Comments from Kalliope (WMF)
@Magioladitis: Kudos for your initiative to spread the word about what the Wikimedia communities achieve as a whole, and attempting to potentially engage new editors focusing on the gender gap. Here are some preliminary thoughts and questions.
- Measure of success. How do you plan on evaluating whether this project has hit its targets and to what extent? I suppose potential new editors in the community is one way to measure that. However since this attempt is specific to articles about women or topics of interest to women, do you plan on monitoring the article creation rate and whether those remain within the above topic areas?
- Target audience. I am assuming that this is the magazine's employees and its subscribers. Quantity certainly doesn't necessarily equal to quality, however, is there a number of new editors you'd ideally want to get engaged out of this initiative?
- Follow-up with your peers. I understand this to be more of a teaser presentation rather than a full scale how-to-write-a-wikipedia-article project (correct me if I'm wrong). Is there a bigger picture vision surrounding this initiative? For example, do you envisage this to be the first in a series of tutoring interested parties in wikipedia article creation, or is it going to be a stand-alone initiative? If yes, is there any thought to collaborate with other community members who are local to Athens and work with new editors?
- Two meetings. You mention one with the magazine's board and one with the magazine's subscribers. If this is a wide circulation magazine, then you may have a large number of subscribers showing up for that second meeting (wishful thinking, on my part, for sure). Have you factored in potential cost implications should the turnout be larger than expected? Assuming the talk will take place at the magazine's premises, will their accommodation suffice? Is there a contingency plan in case it doesn't, like renting out a larger space?
- Other initiatives. You may find the WikiProject Women scientists, an initiave by Keilana, a good place for inspiration on setting up your outreach, at least in part. WikiProject Women's health is another good example of focus on the same [wide] topic area which I understand you intend to cover (not specifically/necessarily medical but women's topics in general). Getting new editors aboard is one thing. Retaining them and keeping them engaged is another. The above two WikiProjects use some interesting ways to keep editors engaged (example that I like: a list of their achievements / good or featured articles) in an organised and monitor-able manner.
- In fact there will be two meetings to raise awareness about Wikipedia in a group that show interest about it. Moreover, the editorial board has a huge archive which potentially would like to share in public. I do not expect everyone to start writing articles right after the two meetings I will held. Still, any new account will be monitored using the Education Evaluation tool I used in school. I see these meetings as a preparation for a greater project. This is not going to be an edithon.
- Almost same as above. My main concern is that they are experts in giving me a wish-list of wanted articles and potentially we can get access to their archive. They 've been scanning newspapers on female subjects for the last 20 years.
- The group have their own building in Athens. I try to keep this as low budget as possible. If we see that this can really be useful for Wikipedia, we can organise better events than that. The second meeting will be for a a 20-30 people audience I presume but I will have to check the details.
- In order to get a better idea of where I would like to go check my draft Grants:IEG/Why women don’t edit Wikipedia. Since, I do not want to get there not before checking all the details and not without providing a high quality project I would like to participate in 2-3 meetings with feminist groups in this directions. See these meetings as step 1 of this procedure. I'll check the WikiProject you suggested! Thanks for the heads up. -- Magioladitis (talk) 13:08, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for submitting this proposal. The Committee reviewed it this morning. We can readily see the potential value of this partnership and are interested in supporting it. However, we have a few questions for you, as follows:
- The TPS program provides funding for activities that are in support of volunteers. It's not clear to us whether the intent of your outreach efforts will be to recruit volunteer editors or paid editors on staff with the magazine. Can you clarify?
- As the comments posted by Kalliope (WMF) make clear, outreach efforts to recruit new volunteers typically require a more comprehensive plan for follow-up and support if they are to be successful. One-off presentations, especially when divorced from hands-on editing training, are not likely to succeed in attracting new editors. Have you considered expanding this into a PEG project that would include a more robust and sustainable outreach plan, involving Wikimedians local to the magazine site and incorporating strategies such as those Kalliope references above? Our concern is that your presentations as currently proposed may not have the long-term impact that might otherwise be possible.
Thank you again for your efforts to foster this promising partnership.
Marti (WMF) I want to meet this persons in order to raise their awareness about Wikipedia and examine in which extend they could contribute. I was mainly asked from them to meet them and make a short talk about what Wikipedia is all about and answer to questions. if this goes well I will proceed in a PEG project as I wrote above that will work on gender gap and recruiting female volunteers. Consider this TPS as step 1 of this process. It's only going to be an informal meeting and then an open talk to a female audience in this phase. I will try to focus in why Wikipedia is beneficial in promoting female subjects based on the informal meeting I will have the first day. That's the simple plan. I have these connections and I would like to have the chance to examine the possibilities. I prefer to take small steps that going for the big plan right away. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:37, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
- Dear Magioladitis. Thank you very much for having taken the time to answer our questions, we appreciate this. Furthermore we are glad to inform you that your grant-request has been approved. Last but not least we would like to emphasize again that it seems important to us that it will be stated clearly in the presentation that you're giving that editing on Wikipedia is volunteer-based work. Best wishes and good luck, --Muriel Staub (WMCH) (talk) 14:33, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, Magioladitis! We look forward to reading your report. In case you haven't already seen the guidelines for your report, just want to point you to the information in step 3 here so you can plan ahead for outcome reporting (i.e. linking to a learning pattern, something new that was co-created by you and your fellow participants at the event, or a blog post you wrote to share your experience with others after the event). Thanks again! --Marti (WMF) (talk) 21:01, 28 January 2016 (UTC)