September 26 Proposal Deadline: Reminder to change status to 'proposed'
As posted on the Project Grants startpage, the deadline for submissions this round is September 26, 2017. To submit your proposal, you must (1) complete the proposal entirely, filling in all empty fields, and (2) change the status from "draft" to "proposed." As soon as you’re ready, you should begin to invite any communities affected by your project to provide feedback on your proposal talkpage.
Comments of Glrx
I would decline this proposal. The basic idea is intriguing, but the reality seems much different. I need more information about how it will be used and guesses about its benefits.
With Google Maps, I can go anywhere in the world with fine detail and often get street images. There's plenty of data, and the panning is continuous. If I set the clock to say 1776, the number of available map sources dwindles, and the dates between maps may be far apart. I won't get a smooth time scale, and if I pan too far, I'll fall off the map. For an arbitrary spot on earth, how many historical maps will I find? A couple months ago, I searched for historical maps of w:Rancho San Antonio County Park area to look for a creek name. I found a few maps, and I had no trouble panning and zooming those maps as images. I didn't need a tile server; I just needed an index of maps of the area.
I've read about Revolutionary, Civil, and World War battles, and then gone to Google Maps to look at the current terrain. Yes, some areas have changed a lot, but I can still get a sense of the past by ignoring modern buildings and roads. I've also done that for paintings and photographs. w:Vincent van Gogh's w:The Yellow House has disappeared, but the nearby railroad bridge is still there (sans railroad). The vicinity of w:Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico has changed a lot in 75 years, but the church, graveyard, and mountains are still there.
When I go back 2000 years, the images are less satisfying. I don't get a good sense of w:Julius Caesar's w:Siege of Alesia. I love using the current street views, and I doubt the terrain has changed a lot since Caesars time. I don't see a tile server helping me out. It could erase some farm houses and other modern features, but it could only guess at what Alesia looked like back then.
The proposal mentions archeology, but that application seems specialized. Viewing the available maps from separate sources seems a more reasonable practice. If I'm researching w:Troy, I can find excavation maps that attribute different digs to different times (mapping a range of times). Before funding a tile server for such excavations, it would be more appropriate to show a time rendition for a single site. Then we can ask the value of varying time. And the data may be suspect; many archaeological time estimates are crude.
I have been interested in historical changes, but that interest has usually been focused around significant events that have interested others. w:Port Royal is an example. The earthquake is the notable event, and others have prepared maps that show the impact.
It is appropriate to tag maps with metadata, and such specifications exist (I cannot find the RDF map information spec I'm thinking of). A simple goal would be given a point on earth, find all the available maps within a time interval.
Eligibility confirmed, round 1 2018
We've confirmed your proposal is eligible for round 1 2018 review. Please feel free to ask questions and make changes to this proposal as discussions continue during the community comments period, through March 12, 2018.
The committee's formal review for round 1 2018 will occur March 13-March 26, 2018. New grants will be announced April 27, 2018. See the schedule for more details.Questions? Contact us.
In my opinion this project is much too vauge. It is totally unclear what the software aspects of this actually are and what success would be (beyond talking about it at a conference). It also doesnt seem to make sense to gather a community around a project that doesnt exist yet (which seems to be a main goal of this grant). I would reccomend declining this proposal. Bawolff (talk) 14:41, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
- I agree that it is vague. In addition, it is not in any way connected to the Wikimedia Movement goals. WMF does not produce its own maps and improving existing maps like Google Maps or OSM is not one of its goals. It is better to request funding from some other source. Ruslik (talk) 18:15, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi and thank you for your proposition ; Could you detail the budget a little bit ? Expecially, could you give us the amount of worked hours, the utpout expected, and their connexion to the spendings ? Léna (talk) 22:18, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
- I would also like a little more detail about the budget. The information seems a bit vague and I would like to know more about the event planning and engagement. Thank you for taking the time to submit a project proposal and I look forward to your response. Best, Jackiekoerner (talk) 16:11, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
Aggregated feedback from the committee for Development of Open History Map
|(A) Impact potential
|(B) Community engagement
|(C) Ability to execute
|(D) Measures of success
|Additional comments from the Committee:
Opportunity to respond to committee comments in the next week
The Project Grants Committee has conducted a preliminary assessment of your proposal. Based on their initial review, a majority of committee reviewers have not recommended your proposal for funding. You can read more about their reasons for this decision in their comments above. Before the committee finalizes this decision, they would like to provide you with an opportunity to respond to their comments.
- Aggregated committee comments from the committee are posted above. Note that these comments may vary, or even contradict each other, since they reflect the conclusions of multiple individual committee members who independently reviewed this proposal. We recommend that you review all the feedback carefully and post any responses, clarifications or questions on this talk page by 5pm UTC on Tuesday, May 11, 2021. If you make any revisions to your proposal based on committee feedback, we recommend that you also summarize the changes on your talkpage.
- The committee will review any additional feedback you post on your talkpage before making a final funding decision. A decision will be announced Thursday, May 27, 2021.
Questions? Contact us at projectgrants wikimedia · org.
Round 1 2018 decision
This project has not been selected for a Project 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. This was a very competitive round with many good ideas, not all of which could be funded in spite of many merits. We appreciate your participation, and we hope you'll continue to stay engaged in the Wikimedia context.
Next steps: Applicants whose proposals are declined are welcome to consider resubmitting your application again in the future. You are welcome to request a consultation with staff to review any concerns with your proposal that contributed to a decline decision, and help you determine whether resubmission makes sense for your proposal.Over the last year, the Wikimedia Foundation has been undergoing a community consultation process to launch a new grants strategy. Our proposed programs are posted on Meta here: Grants Strategy Relaunch 2020-2021. If you have suggestions about how we can improve our programs in the future, you can find information about how to give feedback here: Get involved. We are also currently seeking candidates to serve on regional grants committees and we'd appreciate it if you could help us spread the word to strong candidates--you can find out more here. We will launch our new programs in July 2021. If you are interested in submitting future proposals for funding, stay tuned to learn more about our future programs.