Grants talk:Project/Performing Arts Aotearoa - Wiki Project

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

Proposal Clinics[edit]

Thanks for posting your draft proposal for the Project Grants open call! I wanted to make sure you are aware that we are hosting proposal clinics for applicants to discuss, ask questions and get feedback about their proposals. Participation is optional. If you would like to attend, you can find the dates, times and videoconference links posted at this link. Let me know if you have any questions! Good luck finishing and submitting your proposal for the February 10 deadline!

Warm regards,

--Marti (WMF) (talk) 16:22, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Reminder: Change status to proposed to submit[edit]

IMPORTANT: Please note that you must change your proposal status from "draft" to "proposed" by the submission deadline in order for your proposal to be reviewed in the current round. When your proposal has been successfully submitted, it will show up in the "Open proposals" list (it may take several minutes for the list to update after you submit it). Applications that are not completely filled out and correctly submitted by the deadline will not be reviewed. To submit your proposal, you must complete all fields of the application and then:

1. Click on "edit source"
2. Change "|status=DRAFT" to "|status=PROPOSED"
3. Click the "Publish changes" button.

Thank you,

--MCasoValdes (WMF) (talk) 02:25, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

[edit]

  • Given previous experiences with WMF paid editing or coordination thereof at Wikidata, I don't really see how more of this could be a good idea.
  • In addition, we already financed a grant to put in place some basics in the field of performing arts at Wikidata. This effort still needs to be completed and evaluated and financing another effort in the meantime seems redudant.
  • If the proposer wasn't even able to add some basic information in the field at any of the WMF sites mentioned, it's unclear why they would be suitable to do that based on a grant.
    Jura1 (talk) 07:44, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi Jura1 - What exactly do you refer to in first point? I am curious as I plan some Wikidata projects and I would also apply for subsidized work in organization and coordination (not exactly editing). Zblace (talk) 16:37, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Eligibility confirmed, Round 1 2021 - Community Organizing proposal[edit]

IEG review.png
This Project Grants proposal is under review!

We've confirmed your proposal is eligible for review in Round 1 2021 for Community Organizing projects. This decision is contingent upon compliance with our COVID-19 guidelines. 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. If you have not already included this in your proposal, you have until February 28 to add it.

The Community review period is now underway, from February 20-March 4. 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).

Please feel free to ask questions and make changes to this proposal as discussions continue during the community review period. By March 4, make sure that your proposal has incorporated any revisions you want to make and complies with all of our guidelines. If you have not already done so, you can make use of our project planning resources to improve your proposal further, too.

The Project Grant committee's formal review for round 1 2020 will occur March 5 through March 20, 2021. We ask that you refrain from making any further changes to your proposal during the committee review period, so we can be sure that all committee members are scoring the same version of the proposal.

Grantees will be announced Friday, April 22, 2021. Sometimes we have to make some changes to the round schedule. If that happens, it will be reflected on the round schedule on the Project Grants start page.

We look forward to engaging with you in this Round!

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

--Marti (WMF) (talk) 07:10, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Comment from Wikimedia Foundation GLAM & Culture team[edit]

Hello! It’s good to see further work on performing arts and we appreciate your focus on diversity. Can you add numerical targets for institutions, events, and participants? And explain how you will meet your goals for images?

Have you thought about coordination with Building up performing arts data in Wikidata if you’re both successful?

Thanks, -- GFontenelle (WMF) (talk) 23:54, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi GFontenelle (WMF)- thanks for your questions. It's too late to make changes to my application based on your thoughts now obviously. My response is:
  • Numerical targets for institutions, events, and participants is a good idea. I can provide this if my grant is successful.
  • The goals for images of venues will activate editors in their regions to take photos. The goal for images of people and events is about educating arts organisations and role modelling taking images for use on Wikipedia - photographers are often employed as contractors or within staff, so part of it is about the contract, and part of it is also about privacy of subjects, and informing people. Most people I have talked to are very supportive of Wikipedia and don't understand the criteria for image rights. I believe that in the first instance face to face conversation is required, alongside demonstrations.
  • Coordination with Building up performing arts data in Wikidata is desirable. I feel an exchange of learning can occur, even to ascertain if our successes and challenges are the same or different would be valuable. Fjjulien and I can connect once our projects go ahead as they have indicated in their comment.

Aggregated feedback from the committee for Performing Arts Aotearoa - Wiki Project[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?
5.4
(B) Community engagement
  • Does it have a specific target community and plan to engage it often?
  • Does it have community support?
5.0
(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?
5.4
(D) Measures of success
  • Are there both quantitative and qualitative measures of success?
  • Are they realistic?
  • Can they be measured?
6.0
Additional comments from the Committee:
  • This project aims to gather more cultural diversity from New Zealand. After the project ends, I don't see a potential second part without WIkimedia funds and it can't be replicated in other countries.
  • I do not see this project as fitting with Wikimedia’s strategic priorities. While content on Aotearoa New Zealand performing arts may be underrepresented, it is not clear that this is because of structures of power and privilege (e.g. racism, sexism, ableism, etc.) rather than just happenstance or community interest. Furthermore, the focus is on English-language projects. It is also unclear if/how the work will be sustained beyond the grant.
  • Project is in an underrepresented community.
  • Improving the quality of contents about performing arts in Aotearoa on Wikimedia project is fit with the Wikimedia's strategic priorities and this would be of great impact if successful.
  • There are many ways to create an online and offline potential, but I didn't see clear during the execution.
  • The project has a specific, manageable, well-scoped area of focus and a reasonable approach to increasing content in the identified topic area. However, it does not offer significant opportunity for learning for the movement.
  • It is not clear from the proposal how they plan to achieve the set goals. It is not clear how many people will participate in the edit-a-thons, and how many of the editors are new. There is no clear plan on how to engage the new editors or follow up with participants.
  • The grantee has only one year in Wikimedia movement and organized one in-person event. Over 75% of budget is to pay staff and the project manager role is not clear.
  • The applicant seems to have the necessary subject matter expertise to carry out the project, as well as connections to the performing arts world. Though they don’t have extensive on-wiki experience, they are involved in the editing community and have endorsements and offers of support from other active editors.
  • I think they have the relevant skills and experienced volunteers to support the event.
  • There are some content goals around diversity of Wikidata data, with specific reference to Māori, Pacific Islander and people of colour - I would like to see this be more of the focus for goals relating to Wikipedia articles which are currently more centred around gender.
  • There is enough community engagement and support
  • I support the project execution but if there is an explanation about the role of project manager.
  • While there has been only one project grant in Aotearoa New Zealand, and while there are potential opportunities/synergy related to another grant looking at performing arts data modelling, I do not see this proposal as being significantly engaged either with the “knowledge as a service” or “knowledge equity” strategic directions. It also seems like a project that could be eligible for other pots of funding or carried out with limited to no funding.
  • The relation costs/benefit is reasonable.
  • I'd generally recommend this proposal for funding provided the following concerns are addressed
    • 1. The total number of participants including the number of expected new editors should be stated
    • 2. The grantee should provide a clear plan on how to follow up with participants after the edit-a-thons
    • 3.The budget includes Catering and expenses for in-house edit-a-thons. The total number of expected participant including organizers should be stated
    • 4. The measure of success should be increased by at least 50%


IEG IdeaLab review.png

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 Friday, April 22, 2021.

Questions? Contact us.

Marti (WMF) (talk) 05:53, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Please check your email when you have a minute[edit]

Dear Pakoire,

We would like to meet with you to discuss your Project Grant proposal. This will be a casual and hopefully enjoyable conversation in which we will get to know each other a little bit, we will ask you some questions about your proposal and you will have a chance to ask any questions you have about the grants process. We sent you an email. Please check your email to choose an interview time that better fits you.

Warm regards,


--Mercedes Caso (platícame) 22:04, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Addressing feedback[edit]

Many thanks to all the feedback. I am preparing some responses and apologise for the timing as I realise yesterday would have been better - I expect to have something to you very shortly. Pakoire

Summary of changes to the grant:

  • Insertion of diversity goals for Wikipedia articles
  • Description of project manager role inserted in the proposal
  • Inserted number of expected participants for editathons
  • Insertion of alignment with Wikimedia Foundation strategic direction


Committee comments (grouped to put similar concerns together)

  • This project aims to gather more cultural diversity from New Zealand. After the project ends, I don't see a potential second part without WIkimedia funds and it can't be replicated in other countries.
  • I do not see this project as fitting with Wikimedia’s strategic priorities. While content on Aotearoa New Zealand performing arts may be underrepresented, it is not clear that this is because of structures of power and privilege (e.g. racism, sexism, ableism, etc.) rather than just happenstance or community interest. Furthermore, the focus is on English-language projects. It is also unclear if/how the work will be sustained beyond the grant.

Response: This proposal aligns with the Wikimedia Foundation strategic direction across both goals. This has been updated in the Project Goals section of the application. The is learning that will occur during the project and does also need to be part of the reporting. The performing arts information on Wikimedia for Aotearoa New Zealand is currently in very poor shape, and to understand how that came about would be a social research project beyond the scope of this proposal. We see improving that information and filling gaps as a worthy end. The project will make it easier for editors to continue to work in this area and for future new editors to see where content gaps exist, within New Zealand and through exchange with other editors and project leaders in these subject areas.


Should an editor be recruited to the project who works on Māori Wikipedia, members of the project will be eager to support them however we can. The current volunteers on this project do not have the cultural competencies to undertake that work but recognise it is an area within our country to strengthen.


  • Improving the quality of contents about performing arts in Aotearoa on Wikimedia project is fit with the Wikimedia's strategic priorities and this would be of great impact if successful.
  • There are many ways to create an online and offline potential, but I didn't see clear during the execution.
  • The project has a specific, manageable, well-scoped area of focus and a reasonable approach to increasing content in the identified topic area. However, it does not offer significant opportunity for learning for the movement.

Response: The editing community in New Zealand is relatively young (this is our second year as a user group) and small: our first WikiCon last month had 14 attendees. We have worked collaboratively and with editors in Australia on Māori women weavers and regional projects like the West Coast but there are few ongoing collaborative projects in the group. This project on New Zealand content offers us the opportunity to share our skills and knowledge with each other, and to connect with other Wikimedia editors working on performing arts. One volunteer to this grant proposal is specifically interested in seeing whether an approach based on making it easier for existing editors to work in a new subject area can increase the editing in that area beyond the life of the project.

  • There are some content goals around diversity of Wikidata data, with specific reference to Māori, Pacific Islander and people of colour - I would like to see this be more of the focus for goals relating to Wikipedia articles which are currently more centred around gender.
  • Project is in an underrepresented community.
  • There is enough community engagement and support

Response: We intended to have similar diversity goals for Wikipedia and Wikidata, we thank the committee for pointing out the oversight and have amended the Wikipedia goals to this.

  • I support the project execution but if there is an explanation about the role of project manager.
  • While there has been only one project grant in Aotearoa New Zealand, and while there are potential opportunities/synergy related to another grant looking at performing arts data modelling, I do not see this proposal as being significantly engaged either with the “knowledge as a service” or “knowledge equity” strategic directions. It also seems like a project that could be eligible for other pots of funding or carried out with limited to no funding.
  • The grantee has only one year in Wikimedia movement and organized one in-person event. Over 75% of budget is to pay staff and the project manager role is not clear.
  • The applicant seems to have the necessary subject matter expertise to carry out the project, as well as connections to the performing arts world. Though they don’t have extensive on-wiki experience, they are involved in the editing community and have endorsements and offers of support from other active editors.
  • I think they have the relevant skills and experienced volunteers to support the event.

Response: The project management role as a paid position is 40 hours per month over 4 months. The responsibilities have been updated in the project application. It is necessary to employ someone as the time frame would make it impossible for any volunteers to do. Spreading the role over several volunteers would not be possible as we do not have sufficient volunteers with relevant background and will decrease momentum, increase chance of failure and make coordination much harder. The effort required by the project manager as it includes new learning in the setting up of the project will at times fall outside of the paid hours and become volunteer contribution.

  • The relation costs/benefit is reasonable.
  • I'd generally recommend this proposal for funding provided the following concerns are addressed
    • 1. The total number of participants including the number of expected new editors should be stated
    • 2. The grantee should provide a clear plan on how to follow up with participants after the edit-a-thons
    • 3.The budget includes Catering and expenses for in-house edit-a-thons. The total number of expected participant including organizers should be stated
    • 4. The measure of success should be increased by at least 50%
  • It is not clear from the proposal how they plan to achieve the set goals. It is not clear how many people will participate in the edit-a-thons, and how many of the editors are new. There is no clear plan on how to engage the new editors or follow up with participants.

Response: The budget has been expanded to provide more information. Goals for the number of participants have been inserted into the proposal under Project impact.

We would like to emphasise that the aim of this proposal is not specifically to recruit new Wikipedia editors. Members of the Wikimedia User Group of Aotearoa New Zealand have reported that very few (if any) new editors recruited through editathons continue to edit after the event. Our expectation is that there will be new editors recruited through the process of running the editathons, but we have not set targets around this. Our focus instead is to support existing editors to more easily and comfortably work on performing arts topics and to address specific content gaps. We believe that creating tools, gathering sources and data and producing redlists will make it easier for editors to find notable content to work on, and increase the chances of people choosing to work in this area in future. The creation of a WikiProject will allow us to use queries, a performing arts calendar and other tools as a group to keep energy in this area after the completion of the project.

The Wikimedia Aotearoa New Zealand User Group is developing a welcome template for use on talk pages of new editors. Any new editors will be welcomed onto Wikimedia and supported through personal contact in their region (as comfort with using talk pages can be a barrier for some new editors) and invitation to our regular in person and/or online meetups.

With respect to the measures of success, we have doubled the new articles on Wikipedia measures but the other goals remains the same. We are a small group of volunteers within a small and new user group, working in a very neglected area. There will be a lot of work involved in assessing and organising the existing information and then in seeking out data to fill these gaps. Should we be successful in getting data donated by partners some of these targets will be exceeded, but we have set them so that we believe we can achieve them working on our own. We intend to create high-quality items, for instance well-sourced Wikidata items with external identifiers and links to several reliable sources. We do not think it is realistic to set higher targets arbitrarily, and unrealistic targets will increase the risk of volunteer burnout and disengagement.