Grants:PEG/Wikimedia Community Ireland/WLM Ireland 2015/Report
- Report accepted
- To read the approved grant submission describing the plan for this project, please visit Grants:PEG/Wikimedia Community Ireland/WLM Ireland 2015.
- 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
- We held a launch event for the contest in conjunction with an archaeology event in Dublin on 29 August. We had 4 group members at the event to answer questions and promote the event. We also had the 2014 winners on display at the event. We estimate we interacted with over 500 visitors during the course of the event.
- One photowalk was held in Dublin, hosted by 2 of the judges. Three group members also attended the walk. At the conclusion of the walk, we held an upload event to assist participants in uploading their images.
- We held an awards ceremony on 9 November at the Stags Head Pub in Dublin. Eight of the ten winner photographers were present.
An overview of our media coverage can be found here: http://www.wikilovesmonuments.ie/in-the-news-2/
Lessons learned edit
- What worked well?
- The launch event was extremely successful. We estimate that we interacted with close to 500 visitors during the event, handing out flyers, explaining the event and promoting Wikimedia Community Ireland. In the three days following the launch we had 495 images uploaded. We were also much more successful with making the judging process simple for our judges. We pre-sorted the images to reduce the number of images the judges had to contend with. We used Google photos for the judging process, which worked very well.
- What didn't work?
- Organising the photowalks was the least successful part of the contest. In 2014 we had 5 photowalks organised by members of the working group and the general public. In 2015 we only managed to organise one photowalk. We also struggled to recruit volunteers again this year. We need have a few more than 2014, but not nearly enough to make the contest run smoothly.
- What would you do differently if you planned a similar project?
- For 2016 we would like to make the following improvements:
- Recruit more volunteers
- Increase the amount of promotion through legacy channels (print, radio, television)
- Promote more events outside of Dublin
Learning patterns edit
Outcomes and impact edit
Outcomes edit
- Provide the original project goal here.
- Primary Goal: Increase the availability of images of Irish monuments on Wikimedia Commons.
- Secondary Goal: Outreach to existing Wikimedians in Ireland and the recruitment of new Wikimedians.
- Did you achieve your project goal? How do you know your goal was achieved? Please answer in 1 - 2 short paragraphs.
- Primary Goal: We did reach our primary goal of increasing the availability of images of Irish monuments. During the contest period 1659 images of Irish monuments were uploaded to Wikimedia Commons.
- Secondary Goal: We were slightly less successful with our secondary goal of outreach and recruitment. Though we did recruit several new volunteers, we could have done with a lot more. We had an increase of participants on 2014, but 80% were new users, so we did not do a good enough job reaching out to existing Wikimedians in Ireland.
Progress towards targets and goals edit
Project metrics
| Project metrics | Target outcome | Achieved outcome | Explanation |
| Increase participation by 10% to 285. | We had 293 participants. | We increased participation by 15%. | |
| Increase image uploads by 20% to 2400. | We had 1659 images uploaded. | This is a decrease of 17% on 2014 numbers. We attribute this to a decrease in multiple images of a single monument uploaded by a single user and a reduced reservoir of images. | |
| Hold at least 5 photowalks and 3 additional live events during the contest period. | We held 1 photowalk and 3 additional live events. | We had reduced participation from the general public in regards to photowalks than in 2014, which is why we only had 1 walk. We did have three live events: the launch, an upload event, and an awards ceremony. | |
| Reach out to at least 5 photography clubs/open content groups to increase awareness of the contest and Wikimedia. | We reached out to 56 photo clubs via email/social media and presented at 2 open knowledge events | Though we did reach out to 56 clubs, we only heard back from 2 of them. This is something we want to improve for 2016. We presented talks on WLM at 3 open knowledge events. |
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 | 85 | |
| 2. # of new editors | 236 | 80% of our participants were newly registered users |
| 3. # of individuals involved | 293 | |
| 4a. # of new images/media added to Wikimedia articles/pages | 96 | |
| 4b. # of new images/media uploaded to Wikimedia Commons (Optional) | 1659 | |
| 5. # of articles added or improved on Wikimedia projects | 0 | |
| 6. Absolute value of bytes added to or deleted from Wikimedia projects | 7752 |
- Learning question
- Did your work increase the motivation of contributors, and how do you know?
- We feel that our outreach, specifically on Social Media, did motivate users. During the contest period we posted uploaded pictures to Twitter to encourage our followers to upload more images. We know this worked because many people mentioned it at our awards ceremony.
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?
- With 236 new participants we increased usage of Commons. Several of our winning photographers are members of photography clubs which should continue the increase of participation on Commons.
Option B: How did you improve quality on one or more Wikimedia projects?
- The quality of images in the 2015 contest far surpassed the 2014 contest. This improves the overall quality of Irish monument images on Commons.
Option C: How did you increase the reach (readership) of one or more Wikimedia projects?
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 | Promotional Items | 1 | 300 | 1.47 | 441.00 | 367.50 | EUR | €73.50 over budget-the minimum order number for these items was 50 higher than originally budgeted for, which caused us to go over budget. The extra cost was taken out of the contingency fund. |
| 2 | Office Supplies | Winning Images Posters | 1 | 10 | 22 | 220 | 200 | EUR | €20 over budget-I miscalculated the VAT |
| 3 | Office Supplies | Postage | 14 | 50 | EUR | €36 under budget-all but 2 of the winners were able to attend the awards ceremony to collect their prizes | |||
| 4 | Office Supplies | Easels | 1 | 10 | 15 | 150 | 150 | EUR | On budget |
| 5 | Awards | Cash Prizes | 525 | 550 | EUR | €25 under budget-one winner asked that his prize of €25 be donated back to the foundation | |||
| 6 | Awards | WCI bag and notebook | 1 | 10 | 28.03 | 280.32 | 285 | EUR | €4.68 under budget |
| 7 | Catering | Venue costs | your actual cost per unit here | 340.50 | 345 | EUR | €4.50 under budget | ||
| 8 | Catering | Refreshments | 230 | 250 | EUR | €20 under budget | |||
| 9 | Technology | Bi-Lingual Wordpress Tool | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 15 | EUR | €15 under budget-we did not need to renew this year |
| 10 | Organisation | Staff shirts | 1 | 7 | 15.42 | 108 | 155.05 | EUR | €47.50 under budget-we placed several orders with this company so received a discount on our shirts |
PLACEHOLDER TEXT. SEE INSTRUCTIONS AT Grants:Index/Create financial report.
- Total project budget (from your approved grant submission)
Project budget table edit
| # | Category | Item | No. of units | Unit cost | Total cost | Currency | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Office Supplies | Promotional Items | 250 | 1.47 | 367.50 | EUR | Pens and Magnets with User Group name on them to give out at events. The remaining will be used by the group at future events. |
| 2 | Office Supplies | Winning Images Posters | 10 | 20 | 200 | EUR | Top 10 images printed for display. |
| 3 | Office Supplies | Postage | 1 | 50 | 50 | EUR | To post prizes to winners that cannot attend the awards ceremony. |
| 4 | Office Supplies | Easels | 10 | 15 | 150 | EUR | A member of the team will create easels for use at the launch, awards, and exhibition. |
| 5 | Awards | Cash Prizes | 10 | 550 | EUR | 1st place €200, 2nd place €100, 3rd place €75, 4th-10th places €25, best non-listed monument €25. | |
| 6 | Awards | WCI Bag/Notebook | 10 | 28.50 | 285 | EUR | Canvas bag with our logo on it and a moleskin notebook will be presented to the top 10 winners. |
| 7 | Catering | Venue Costs | 1 | 345 | 345 | EUR | Tent rental for launch. |
| 8 | Catering | Refreshments | 1 | 250 | 250 | EUR | Refreshments/glass rental for launch and awards. |
| 9 | Technology | Bi-Lingual Wordpress Tool | 1 | 15 | 15 | EUR | Renewal of Bi-lingual tool for WLM website |
| 10 | Organisation | Staff Shirts | 7 | 22.15 | 155.05 | EUR | Shirts printed with logo for Community staff. These shirts will be used for future events. |
| 11 | Miscellaneous | Contingency | 236 | EUR | 10% of total | ||
| Total | $2,603.55 | EUR | |||||
- 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)
- 2603.55 EUR
- Total amount spent on this project
- 3308.82 EUR
- Total amount of Project and Event grant funds spent on this project
- 2308.82 EUR
- Are there additional sources that funded any part of this project? List them here.
- Grant from Department of Arts, Heritage, and the Gaeltacht to hire a PR firm to promote media coverage during the first two weeks of the contest. Amount granted: 1000 EUR.
Remaining funds edit
Remaining funds have been used or will be used for other approved mission-aligned activities. This use has been requested in writing and approved by WMF.
- Are there any grant funds remaining?
- Answer YES or NO.
- YES
- Please list the total amount (specify currency) remaining here. (This is the amount you did not use, or the amount you still have after completing your grant.)
- 294.73 EUR
- If funds are remaining they must be returned to WMF, reallocated to mission-aligned activities, or applied to another approved grant.
- Please state here if you intend to return unused funds to WMF, submit a request for reallocation, or submit a new grant request, and then follow the instructions on your approved grant submission.
- We would like to request reallocation of the 294.73 EUR. A note has been placed on the discussion page.