budaya 3.0 (ID: 23651979)

Endorsement from Sofi Solihah (talk)

I see this as a strong initiative led by experienced contributors, and their track record makes me optimistic that this agenda will create significant impact. The team has consistently delivered high-quality work through earlier Wiki Cagar Budaya projects, combining field documentation, community involvement, and contributions across multiple Wikipedia projects. Their approach responds to a clear need to expand and organize accurate information on cultural heritage in West Java and Banten, where documentation often remains limited or scattered. With their established workflow and commitment to accuracy, this project has solid potential to enhance public access to cultural knowledge and strengthen long term preservation of local history. Sofi Solihah (talk) 00:10, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

--Sofi Solihah (talk) 00:10, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Endorsement from Mutumanikam (talk)

--Mutumanikam (talk) 23:17, 14 November 2025 (UTC)

Endorsement from Raflinoer32 (talk)

Seeing the success of Wiki Cagar Budaya and Wiki Cagar Budaya 2.0, I believe Wiki Cagar Budaya 3.0 will also bring meaningful impact to Wikimedia projects. I fully support and endorse this project.

--Raflinoer32 (talk) 12:29, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

Endorsement from Noerintan (talk)

As a cultural heritage enthusiast, I hereby express my full support for the Rapid Fund proposal Wiki Cagar Budaya 3.0. This project holds strategic value in the efforts to preserve and document Indonesia’s cultural heritage, particularly through improving the quality and quantity of content on Wikipedia, Wikidata, and Wikimedia Commons.

Cultural heritage sites are historical witnesses that play an important role in shaping the identity and journey of the nation. However, many heritage objects remain poorly documented and inaccessible to the public. Through the Wiki Cagar Budaya 3.0 program, I see a real opportunity to photograph, record, and disseminate this information freely so that it can be accessed by anyone.

This project not only enriches various Wikimedia projects but also encourages collaboration among the public, cultural heritage enthusiasts, and the local Wikimedia community. I believe that Wiki Cagar Budaya 3.0 will have a lasting positive impact on public knowledge development as well as on efforts to preserve cultural heritage in Indonesia. Moreover, the previous iterations of this program have proven successful in generating a significant amount of valuable new content.

With full confidence, I support this project as part of the effort to expand knowledge in the field of cultural heritage. Furthermore, through this initiative, I have personally discovered and learned about many heritage sites that I previously did not know.

--Noerintan (talk) 14:10, 15 November 2025 (UTC)

Endorsement from Hasnanf (talk)

--Hasnanf (talk) 15:21, 16 November 2025 (UTC)

Endorsement from Thersetya2021 (talk)

• Support it since this activity is helpful to preserve culture, traditions, literatures, and local language. Also, it increases data to the Wikimedia projects as well as reaches out the future contributors to get involved with Wikimedia movement better. Thersetya2021 (talk) 13:29, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

--Thersetya2021 (talk) 13:29, 24 November 2025 (UTC)

Review responses, questions and action items for your application

Hello @Mirani Pramitasari,

Thank you for your application. We have completed the initial review of your application. Here are the combined comments from the review team (i.e. Wikimedia Indonesia, ESEAP Partnership Manager and ESEAP Programme Officer).

To summarise:

• Section 6 requires your response.

We look forward to your response by 11 December 2025. Please let us know if you require more time to respond. We can adapt. I will also be returning the application to you so that you can make the changes to the application on Fluxx (if you feel its needed) based on the feedback received.

Thank you.

Regards, Jacqueline

--

Criteria	Inputs/ Comments/ Questions
1) Is the proposal clear in terms of the change it wants to make? Does the proposal indicate value/impact potential? Is the proposal viable?	YES Detailed explanation The proposal clearly outlines that this is a continuation (phase 3) of previous documentation efforts ("WikiCagarBudaya" and "Wiki Cagar Budaya 2.0"), with the specific goal of documenting cultural heritage sites in West Java (Cirebon, Majalengka, Tasikmalaya) and Banten that were missed in previous iterations or require better visual documentation, explicitly aiming to bridge the gap between oral history and written documentation. The targets are 75 buildings across these areas with 300 photos, 75 Wikidata items, 100 Wikipedia articles, 5 Wikivoyage pages, plus training/edit-a-thons. There is strong alignment with knowledge equity and geographic/language gaps (West Java, Banten, Sundanese), and they explicitly tag geography + GLAM and linguistic underrepresentation. The project builds on existing datasets from Kemendikbud (Ministry of Education) and local governments, adding verification and illustration in situ, which is good value for money for GLAM-style work. Metrics are concrete, and the use of a Wikidata dashboard adds a bit of innovation and learning for a Rapid Fund. The workplan is straightforward—route planning by kecamatan (district level), clustered field trips, followed by online editing periods—and they’ve already used similar workflows in 1.0 and 2.0. The timeline acknowledges Ramadan/Idul Fitri, during which there will be no fieldwork and a focus on writing; this reflects realistic planning. The goal of 75 objects and 300 photos over approximately 3.5 months for a 3-person core team seems achievable, provided that travel and permissions are managed effectively.
2) Does the applicant have the experience (technical / organizing) capacity to implement this project? Does the applicant or team have experience on target Wikimedia projects?	YES Detailed explanation This is Wiki Cagar Budaya 3.0, explicitly building on two earlier iterations run by (mostly) the same people. They reference WikiCagarBudaya and Wiki Cagar Budaya 2.0, where they already did Commons + Wikidata + idWiki + suWiki content and photowalks. All three team members have prior experience with Dana Wiki projects and intensive editing sprints like WikiWangunan (3 articles/day in suWiki) and WikiTutuwuhan (plants documentation). They have repeatedly served as organizers and facilitators in WikiLatih / edit-a-thons, which directly matches the planned training/edit-a-thon components.
3) Does this proposal have support from Wikimedia community members?  Has there been sufficient engagement of community members through the endorsement and feedback process?	TO SOME EXTENT Detailed explanation a) Community outreach They describe ongoing conversations with Komunitas Wikimedia Bandung, including questions from community members asking whether the project will be continued, and they mention discussing the plan in monthly meetings and informal chats and I notice several endorsements from community members. b) Partner outreach The previous Wiki Cagar Budaya has proven to open opportunities to collaborate with several local communities in West Java and educational institutions. However, for this proposal, it would be better if they are able to share potential partners to make their plan clearer. The applicants are planning to create WikiLatih in Tasikmalaya, which is good. It would be nice to make an additional training event or meetups in Banten or Majalengka.
4) Does the proposed budget adequately reflect the investment needed to achieve the proposed goals?	NO Detailed explanation The current proposal contains several inefficiencies that should be addressed. More details in item 6. I understand that the focus cities in Wiki Cagar Budaya 3.0 are farther away than in previous Wiki Cagar Budaya and require greater costs, specifically in transport. However, the metrics are relatively low, especially those for Wikimedia Commons, compared to the budget.
5) Does the applicant show clarity in what they hope to learn from their work given the change they are hoping to achieve?	TO SOME EXTENT Detailed explanation a) The applicant outlines two distinct learning goals: Cultural: They aim to assess public awareness regarding the shift from oral tradition to written history, specifically how local communities value accurate written documentation of their heritage. Technical: They intend to gauge the enthusiasm of the Wikimedia Bandung community for Wikivoyage as a potential future focus area. b) Metrics The metrics are relatively low, especially those for Wikimedia Commons, compared to the previous Wiki Cagar Budaya. Also, they want to visit more cities than the previous Wiki Cagar Budaya. It would be better if they informed the objects they wanted to document, took photos, and had a contingency plan if they were not permitted to document an object. Wikidata metrics can also be improved. The Wikivoyage part is interesting, as Indonesian Wikivoyage is a newly released project. I suggest they explain the plan for Wikivoyage's content. What things do they want to write on Wikivoyage articles?
6) Questions or feedback to the applicant based on your review	We need a response to these questions a) See comments at 3b b) See comments at 5b c) Timeline Clarification: Clarification is requested regarding the timeline, specifically the mention of creating articles over "4 days tentative" during the break period. The applicant is asked to clarify if the travel itinerary will be similarly condensed to match this timeline, which would help justify the exact number of car rental days and hotel nights required. d) Geographical focus: In the proposal, there are a few explanations of why they chose Majalengka, Tasikmalaya, and Banten as their targets. Would you like to elaborate further? e) Budget Optimization: The proposal provides a comprehensive plan, but a review of the financial details suggests the project goals can be optimised with a leaner budget. It is recommended that the applicant revise the total request to the 45,000,000–50,000,000 IDR range for total project cost. Specific areas for adjustment to consider: Transport Logistics: The budget currently lists both a full-service "Car Rental" (18,000,000 IDR) and a separate line for "Local Transport" (6,300,000 IDR). Since the car rental covers intercity and local movement, the applicant is advised to remove or significantly minimize the additional local transport allowance to avoid redundancy. Accommodation: The budget requests 28 nights of hotel stays (including transit), which appears high relative to the travel itinerary. The applicant is encouraged to review the number of nights to strictly match the travel days and to utilize standard community rates (approx. 350,000 IDR/night) where possible. Equipment & Contingency: To prioritize core activities, it is suggested that the applicant remove the camera rental costs if the team can utilize personal equipment, as well as the non-essential merchandise. General feedback While the expansion into Wikivoyage is a positive and innovative initiative, the applicant has noted that the team is unfamiliar with the platform and has never edited it before. To streamline the budget and ensure quality, perhaps the applicant can consider removing the Wikivoyage component (and its associated training costs) from this specific grant or treat it as a "stretch goal." This would allow the team to focus fully on their established strengths in Wikipedia and Commons contributions.

JChen (WMF) (talk) 09:04, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello  @JChen (WMF), thank you very much for your suggestions and feedback. We would like to clarify.

• Partner Outreach

We’ve revised the total proposed budget. However, for WikiLatih activities in Majalengka/Banten, could we request a budget exceeding your recommended limit?

• Metrik

There are 75 cultural heritage buildings that we will document which can be seen at the following link https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Slg4XEoSz3f7826SO5YC31_7k33vFtWm608OoFD6m8E/edit?gid=1683785507#gid=1683785507

The number of Wikidata items created/developed is adjusted to reflect the number of buildings. Therefore, we cannot increase the Wikidata metrics. The Wikimedia Commons metrics, which were originally 300, we will adjust it to 375, meaning that each building requires five photos taken from various angles.

We also have a list of cultural heritage sites in Cianjur as a backup in case we run into permit issues. We'll include this in our additional activities (if possible).

We've accepted your suggestion in the feedback at the last paragraph that WikiVoyage-related activities should be phased out, and we'll focus on developing content on Wikidata, Wikipedia, and Wikimedia Commons. Therefore, we won't be going into detail about WikiVoyage metrics.

• Timeline

The tentative four-day period for article creation is intended to fill the gap to allow activities to continue. The documentation activities will take place outside of Ramadan and are unrelated to the duration of the article creation.

The documentation activities on the second day, Sunday, were estimated to be completed by noon. The trip from Banten to Bandung takes approximately 7 hours (if there are no obstacles). We were concerned about arriving in Bandung late at night, and some of us live quite far from the city center. That's why we budgeted for a hotel for transit. The article editing was done in-house, so the transit hotel was unrelated.

• Geographic focus

The cultural heritage sites in Majalengka, Tasikmalaya, and Banten are relatively numerous. If we were to visit areas with fewer cultural heritage sites, our travel costs would be less efficient, and our metrics would be less valuable. Furthermore, the documentation area selection was expanded to four strategic areas. Tasikmalaya was chosen because it represents the rich cultural heritage of the East Priangan region. Meanwhile, Banten (formerly part of West Java), Cirebon, and Majalengka are closely associated with important figures in the spread of Islam in West Java. Furthermore, each region also has a unique diversity of local history and culture.

• Budget optimization

We have revised the budget completely, here is the link https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DrnEBoWrv1hgOj5ykuRSHfAE79z3kIvLXQ7Jv-TQc1w/edit?gid=1956014862#gid=1956014862

Regarding equipment, we need to clarify that we will still be renting cameras. One of us has a personal camera. However, having three people share one camera would be cumbersome and inefficient. Therefore, we will continue to rent one camera for two people.

Regarding transportation, we also need to clarify that local transportation refers to the cost of traveling from our home to the location where we meet the driver. Some of us live quite far from Bandung. For this reason, we still budget for local transportation in addition to the car rental fee.

Best regards,

Mirani Pramitasari (talk) 23:47, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Your application has been approved

Hello @Mirani Pramitasari,

Thank you for your application and for taking time to respond and also for taking in the revisions as suggested. Congratulations, your application has been approved in the amount of IDR 53,050,000 from 24 January 2026 to 30 June 2026.

• I extended the implementation timeline. If you complete your project ahead of time, please feel free to submit your final report early via Fluxx.
• I am acknowledging the final approved budget breakdown here - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DrnEBoWrv1hgOj5ykuRSHfAE79z3kIvLXQ7Jv-TQc1w/edit?usp=sharing and the list of 75 cultural heritage buildings you will be documenting here - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Slg4XEoSz3f7826SO5YC31_7k33vFtWm608OoFD6m8E/edit?gid=1683785507#gid=1683785507

Additional resources which may be useful

• The reporting requirements and templates for the grant can be found here. All reports are to be completed and submitted via Fluxx.
• Timelines for reporting can be found in your grant agreement or on Fluxx.
• Instructions for post award: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Processing/Grantee_Portal/Post_award
• Documenting project expenses: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Documenting_project_expenses

We thank you for your participation in the grant application process and hope to continue to journey with you as you embark on this project. Good luck!

Regards, Jacqueline on behalf of review team JChen (WMF) (talk) 02:10, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello @JChen (WMF) thank you for your responses. We will make improvements in Fluxx today. Best regards,

Mirani Pramitasari (talk) 02:30, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

Changes of activity plan

Hello @JChen (WMF),

As we already know that documentation activities are carried out in Tasik Regency, Majalengka Regency, Cirebon City (already implemented) and Banten Province.

Specifically for the Banten Province, after further investigation, it turned out that car rental costs were much higher than we expected. However, until now, we've been documenting at the Banten region for 2 days.

Due to budget constraints, we sought the references for cultural heritage lists in other nearby areas, including Cianjur Regency, Subang Regency, and West Bandung Regency. There are 75 heritage buildings in the metrics proposal. Until now, we've documented 44 heritage buildings. Therefore, we need a minimum of 31 buildings. We have 34 lists of cultural heritage buildings which can be viewed here

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VAfYWmG5JjJUcRQrhBDF1BfJceP5L1ofTYMuDJTaArc/edit?usp=drive_link

We also would like to ensure that the budget for this change of activity plan will remain sufficient. Could you give us permission to carry out this activity change?

Thank you for your understanding and attention. Best regards,

Mirani Pramitasari (talk) 09:33, 7 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello @Mirani Pramitasari,

Thank you for sharing an update.

We have no objections to your proposed adjustments to the implementation plan.

Regards,

Jacqueline JChen (WMF) (talk) 04:44, 17 April 2026 (UTC)