Grants talk:Project/Literary Content Development- Multiple Languages (LCD-ML)

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

October 11 Proposal Deadline: Reminder to change status to 'proposed'[edit]

The deadline for Project Grant submissions this round is October 11th, 2016. 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. If you have any questions about finishing up or would like to brainstorm with us about your proposal, there are still two proposal help sessions before the deadlne in Google Hangouts:

Warm regards,
Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 03:16, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Eligibility confirmed, round 2 2016[edit]

IEG review.png

This Project Grants proposal is under review!

We've confirmed your proposal is eligible for round 2 2016 review. Please feel free to ask questions and make changes to this proposal as discussions continue during this community comments period.

The committee's formal review for round 2 2016 begins on 2 November 2016, and grants will be announced in December. See the schedule for more details.

Questions? Contact us.

Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 17:13, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Questions by Joalpe[edit]

Hi, thank you for your proposal.

  1. The current grant request is vague in terms of metrics, success rates and use of money. Could you please specify much more each of these elements?
  2. Are you saying there is no strong history of activities in Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit (SSUS)? If there have been activities, could you please provide a descriptive account?
  3. Wouldn't it make more sense to start with a smaller-scale activity? If it is true that no previous activity has been organized, risks associated to your workshop --which have had little endorsement so far-- might be too high. Perhaps to host initially an edit-a-thon or a contest, that you may be able to fund through a rapid grant, might make more sense. What do you think?
  4. Could you please precise your expected rate of female participation? A major element in building a Wikimedian community is making sure we are able to tackle seriously the gender gap, as you probably know.

Looking forward to your comments. Thanks again! --Joalpe (talk) 11:14, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Response by Drcenjary[edit]

Hi, Joalpe. I am happy on two counts. 1. You have shown interest in the project 2. You are from the Teaching Stream. You have asked Four questions/Points. 1. The first one is about metrics, success and money.

                                     2. History of Wiki activity/activities
                                     3. Size of the activity, type of the activity- either contest or edit-a-thon, type of funds rapid grants or other type.
                                     4. Gender ratio

The detailed answers/points are here:

  1. The event is taking place in a university, where full fledged departments of languages (for which grants sought) are functioning. PARTICIPANTS. We are about to select a few from the available many. The participants will be selected only if they know computer typing and will be at ease to spare some time regularly. Each department have sufficient no of teachers, research scholars and students. Since the idea has been discussed at the the Academic Council and Departmental councils of different departments (through the Head of the Departments) who were there at the Academic Council. The idea also has been discussed at the Research Scholars forum as well. After an introduction (First Half day/Full day). they will be in a position to do an edit-a-thon on the day second. The third and Fourth day either they can continue with edit-a-thon and adding studs as well. the studs will be added with an understanding that the same will be developed by them in the coming months.(at least six months). We are likely to meet at least once in a month (Twice also if it is possible) to clear their doubts and take the stock of their progress. The doubts can also be cleared by each other meeting here and there in the campus. This is to be noted that Five languages (Wikis) will be guided and supervised by the five active users from that particular wikipedias. Either one the given two names will be physically available not only on the first four days but also on the six (at least ) or more meetings. Since all of us are volunteers. Hence SUCCESS OF THE PROGRAMME AT ANY COST CAN BE ASSURED. Money will be spent of course frugally during the whole process as per the suggestions we are likely to get from you side.
  2. History we have to create through this initiative. But all participants are aware about Wikipedia. It is also a fact that they heard about Wikipedia but don't know that how it works and how content develops.
  3. Of course we can think of some smaller activity too. But in the University level (especially in the scenario of Indic Languages) only activity will be preferred which is concrete and solid one, where they can be assemble again and again in a disciplined manner with strategically aimed goals (here it is Literary Content Development (LCD)). Hopefully the event will create an aura of Win Win Situation.
  4. There is a huge scope of reducing gender gap. It is also a fact that the female students and research scholars are more in number in all departments of the university. Since residential facility is available at the campus the female participation is also assured. Among the teachers are also good number of (at least 50%) females are there.

Looking forward for your more questions and comments.--Drcenjary (talk) 16:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Comments of Ruslik0[edit]

Thanks for your proposal. However it suffers from a number of problems:

  • The project duration is not specified.
  • What you wrote in "Project plan" section is not really a plan.
  • There is no budget.
  • The project activities are not specified.
  • No specific measures of success are provided.
  • Can you provide links to the discussions that you mention in "Community engagement" section?
  • My general impression is that the project is not ready for prime time. It still needs a lot of work.

Ruslik (talk) 16:58, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Reply from Dr Cenjary[edit]

Hi, Your comments are well come. Thanks for the same.

*The project duration is not specified. Already I have specified that it will be an event of 4 (four days). Six more meetings (At least one every month) for sixth meeting. as shown here below.

Sl.No. Day/Session Description Date Remarks
1 Day=1 Inauguration by Vice Chancellor/Registrar, Introduction of Wikipedia/Wiki books/Wikisource to (all languages together), Introduction of Wikipedia/Wiki books/Wikisource (Individual Languages in individual sessions by Experts Wikipedians in that particular languages. 1-2-2017
2 Day=2 How to edit of Wikipedia/Wiki books/Wikisource (Individual Languages in individual sessions by Experts Wikipedians in that particular languages. 2-2-2017
3 Day=3 How to write articles in of Wikipedia/Wiki books/Wikisource (Individual Languages in individual sessions by Experts Wikipedians in that particular languages. 3-2-2017
4 Day=4 Fore Noon:Demonstration by Participants /Corrections by the Experts (Individual Languages) After Noon: Concluding Session
5 Session-1 Edit count/Article Count/Details of New Wikipedians (Other than the current participants) if any brought in the fold of Wikipedia 1-3-2017
6 Session-2 Edit count/Article Count/Details of New Wikipedians (Other than the current participants) if any brought in the fold of Wikipedia Continued 1-4-2017
7 Session-3 Edit count/Article Count/Details of New Wikipedians (Other than the current participants) if any brought in the fold of Wikipedia Continued 1-5-2017
8 Session-4 Edit count/Article Count/Details of New Wikipedians (Other than the current participants) if any brought in the fold of Wikipedia Continued 1-6-2017
9 Session-5 Edit count/Article Count/Details of New Wikipedians (Other than the current participants) if any brought in the fold of Wikipedia Continued 1-6-2017
10 Session-6 Edit count/Article Count/Details of New Wikipedians (Other than the current participants) if any brought in the fold of Wikipedia Continued. Report submission by all participants. 1-6-2017

*Can you provide links to the discussions that you mention in "Community engagement" section?

Please find community notifications below. Note: The Sanskrit community is having less no. (to be precise only three) of user support, where as we do have 16 universities of sanskrit in India, including this university where event is planned.

Hindi Wikipedians

Urdu Wikipedians

Malayalam Wikipedian

*What you wrote in "Project plan" section is not really a plan.

  • The project activities are not specified.
  • No specific measures of success are provided.

I hope the above table is self explanatory for these comments/observation.

*There is no budget.

Yeah, It was there as lump-sum (i.e.3000 US). The split up is as follows

Aggregated feedback from the committee for Literary Content Development- Multiple Languages (LCD-ML)[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?
5.6
(B) Community engagement
  • Does it have a specific target community and plan to engage it often?
  • Does it have community support?
4.3
(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?
5.1
(D) Measures of success
  • Are there both quantitative and qualitative measures of success?
  • Are they realistic?
  • Can they be measured?
5.7
Additional comments from the Committee:
  • Fits with priorities to increase participation and improve quality. It sounds like the focus here is more on edit-a-thons than introducing/integrating Wikipedia editing into university curriculum. I therefore think the sustainability of the project and potential for online impact are low.
  • The project is vague in its goals so it is difficult to judge possible online impact.
  • Global South project - that is in line with Wikimedia strategy. Furthermore, building relations with universities is an important part of developing the local community
  • This is a risky project since it is overall an attempt to foster a community where there is none. A statement from the university would have helped to better understand the risk potential. Wikimedians should be more involved from the beginning. Yet, if it is successful it could lead to good outcomes and as the proponent stated, could be replicated in other universities.
  • No specific measures of success are provided. There is limited new experimentation or innovation proposed.
  • The activities seem to consist of a series of meetup and workshops. However the results of these activities are highly uncertain.
  • Overall, good understanding of potentials of project, since the proponent appears to have robust assessment of local challenges. There is little evidence of support from the university. Replication possibilities are unclear, and this seems of fundamental importance given the context that is given about Kerala.
  • No details provided in budget. Not much information is provided about the project lead either although they seem very active on Urdu Wikipedia. From the talk page, it sounds like the idea has been discussed with departments at the university and there is interest but more information confirming this would be helpful.
  • The is no budget nor clear plan.
  • The grantee seems have an idea about what he/she wants to do. Looking at the grantees work in the movement it is likely he/she will be able to execute the project and will be highly effective at it since he lives right on campus and the team lives close by.
  • The project seeks to engage five Wikimedia language projects which is impressive. There is quite a bit of support from each project too.
  • There is some community engagement.
  • I would be more inclined to fund if this project was modeled after the Christ University Wikipedia Education Programme. I encourage the applicant to refine the project idea and resubmit in a future round once they can provide more details on budget, activities, and measures of success.
  • The idea for the grant is feasible and a good one. Having someone check on the grantee and help to restructure the grant proposal could be helpful. I think we should consider this grant request after a restructure and a vivid breakdown of the budget, but i see some huge potential here.
  • It would be beneficial for the grantee to get more wiki experience before serving as a mentor for new editors.
  • This is a good project, that could lead to a great contribution. But the uncertainty and risk levels that are associated with it are high, since local Wikimedia activity in the area remains low. I would recommend making stronger connections with the community before organizing this project and then starting at a smaller scale (i.e., rapid grant).
IEG IdeaLab review.png

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, but we hope you'll continue to engage in the program. Please drop by the IdeaLab to share and refine future ideas!


Next steps:

  1. Visit the IdeaLab to continue developing this idea and share any new ideas you may have.
  2. To reapply with this project in the future, please make updates based on the feedback provided in this round before resubmitting it for review in a new round.
  3. Check the schedule for the next open call to submit proposals - we look forward to helping you apply for a grant in a future round.

Questions? Contact us.


Hopefully next time[edit]

Hi! Everybody! Hopefully the same project will be resubmitted after incorporating your guideline and suggestions. Thank you very much for the same.--Drcenjary (talk) 12:40, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

5 languages compain is a great work[edit]

Its great work and i appropriate Manzoor khan 1 (talk) 15:43, 11 May 2018 (UTC)