Grants talk:Start/2018

Proposal to merge talk pages for grants

Currently there are various talk pages for different WMF grants I propose to merge all of these into a single talk page here. Benefits of doing so would be the following:

1. Less confusion about where to post
2. Centralized conversation about WMF grants
3. Easier for users to watch one single page, which also would build a community of regulars in the forum
4. Easier to search all previous discussions in a centralized archive

Here are the grant talk pages which I have found and which I propose to merge here:

1. Grants talk:Project/Rapid
2. Grants talk:TPS
3. Grants talk:Project
4. Grants talk:Start/Individuals
5. Grants talk:Conference
6. Grants talk:Simple
7. Grants talk:APG

Here are some problems which a merge would address:

1. The talk page is dead - Grants talk:Simple, Grants talk:TPS, Grants talk:APG, Grants talk:Conference
2. Page attracts posts which are general discussion of WMF grants, not specific grant type for which forum is designated Grants talk:Project/Rapid, Grants talk:Project

I would not oppose forking out discussion pages after the merge if it happens that one type of grant gets much more discussion than the others, but right now, I would say that there is no regular discussion for any sort of grant. The usual wiki response to fragmented discussions on many similar topics is a merge of talk pages. Thoughts from others? Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:01, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

I am posting notices on the above pages of my intent to merge soon. I am directing anyone with comments to post here. Blue Rasberry (talk) 11:38, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi Blue Rasberry, which imminent/actual problem are you trying to solve here? Your assumptions for why talk pages aren't used very often are based on which information? Braveheart (talk) 13:52, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

@Braveheart: The actual problem here is that these talk pages are contrary to the status quo of Wikimedia community culture. No one should have to argue for talk pages to be organized in the normal way. My first assumptions are that there is an obvious normal way to do things here and the system here is not normal.

If I were to make an argument then I would note that main page here says that US$9 million goes through the grants process, which is about 10% of the Wikimedia annual funds. Despite that, neither is this talk page used much, nor are there many messages on all of these pages collectively. Obviously people care because they have questions. I think something about this infrastructure is a barrier to discussion here and unnecessarily encouraging less organized discussion, which is why I advocate for the standard way of organizing here.

"Wikimedia Grants" is a topic which I know that tens of thousands of people in the wiki community discuss monthly, and yet the main discussion page in the Wikimedia platform gets only a few comments a year. I cannot immediately think of comparable situations for other topics, and I think this odd talk page system is the most apparent difference here. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:00, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

The problem is Meta itself, not a vast array of talk pages. I for one don't wont to talk about APG grants mixed in with individual or rapid grants because it gets too confusing. Affiliates are discouraged from commenting on other grants because it would come across as petty or patronizing, depending on the relationship with the other grantees. Hardly anyone reads the grants themselves and I surely wouldn't want to turn Meta into a second toxic Wikimedia-l. This problem needs big changes, not the reorganisation of some trivial talk pages ;-) Braveheart (talk) 15:39, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

Category:Reports for WMF grants funded in FY Pending

There are 132 pages in this category, some of them from 2014 or earlier. In many cases it seems to be a miscategorisation. --Nemo 10:11, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Category mingling

I'm trying to make sure that it's possible to navigate the categories for grant reports (or selected proposals if impossible) by criteria which trascend the specific grant program, for instance the grantee. See:

• Category:WMF grant reports by grantee (this and its subcategories are what I'd like to be tidy)
• Category:WMF grantees (many categories here had become empty; I'm not sure every category like "Grants:WM FI" is also under the respective category "Wikimedia Suomi")
• Category talk:WMF grant reports (on a generic category for everything)

When no specific subcategory is available for a grantee, better add the proposal/report to a category named after the grantee, so that other related proposals can be found more easily. Often the grant pages are also the only pages describing what a certain group does. --Nemo 10:30, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Long evaluation, no clear resolution

I assisted some individuals in applying for grants. In each of three cases the evaluation period lasted for months end ended ambiguously. I made a post at Grants_talk:Start#How_does_the_WMF_grants_team_feel_about_saying_"no"? advocating for clear outcomes to grant applications.

I wanted to share here because these were rapid grants. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:07, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Wiki expansion

Facebook,the most used application,especially in undeveloped and developing countries can be the tool to expand wiki.many people in such countries especially unemployed use wiki just for passing time By colaborating with facebook we can expand it. A new feature like find in wiki should be added in facebook👉 Shiva Gurung (talk) 07:43, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

@Shiva Gurung: This question is more appropriate for Wikimedia Forum than Rapid Grants. Anyway, Facebook tried integrating Wikipedia into the walled garden once and (I think) its since disappeared. --Dispenser (talk) 01:59, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

"unethical financial behaviors".

This was mentioned in the Guidelines and Criteria section. What are "unethical financial behaviors" as described or seen in the past by WMF? I'll not just appreciate WMF answering this but making it a page or adding it to the Learn section thereafter just like Friendly space expectations. Thank you.

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Danidamiobi (talk) 11:46, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Merge to Grants_talk:Start

There are many grant discussion pages. None of them get much conversation alone. The collective effect is that the current system splits similar conversations which ought to be together. Sometime soon, I will merge all talk pages for grants into Grants_talk:Start. Even with many pages merged together I do not anticipate that this one page will get much traffic in the near future.

Sometime soon I will merge this page! If you have comments, please post at Grants_talk:Start#Proposal_to_merge_talk_pages_for_grants. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 11:37, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi Bluerasberry. Thanks for the notice. While I understand the rationale for wanting to merge the different grant program talk pages, there are specific Program Officers responsible for each program and they are the ones watching the individual pages. It makes extra work as well as increases the potential for miscommunication or lost messages if we merge them all together. Thanks, Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 12:45, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

@AWang (WMF): Can you say something about how you balance the cost of staff time versus the cost of community time? Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:02, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi Bluerasberry. It will take longer to get a response from the most knowledgable person if the pages are combined. If the question is not a general grants question, we need to identify who the best person is and route that question to the relevant Program Officer. Alternatively, Program Officers watch their program's talk pages and are more likely to respond quickly and accurately if questions are posted there. Best, Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 16:50, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Proposal showing as "Draft", not "Open proposals"

Hi I started Grants:Project/Rapid/Swwiki workshop astronomia. In the list Grants:Project/Rapid/Browse_applications it is shown under "Draft proposals", not "Open proposals". What do I have to do to get it under consideration?? Kipala (talk) 07:52, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello Kipala, I see you've already changed your grant to proposed. I will review and respond shortly. Best regards, WJifar (WMF) (talk) 00:31, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

No response to Grant Proposal

I applied for a rapid grant on the 15th of August and it's already September but I'm yet to get a reply from the WMF. Just wanted to know what's happening. Here's the link to the grant Launching of Wikimedia Fan Club, EKSU. SuperSwift (talk) 12:16, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

No response to Grant proposal from Wlodzimierz Lewoniewski

@WJifar (WMF) and AWang (WMF): No any response to Grant proposal during last month - Grants:Project/Rapid/Presenting the results of researches on Wikipedia quality at Wiki-Сonference 2018 in Saint Petersburg. Emails also without responses. This is very sadly. This speaker was supposed to come to the conference on September 22-23. Is it possible to solve something FASTLY? --Kaganer (talk) 23:11, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Examples - maybe update?

Since the lower limit for application has been set to $500, I don't think that examples like 'Reimbursement of bus tickets for a photo walk' and 'Food for your monthly community meet-up' are relevant anymore... I suggest a quick review. Thanks. Gikü (talk) 15:11, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Response to Grant Approval and Grant release for Wiki Women for Women Wellbeing proposal

Hi Alex Wang (WMF), I understand there are numerous grant requests and the team is busy, but in spite of a number of reminder emails to rapid grants team, I haven't heard anything regarding release of grant till date when the grant request was approved on 25th September. This is a humble submission that please update me about the current status of the same. This is the last week of the month and the funds haven't been dispersed till date, also depending upon the event progress, we are extending the event till 24th November. So, you are hereby requested to share the status of the grant. Thank You. - Manavpreet Kaur (talk) 21:35, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Hello Manavpreet Kaur, I'm responding on behalf of Alex Wang (WMF), thank you for your patience as we worked through the proposal and glad we've moved forward with this now. WJifar (WMF) (talk) 23:08, 31 October 2018 (UTC)