Grants talk:Project/Rapid/The evolution of Wikipedia’s medical content: past, present and future: JECH paper

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Comments from I JethroBT (WMF)[edit]

Hi Evolution and evolvability, thanks for your proposal. We don't get many requests for funding related to open-access fees (I believe this is the second request I've encountered), but we agree that covering these fees is valuable as this research can be more immediately and practically utilized by program leaders in our movement. I am going to approve this proposal for funding, but I would like to ask if you would consider pushing back the end date for the grant (August 1st) to something a bit later on the scale of months. The impact of publications in terms of citations usually takes a while to assess (sometimes even longer than the 12-month maximum that Rapid Grants usually go through). Would you consider extending the end of the grant to a 4-6 months timeline instead? Furthermore, will there be opportunities to discuss the paper (i.e. at conferences) that might be worthwhile to report in the coming months? I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 16:37, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you User:I JethroBT (WMF) for approving this grant. I erroneously did not include VAT in the cost (I am not used to UK prices not including it), and consequently the final amount is 20% higher than what we originally out in the request. I'm extremely sorry for the added confusion. The paper has been accepted and the reviewed version submitted for copy editing and final approval. The open access fee would possibly need to be submitted soon after the copy edited version is complete. I agree that moving the report date back would allow for greater time to measure impact of the work. I shall be presenting the work at upcoming Australian medical student association's Global Health Conference (Aug) and the Health Libraries Conference (Oct). The other coauthors will also look into opportunities to present the work. These should complement the online activities to disseminate the work. Moving the report date back to the 1st of November would give a better picture of the impact. I have therefore edited the grant page to reflect the following changes:
  • Moved finish date back to 1 November 2017
  • Added the two currently accepted conferences into the impact section
  • Updated the cost to include VAT
If it is preferred to keep the grant page static after it is approved, please feel free to revert the page back. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 11:35, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a problem, I can cover the rest. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:52, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Evolution and evolvability and Doc James: Thanks for these changes, Thomas. As for the change in the requested funds, I'll need some time to check with our grants team about this change. Let me know if you are OK with waiting for a decision or would rather go ahead with the approval for the original amount.
The issue at hand is not the VAT (we have provided funding to cover these in the pass), but more so that Rapid Grants specify a maximum funding request of $2000.00 USD, otherwise these requests generally should go through Project Grants where more thorough and community-based review can take place. Project Grants are not offered on a rolling basis, however, and I suspect that its schedule for open calls and grant approvals is not conducive to this sort of request, which is part of the reason I approved this for the original amount. When you're able, let me know how you would like to proceed. Thanks, I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 17:56, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your explanation. I think that the project grant timeline is probably too long for when funds would need to be released (likely within the next couple of weeks). We hope that an exception is acceptable in this case, however if the rapid grant is ruled to be a strict limit then even $2000 would greatly help in reducing the financial burden. Please let us know what the grants team reckon and we will work with it. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 01:35, 30 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My extreme apologies for the added confusion. I have just received an email from the BMJ, who have said that we are not required to pay VAT because we are not employed in Britain. Consequently the original amount requested was the correct amount after all. Sorry again for flipping back and forth. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 08:01, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have just received a letter from the journal that the article is now being typeset and should be ready within 2 weeks. I should be receiving an invoice from the journal in the coming week. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)talk 03:51, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]