Grants talk:Project/Jayprakash12345/Improve documentation of MediaWiki maintenance scripts

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Eligibility provisionally confirmed, Round 2 2021 - Research and Software proposal[edit]

This Project Grants proposal is under review!

We've provisionally confirmed your proposal is eligible for review in Round 2 2021 for Research and Software projects, contingent upon:

  • confirmation that the project will not depend on staff from the Wikimedia Foundation for code review, integration or other technical support during or after the project, unless those staff are part of the Project Team.
  • compliance with our COVID-19 guidelines.

Schedule delay

Please note that due to unexpected delays in the review process, committee scoring will take place from April 17 through May 2, instead of April 9-24, as originally planned.

  • Please watch your talkpage, which will be the primary method of communication about your proposal. We appreciate your timely response to questions and comments posted there.
  • Please refrain from making changes to your proposal during the scoring period, so that all committee members score the same version of your proposal.
  • After the scoring period ends, you are welcome to make further changes to your proposal in response to committee comments.

COVID-19 planning for travel and/or offline events

Proposals that include travel and/or offline events must ensure that all of the following are true:

  • You must review and can comply with the guidelines linked above.
  • If necessary because of COVID-19 safety risks, you must be able to complete the core components of your proposed work plan _without_ offline events or travel.
  • You must be able to postpone any planned offline events or travel until the Wikimedia Foundation’s guidelines allow for them, without significant harm to the goals of your project.
  • You must include a COVID-19 planning section in your activities plan. In this section, you should provide a brief summary of how your project plan will meet COVID-19 guidelines, and how it would impact your project if travel and offline events prove unfeasible throughout the entire life of your project.

Community engagement

We encourage you to make sure that stakeholders, volunteers, and/or communities impacted by your proposed project are aware of your proposal and invite them to give feedback on your talkpage. This is a great way to make sure that you are meeting the needs of the people you plan to work with and it can help you improve your project.

  • If you are applying for funds in a region where there is a Wikimedia Affiliate working, we encourage you to let them know about your project, too.
  • If you are a Wikimedia Affiliate applying for a Project Grant: A special reminder that our guidelines and criteria require you to announce your Project Grant requests on your official user group page on Meta and a local language forum that is recognized by your group, to allow adequate space for objections and support to be voiced).

We look forward to engaging with you in this Round!

Questions? Contact us at projectgrants (_AT_) wikimedia  · org.

Marti (WMF) (talk) 05:40, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marti (WMF),
  1. I confirm that this project does not depends on WMF staff for code review, integration or other technical support. Although I will take WMF staff and MediaWIki community member's feedback but they will independent to give feedbacks/suggestions in their own capacity.
  2. COVID-19 guidelines compliance is not applicable on this project.--Jayprakash >>> Talk 14:21, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Aggregated feedback from the committee for Improve documentation of MediaWiki maintenance scripts[edit]

Scoring rubric Score
(A) Impact potential
  • Does it have the potential to increase gender diversity in Wikimedia projects, either in terms of content, contributors, or both?
  • Does it have the potential for online impact?
  • Can it be sustained, scaled, or adapted elsewhere after the grant ends?
 8.0
(B) Community engagement
  • Does it have a specific target community and plan to engage it often?
  • Does it have community support?
 7.0
(C) Ability to execute
  • Can the scope be accomplished in the proposed timeframe?
  • Is the budget realistic/efficient ?
  • Do the participants have the necessary skills/experience?
 8.5
(D) Measures of success
  • Are there both quantitative and qualitative measures of success?
  • Are they realistic?
  • Can they be measured?
 8.2
Additional comments from the Committee:
  • The project doesn't fit with WM priorities, but it helps a lot of developers and newcomers to use Mediawiki without reading along archives to see if the script would help.
  • The project fits with Wikimedia's strategic priorities. Since it is only about documentation the sustainability and scalability should not be an issue.
  • It is building a sustainable basis by creating documentation for vital scripts. I don't think that it will increase the desire of other developers to contribute to documentation more but, still, better than nothing.
  • 1. Yes, the project fits into Wikimedia Strategic Priority.
  • 2. Yes, it can be sustained and adopted elsewhere.
  • This project seeks to provide an essential solution to Media Wiki documentation and the tools that support the platform. This is quite an interesting project that can be sustained for a longer period. I believe other technical experts can leverage the outcome of this project to create more solutions. This project will contribute greatly to the Wikimedia movement.
  • The project is innovative because nobody has so far tried to systematically improve the documentation of various maintenance scripts. The risks seem to be low but potential impacts - high. There is a clear evaluation plan.
  • Documentation is an often disregarded aspect of development, and this is supporting best practice.
  • 1. Yes the project takes an innovative approach to solve a key problem
  • 2. Yes, the potential impact is greater than its risk
  • 3. Yes the project has an evaluation plan the measures the success of the projects
  • It is an innovative approach to solving several technical problems in the movement, not just media wiki. This project's scope is comprehensive, and I think other volunteers will learn a lot from the outcome. It has a very high potential of creating a long-term impact. The project outline can be measured to determine its success.
  • The grantee has enough experience to develop the project and the advisor will help to reach the goals. I see a little high budget to be paid to be a technical writer.
  • The scope can be accomplished in 12 months. The budget is reasonable. The necessary skills are present.
  • Familiar with Gerrit, multiple commits, as I see, even has "+2" there. Probably, the hourly rate is quite expensive but ok.
  • 1. The scope of the project can be accomplished in 12 months.
  • 2. The budget is realistic enough.
  • 3. Yes the participants have the necessary skills to undertake the projects
  • This project can be completed in 12 months if the grantee sticks to the 350 hours work target. The budget looks pretty ok and should be approved. The grantee has great experience working on a similar project and knows more about the success indicators. I believe they could successfully execute this project.
  • There is a reasonable level of community engagement.
  • I like WMF staff in endorsements
  • 1. Yes, its target group is MediaWiki.
  • 2. Yes, the project has community support.
  • 3. Yes, the project supports diversity.
  • Even though it is an independent project, the grantee seems to have a lot of support from the community, which is great. They have also indicated how they intend to seek feedback from other community members, WMF staff, and some volunteers. I am sure their engagement with the community will provide more support to the project.
  • The project is small but can have a high positive impact on the project maintenance.
  • probably hour rate is a little bit high
  • This is very useful for lowering obstacles to meaningful contributions in MediaWiki. Strong support by the WMF team.
  • This would be one of the projects I’ll choose to support and fund.
  • I recommend the approval of this project based on its scope, community engagement, and the overall impact it will bring to the Wikimedia projects. The grantee also has the necessary skills and expertise to deliver the project.

Mercedes Caso (platícame) 01:12, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This proposal has been recommended for due diligence review.

The Project Grants Committee has conducted a preliminary assessment of your proposal and recommended it for due diligence review. This means that a majority of the committee reviewers favorably assessed this proposal and have requested further investigation by Wikimedia Foundation staff.


Next steps:

  1. 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 and post any responses, clarifications or questions on this talk page.
  2. Following due diligence review, a final funding decision will be announced on Thursday, May 27, 2021.
Questions? Contact us at projectgrants (_AT_) wikimedia  · org.

Mercedes Caso (platícame) 21:20, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Round 2 2021 decision[edit]

Congratulations! Your proposal has been selected for a Project Grant.

The committee has recommended this proposal and WMF has approved funding for the full amount of your request, $9,350

Comments regarding this decision:
The committee is pleased to support a dedicated Wikimedian in developing a project that will help developers and newcomers to use Mediawiki.

NOTE: Funding of any offline activities (e.g. travel and in-person events) is contingent upon compliance with the Wikimedia Foundation's COVID-19 guidelines. We require that you complete the Risk Assessment Tool:

  • 14 days before any travel and/or gathering event
  • 24 hours before any travel and/or gathering event

Offline events may only proceed if the tool results continue to be green or yellow.

Next steps:

  1. You will be contacted to sign a grant agreement and setup a monthly check-in schedule.
  2. Review the information for grantees.
  3. Use the new buttons on your original proposal to create your project pages.
  4. Start work on your project!

Upcoming changes to Wikimedia Foundation Grants

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.
Marti (WMF) (talk) 04:46, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:Project/Jayprakash12345/Improve_documentation_of_MediaWiki_maintenance_scripts&oldid=21509036"