Grants:Project/CEE Spring User Group/CEE Spring 2021/Final

Report under review
This Project Grant report has been submitted by the grantee, and is currently being reviewed by WMF staff. If you would like to add comments, responses, or questions about this grant report, you can create a discussion page at this redlink.

Welcome to this project's final report! This report shares the outcomes, impact and learnings from the grantee's project.

Part 1: The Project




In a few short sentences, give the main highlights of what happened with your project. Please include a few key outcomes or learnings from your project in bullet points, for readers who may not make it all the way through your report.

  • CEE Spring 2021 was conducted between March 21st and May 31st of 2021 - the main focus was on writing articles about the countries and regions of CEE, which took place in 32 languages, writing about 36 countries or regions.
    • Serbo-croatian took part for the first time
    • Võro also took part for the first time, indicating that this project might be a good starting point for very small languages to establish a baseline of articles
  • Like last year, we created a side challenge for articles about notable women in the CEE region, that helped create 549 articles in mostly CEE languages.
  • For the second time this year, we supported an experimental activity that started after the main contest on June 1st called #femWikiRAINBOW #checkInEditON, which aims to close gender and diversity gaps through skillsharing and the gathering of sources in order to be able to write articles that address these gaps, as well as experiment with methods of feminist-queer event organizing

Project Goals


Please copy and paste the project goals from your proposal page. Under each goal, write at least three sentences about how you met that goal over the course of the project. Alternatively, if your goals changed, you may describe the change, list your new goals and explain how you met them, instead.

Plan vs. Reality


These goals have been set based on expectations based on quantitative data analysis from the international organising team and last year's results and will be used as a measure of success. An important aspect in 2021 was the global pandemic, which probably helped a lot with the larger number of participants. We do not expect this to repeat in 2022 because circumstances will have hopefully improved by then.

Numbers based mainly on Wikimedia CEE Spring 2021/Statistics/Authors list

  • Total number of participants from CEE: 450 621 (38% over goal)
  • Total number of users from CEE that identify as female: 20% (90) 62 (28% under goal)
    • As a side note (as every year), it is still difficult to discern the female participants because it requires users to change the default setting
  • Total number of participants worldwide: 550 ~669 (many CEE Women users are also CEE users)
  • Total number of female participants worldwide: 20% (110) same result as above
  • 40% of all newly created and significantly edited biographies are about women
    • 3462 articles about women - which is most likely significantly more than 40% (since it makes up about 25% of all articles)
  • At least 20 new articles on topics of every CEE community participating
    • Achieved by adding international prizes for every editor who manages to write articles on all CEE communities (see Hall of Fame).
    • Achieved for all participating and non-participating communities - lowest number was for Voro with 72 articles with the language/culture as a topi, being a relatively small geographical area with a small population (Source)

Have the nice to have goals been achieved?


These goals have been set based on qualitative estimations by the international organising team.

  • 10% of the participants in all countries are new users
    • 22 new users, 3.5% of all users - unclear why this is the case, considering the big turnout again. Will have to be looked at for 2022.


  • Closing the content gender gap (correlates with the quantitative goal about biographies about women)
  • Adding more content on minority groups in the CEE region and expanding the list of topics in order to diversify the content created
  • Further development of the regional partnership Wikimedia Central and Eastern Europe
    • As mentioned above, adding Maltese was an interesting and enlightening move, since it is a very small language Wikipedia with some very active volunteers that made for an exciting exchange.





Unused metrics


See Grants:Evaluation/Program_resources/Writing_competitions#Metrics Metrics from the Program resources.

We would compute these global metrics but will not define goals for them

  • % increase in contribution rate per participating user as compared to user's contribution rate outside the competition timeframe
  • # of participants editing X months after the event:
  • # of participants who are active editors (5 edits/month) X months after an event:

Project Impact


Important: The Wikimedia Foundation is no longer collecting Global Metrics for Project Grants. We are currently updating our pages to remove legacy references, but please ignore any that you encounter until we finish.

The project impact can be viewed in the project goals section and on Wikimedia CEE Spring 2021/Statistics. Because of still extraordinary circumstances in many participating countries an increase in participants resulted in a large increase in articles, with a total of 13666 new articles and 542 expanded articles. Having a reliable setup with experienced local organisers definitely helped make this process as smooth as possible, despite the circumstances.

Methods and activities


Please provide a list of the main methods and activities through which you completed your project.

  • The setup is similar to last year - every participating language/country/region has a local organiser who makes sure that the tasks were completed on time.
  • The timeline for the project was defined to illustrate the different stages of the project. Every week of the contest was reserved for 2-4 participants to highlight their treasure trove of articles and focus on interesting aspects of their cultures.
  • Similar to last year, the statistics helped participants judge how well or how badly they were doing or which participating community wasn't doing that well in order to write more articles about the community in question.
  • In order to work towards specific goals we set for this year, we created a few side challenges mentioned above to help out with those metrics.
  • Expanding into more diverse areas as happened in femWikiRainbow also helps attract new organisers that want to participate, but who maybe want to focus on specific topics that aren't covered well in the classic project
    • This initative has lead to a planned collaboration with the Human Rights campaign that the WMF is running in Spring 2022.

Project resources


All resources on stats in detail, participants, results, and organisational information can be found at Wikimedia CEE Spring 2021.



The best thing about trying something new is that you learn from it. We want to follow in your footsteps and learn along with you, and we want to know that you took enough risks in your project to have learned something really interesting! Think about what recommendations you have for others who may follow in your footsteps, and use the below sections to describe what worked and what didn’t.

Acknowledging our differences


CEE region is all about the differences: in both our languages, writing systems, demographics, religious and historical background, as well in our local Wikip/media performance and community specifics. In the region we have both language versions with more than a million articles (Russian with 1.4 M and Polish with 1.2 M) and versions with less than 10 thousands articles, like Maltese, Crimean Tatar and Erzya Wikipedia. The differences in the size of the local encyclopedia and the internal dynamics of the respective wiki community determine to a great extent the differences in the localization and the stricter or looser implementation of the CEE Spring contest rules. Sharing knowledge across Wikipedias also helps motivate people in smaller communities.

Outside influences


The level of participation in each language is also massively influenced by external events, especially during a timeframe where most people in Europe were told to stay at home. This had an enormous effect on the output of the contest and is definitely not something we would expect again next year.

For example, Armenia did not contribute a lot in 2018 due to the 2018 Armenian revolution, but was back even stronger in 2019 than before. Turkey has the issue of Wikipedia being blocked, although the recent ruling by the Supreme Court of Turkey affected the 2020 version of CEE Spring positively. Some communities have expressed that the contest is too long, so, for example, Macedonian community run CEE Spring only for a month.

What does the international team need to do?


Similar to last year, we further reduced the outreach on Facebook. The local organisers are now fractured in how to reach them, be it Facebook, Telegram, on Meta, or via email. The timeline is still used so that communities can plan their week-by-week activities accordingly, but the reach of the posts written on Facebook has shrunk dramatically. It would probably need a social media staff person to figure out why, but not posting regularly seems to make those posts less noticeable on people's feed.

Instead the time and energy was focused more on additional campaigns and more direct coordination with local organisers, in an effort to strengthen the ties that make this project possible in the first place. This can also be seen as a precursor to the Wikimedia CEE Hub, which will hopefully take over some of the coordination effort in the future.

Next steps and opportunities


Are there opportunities for future growth of this project, or new areas you have uncovered in the course of this grant that could be fruitful for more exploration (either by yourself, or others)? What ideas or suggestions do you have for future projects based on the work you’ve completed? Please list these as short bullet points.

See you at Wikimedia CEE Spring 2022!

Part 2: The Grant




Actual spending

Prizes on local level
Local usergroup Amount in EUR in USD Transfer/Western Union charge/
conversion fees in EUR
in USD Total EUR in USD
Reimbursements Bulgarian Wikipedia Community 389.47 441,87 389.47 441,87
Wikimedia Russia 394.00 447,01 394.00 447,01
Wikimedians of Romania and Moldova User Group 400.00 453.82 400.00 453.82
Wikimedia Community User Group Malta 209.47 237.65 209.47 237.65
Wikimedia Community User Group Greece 388.40 440.66 388.40 440.66
Azerbaijani Wikimedians User Group 443.41 503,07 23.50 26,66 466.91 529.73
Wikimedia Community User Group Turkey 400.00 453.82 31.99 36.29 431.99 490.11
Wikimedians of Slovakia 160.00 181.53 160.00 181.53
Wikimedians of Latvia User Group 300.00 340.36 4.50 5.11 304.50 345.47
Wikimedians of Erzya language User Group 416.60 472.65 1.99 2.26 418.59 474.91
Esperanto and Free Knowledge 260.00 294.98 260.00 294.98
Prizes bought by Wikimedia Austria Wikimedia Community User Group Belarus
(3 different orders)
50.00 56.73 50.00 56.73
148.79 168.81 2.23 2.53 151.02 171.34
198.83 225.58 198.83 225.58
Wikimedians of Bashkortostan User Group 407.63 462.48 6.11 6.93 413.74 469.41
Wikipedians of Slovenia User Group
(4 different orders)
94.75 107.50 14.00 15.88 108.75 123.38
51.00 57.86 51.00 57.86
129.67 147.11 1.95 2.21 131.62 149.32
68.50 77.72 68.50 77.72
Wikimedia Community of Tatar language User Group 413.78 469.45 6.21 7.05 419.99 476.50
Serbo-Croatian 97.08 110.14 97.08 110.14
Prizes on international level
"CEE-Spring Hall of Fame" package postal rates 123.30 139.89
WMAT staff / overhead 500.00 567.27
Total expenditures 5,421.38 6,150.81 92.48 104.92 6,137.16 6,962.90
other II
"New activities for 2021 Wikimedia CEE Spring to expand on knowledge equity and diversity within the CEE region" (Zblace) final invoice and payment in May 2022 2,000.00 1,997.98 10.12 10.11 2,010.12 2,008.09
Total expenditures final 7,421.38 8,148,79 102.60 115.03 8,147.28 8,970.99


  • For the conversion between EUR and USD we used with the conversion rates of 2021-01-12. If the purchases were paid for in other currencies than Euro the respective dates of the original purchases apply.

Remaining funds

If you have unspent funds, they must be returned to WMF. Please see the instructions for returning unspent funds and indicate here if this is still in progress, or if this is already completed:
  • Wikimedia Austria received the first installment of EUR 4,850.00 (half of the full grant of EUR 9,700.00). EUR 6,137.16 have been spent, so we'd like to ask for EUR 1,287.16 from the second installment to be payed out to cover the expenditures. The remaining funds of EUR 3,562.84 are not required for the past edition of CEE Spring.



Did you send documentation of all expenses paid with grant funds to grantsadmin, according to the guidelines here?

Please answer yes or no. If no, include an explanation.

  • Yes

Confirmation of project status


Did you comply with the requirements specified by WMF in the grant agreement?

Please answer yes or no.

  • Yes

Is your project completed?

  • Yes

Please answer yes or no.

  • Yes

Grantee reflection


We’d love to hear any thoughts you have on what this project has meant to you, or how the experience of being a grantee has gone overall. Is there something that surprised you, or that you particularly enjoyed, or that you’ll do differently going forward as a result of the Project Grant experience? Please share it here!

We are slowly getting to the point where more affiliates in CEE are financing their own local contest via their own budgets, which will probably further lower the budget asked for in the coming years. Other than that, we will post here the same thing we wrote last year, in the hope that something might change for next year: It would be great to have a customised approach for recurring projects instead of having to copy and paste most of the text and changing only certain sections. The same should be the case for the application itself. We know this formula works, so why have us jump through all the hoops every year?.

We appreciate everything the grants team is doing - we know how challenging this year has been for everyone and wish everyone reading this all the best for the future!

Expense Approved amount Actual funds spent Difference