Grants:PEG/Nanna1704/WeCanEdit Copenhagen/Report

Report accepted

This report for a Project and Event grant approved in FY 2014-15 has been reviewed and accepted by the Wikimedia Foundation.

To read the approved grant submission describing the plan for this project, please visit Grants:PEG/Nanna1704/WeCanEdit Copenhagen.

You may still comment on this report on its discussion page, or visit the discussion page to read the discussion about this report.
You are welcome to Email grants at wikimedia dot org at any time if you have questions or concerns about this report.

Project status edit

Did you comply with the requirements specified by WMF in the grant agreement?: Yes
Is your project completed?: Yes

Activities and lessons learned edit

Activities edit

Participants edit

Maia Kahlke Lorentzen, Renegade Runner
Palnatoke
Muybridge_dk
Birgitte Ejdrup Kristensen
Tove H.
Rita.bum
Kattleroff
Jullie Hjetland
Steinerakarudi
Anja Kickbusch
Amafos
Karen Mardahl, Twdk
Annika Skaarup Larsen
Rossil123
tovedit
Luba Lynch
Littlecph
Steen Thomassen, Wikimedia Danmark
Lone Sæderup
Lene Harbo
Coral Short
Asteroide
Christian Dahl
Charlotte Thomsen
Simone Felding
Tobias Linnemann Ewé
Elisabeth Toubro
DSDeniso
Pernille Lystlund Matzen
Qivioq
Karen Vestergaard Andersen
Annette Vilslev
Helle Ella
Elle Lørinc
Leyla
Julie Kirkegaard
Waltraut Eissau
Maria Molia
jenniecph
kris.ahm
Sofia Ivar
Kristina Madsen
Isabel Ahm
Jane Rowley
Tine Stevnhoved
Charlotte Haslund-Christensen
Mette Gade
Nanna1704
Sara Holst
Dortea Jepsen
Ulla Hvejsel
Frk overskud
Louise Gregersen
Anne Gregersen
Juliane Schmelzer Dybkjær
Natascha Thiara Rydvald
Stine Slot
Laura Tams
Kim Bach (Wikimedia Danmark)
Jana Sanne Huisman
fnielsen
Henrik Sørensen (Wikimedia Danmark)
Sigrid Bjerre Andersen
Mette Kit Jensen
Kristine Marie Berg
Eva Ethelberg

Lessons learned edit

What worked well?

press campaign, recruiting, site, trainers, participants

What didn't work?

Everything seemed to work really well, but maybe more could be done to get people to work together on articles

What would you do differently if you planned a similar project?

Everything seemed to work really well, but maybe more could be done to get people to work together on articles

Learning patterns edit

Outcomes and impact edit

Outcomes edit

Provide the original At least 50 women (both gender are invited) total attend and/or facilitate the March 8th + 9th Copenhagen event.

At least 70 people sign in for attending the March 8th edit-a-thon event (we currently [February 21] have 104 people signed up through FB)
At least 200 users sign in on the project wiki-page
At least 50 articles on women are created and/or improved
Less than 5 articles are speedy deleted, or nominated for deletion.
One academic article on Wikipedia is submitted and published in a top-ranking international journal
A guest edited issue of NTIK is published on the basis of the symposium
Event is covered extensively by Danish national press

Did you achieve your project goal? How do you know your goal was achieved? Please answer in 1 - 2 short paragraphs.: Yes, by and large the goals were achieved. We know this through tracking of press, participants, articles etc

==Press==

Kont@kt 20/1-2015, TV2 Lorry, 20. januar 2015.
AK 24syv 3. marts 2015, Radio24syv. Radio-interview med organisatorerne bag We can [edit] edit-a-thon med Nanna Bonde Thylstrup og Maia Kahlke Lorentzen.
Emil Eggert Scherrebeck, Den digitale virkelighed er skrevet af mænd, Information, 17. marts 2015. Rapportage og interview med Wikimedia Danmarks formand Ole Palnatoke Andersen i forbindelse med We can edit edit-a-thon.
Wikipediaterroristen 'Sincere', Radio24syv.
Presselogen, TV 2. Med Pierre Collignon
Wiki-værkstedet: Radio24syv begyndte igen den 31. januar 2015 igen og gjordt tilgængelig fra http://www.radio24syv.dk/programmer/wiki-vaerkstedet
Daniel Bergsagel (29. maj 2015). "Wikipedia er presset af mobiltelefoner og hvide, unge, engelsktalende mænd". version2.dk. Check date values in: |date= (help)

Progress towards targets and goals edit

Project metrics

Project metrics	Target outcome	Achieved outcome	Explanation
At least 50 women (both gender are invited) total attend and/or facilitate the March 8th + 9th Copenhagen event.	At least 66 people (both gender) attended Sunday and at least 60 people attended Monday	We used all channels to recruit editors and symposium attendees
At least 70 people sign in for attending the March 8th edit-a-thon event (we currently [February 21] have 104 people signed up through FB)	At least 335 people signed up through FB	We reach 1700 people through the Renegade Runners FB page and the University's communication channels were also employed to communicate to faculty and students
At least 200 users sign in on the project wiki-page	66 users signed in on the project wiki-page	A lot of people had not used Wikipedia before and did not use Wikipedia as a sign-up place
At least 50 articles on women are created and/or improved	63 articles on women and women-related issues were created and/or improved	People were awesome
Less than 5 articles are speedy deleted, or nominated for deletion	4 articles are currently contested	people wrote great articles and the trainers were great at quickly improving the ones that were not up to standard
One academic article on Wikipedia is submitted and published in a top-ranking international journal	Will be published in the special issue mentioned below.
A guest edited issue of NTIK is published February 2016 on the basis of the symposium	Confirmed
Event is covered extensively by Danish national press	Yes, it was covered by national press, radio and tv

Global Metrics edit

We are trying to understand the overall outcomes of the work being funded across our grantees. In addition to the measures of success for your specific program (in above section), please use the table below to let us know how your project contributed to the Global Metrics. We know that not all projects will have results for each type of metric, so feel free to put "0" where necessary.

Next to each required metric, list the actual outcome achieved through this project.
Where necessary, explain the context behind your outcome. For example, if you were funded for an edit-a-thon which resulted in 0 new images, your explanation might be "This project focused solely on participation and articles written/improved, the goal was not to collect images."

For more information and a sample, see Global Metrics.

Metric	Achieved outcome	Explanation
1. # of active editors involved	ca. 100
2. # of new editors	70
3. # of individuals involved	ca. 200
4. # of new images/media added to Wikimedia articles/pages	?
5. # of articles added or improved on Wikimedia projects	66
6. Absolute value of bytes added to or deleted from Wikimedia projects	?

Learning question: Did your work increase the motivation of contributors, and how do you know?

People seemed very enthusiastic and happy about the training they received

Impact edit

What impact did this project have on WMF's mission and the strategic priorities?

Option A: How did you increase participation in one or more Wikimedia projects?
Answer We increased participation by recruiting from a broad range of environments
Option B: How did you improve quality on one or more Wikimedia projects?
Answer We improved the quality by continuously monitoring the editors, offering assistance, providing links to open access knowledge sources and discussing what makes a good article on workshops Option C: How did you increase the reach (readership) of one or more Wikimedia projects?
Answer We have increased readership by giving Wikipedia national press coverage, a full day of scholarly debate and a full day of public edu-a-thon

Reporting and documentation of expenditures edit

This section describes the grant's use of funds

Documentation edit

Did you send documentation of all expenses paid with grant funds to grants at wikimedia dot org, according to the guidelines here? Answer "Yes" or "No".: Yes

Expenses edit

Please list all project expenses in a table here, with descriptions and dates. Review the instructions here.

Number	Category	Item description	Unit	Number of units	Actual cost per unit	Actual total	Budgeted total	Currency	Notes
1	Office supplies	paper, notebooks, tape etc	paper, note books, tape rolls etc			881.00	881.00	DKK
2	Playthings for the children	Soap Bubble	1 bottle	10.00	8	80.00	80.00	DKK
3	Playthings for the children	Playdough	1 jar	11.97	10	119.97	119.97	DKK
4	Food & Beverages	Snacks, lunch, coffee; both days	Per person	48.1	200	9620.00	9620.00	DKK
5	Advertising	Facebook ads	1	270.00	1	270.00	270.00	DKK
6	Childcare	Nannies	1	715.00	2	1430.00	1430.00	DKK
7	Office supplies	Printer	1	399.00	1	399.00	399.00	DKK
8	T-shirts	Printed T-shirts	1	75.00	30	2250.00	2250.00	DKK
9	Transport, air	1 flight ticket NYC/CPH	1	3971.50	1	3971.50	3971.50	DKK
10	Transport, rails	Train ticket	1	280.00	1	280.00	280.00	DKK
11	Transport, rails	Train ticket	1	24.00	1	24.00	24.00	DKK
12	Literature	Book of women's art history	1	394.00	1	394.00	394.00	DKK
13	Follow-up activities in May and June (confirmed at the National Gallery of Art)	Expenses to food, beverages, paper, marketing, babysitter etc	1	3600.00	1	3600.00	3600.00	DKK

Total project budget (from your approved grant submission): 2780 USD

Total amount requested from WMF (from your approved grant submission, this total will be the same as the total project budget if PEG is your only funding source): 2780 USD

Total amount spent on this project: 2812 USD

Total amount of Project and Event grant funds spent on this project: 2812 USD

Are there additional sources that funded any part of this project? List them here.

Kvindernes Bygningsfond
Velux Fonden
Ydun fonden
Græsrodsfonden

Remaining funds edit

Are there any grant funds remaining?: Answer YES or NO.; NO