Grants:Project/Rapid/UG LV/Wiki Loves Monuments Latvia 2018/Report
Did you meet your goals? Are you happy with how the project went?
We manged to successfully run Wiki Loves Monuments 2018 photo competition. However we did not meet participation goals set in grant proposal.
Please report on your original project targets.
|Target outcome||Achieved outcome||Explanation|
|2000 photos uploaded to Wikimedia Commons||2499|
|50 participants uploading a photo||41|
|25 newly registered participants||16|
|10% distinct photos used in Wikipedia articles||10.52%||As reported by GLAMorous tool|
|mentions in 5 different noteworthy web sites||0||No notable media sites published our press release.|
Projects do not always go according to plan. Sharing what you learned can help you and others plan similar projects in the future. Help the movement learn from your experience by answering the following questions:
- What worked well?
- In addition to using lists of monuments, we had developed interactive map based on Wikidata. That was new for this year.
- Just before the contest we decided to implement restriction of maximum 3 images per author in TOP10. Without this rule we would have images only from two authors there.
- Our social media (Facebook/Twitter/Instagram) posts performed well and allowed to grow our follower count. There was more interaction than in previous editions.
- Instagram account was created just before the contest and performed well.
- It took very little effort to arrange venue for awards ceremony and it was an excellent location (National History museum) due to previous experience.
- We took the effort to compensate travel expenses for winner from different part of country.
- We found that current prize amount is enough to draw attentions of advanced enthusiast photographers but not professionals. We feel that this is out target audience.
- There was a successful photo-expedition during the contest, covering less photographed area.
- What did not work so well?
- Pre-contest press release was not published and no mentions on noteworthy news outlets. This area in our events needs urgent improvement.
- Awards ceremony was not attended by local community except by one jury member.
- There was low interest in participating in organized photo-expedition from the community.
- We did not reach our participation goals.
- What would you do differently next time?
- We would need to create some kind of media strategy for the contest and have some press releases ready in advance, not during the first days of contest when there are other tasks to attend to.
- There should be a plan/guidelines for social media posts, too.
- Add filter for type of monuments for our interactive map. Some competitors complained about too many ancient burial grounds and hillforts which are hard to photograph/uninteresting.
- Try different tactics for recruiting new participants in social media.
Grant funds spent edit
Please describe how much grant money you spent for approved expenses, and tell us what you spent it on.
Funds were spent mostly for prizes of competition and organizing awards ceremony.
All costs are displayed in EUR. Sums in USD were calculated using exchange rate the January 4th, 2019.
|Awards for participants||600||600||Gift cards|
|Gifts for jury members||80||75||Gift cards|
|Venue for awards ceremony & snacks||60||31.37||Venue, snacks|
|Photo expedition||50||29.68||Fuel and museum tickets|
|Traveling or shipping expenses for people who are not living in the capital||50||12.80||One winner was compensated travel|
|Miscellaneous||50||6.24||Bank fees and transfers|
Remaining funds edit
Do you have any remaining grant funds?
134.91 EUR (153.44 USD) remaining
Anything else edit
Anything else you want to share about your project?