Open main menu

Grants talk:IdeaLab/Gender, Laws and Wikipedia

Hi @Chinmayisk:, thanks for posting this Idea! I think it's got potential and I wanted to check in and see if you are interested in developing it further (and if funding is needed, in turning this into a grant proposal -- the Inspire campaign is offering $250,000 in grants funding to gendergap-related projects). The deadline for grant proposals is today, March 31, if you want to add more detail, rally people to help out, etc. If you'll need a couple more days, please do let me know. Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 20:58, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Dear @ Alex Wang (WMF) , I am definitely interested in taking this forward. I am presently applying for the grants as well . But a few more days to garner more support would be useful --Chinmayisk (talk) 22:39, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Eligibility confirmed, Inspire CampaignEdit

This Inspire Grant proposal is under review!

We've confirmed your proposal is eligible for the Inspire Campaign review. Please feel free to ask questions and make changes to this proposal as discussions continue during this community comments period.

The committee's formal review begins on ’’6 April 2015’’, and grants will be announced at the end of April. See the schedule for more details.

Questions? Contact us at grants(at)wikimedia.org.’’

feedback and comments from ThepwncoEdit

@Chinmayisk: hello and congratulations on having your grant proposal confirmed as eligible for review! I have a few questions for you - and generally would like to see more details about the activities proposed here before the formal review period begins (I am part of the funding committee).

  1. there's quite a lot of content about copyright available on Wikipedia...could you provide a link to the copyright documentation you refer to throughout the proposal so I have a better idea of the framework you're envisioning for legal information on gendered issues?
  2. I like the idea of including a way for users of the mobile app to "flag abuse in the real world" and would love to hear more about this. Specifically, how do you see this mechanism working? What happens after someone has flagged abuse? Is the assumption that the Wikimedia Foundation or others should then respond somehow to the report of abuse?
  3. How much content needs to be developed in order for the tool to be a comprehensive source of information? I note that community organizing efforts around content creation are not outlined in your plan of activities. Are there other ways you plan to increase the number of articles related to legal knowledge containing gendered issues?

cheers. -Thepwnco (talk) 21:30, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Dear @Thepwnco:, Thank you for the confirmation. I will definitely add more details on the activities proposed and here are my answers to your questions 1. There's quite a lot of content about copyright available on Wikipedia...could you provide a link to the copyright documentation you refer to throughout the proposal so I have a better idea of the framework you're envisioning for legal information on gendered issues?

Yes absolutely there is a lot of content about copyright . I was refering to http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikilegal .
But I think @Willowbl00: has a few more ideas so I would invite her to explain this better.
@Thepwnco: @Chinmayisk:, nope, that's exactly right!

2. I like the idea of including a way for users of the mobile app to "flag abuse in the real world" and would love to hear more about this. Specifically, how do you see this mechanism working? What happens after someone has flagged abuse? Is the assumption that the Wikimedia Foundation or others should then respond somehow to the report of abuse?

The abuse flagged could be offline or online. We would like to work with local organisations to tackle offline abuse first and may be use this data to create awareness or influence policy changes. But, the intent at a latter point is the Wikimedia Foundation to handle abuse that happens online especially that which happens in wikimedia space.
@Thepwnco: @Chinmayisk:, many folk aren't aware of the (il)legalities of sexual assault in their area. Having a repository to check against would 1) help people decide which action to take in their situation -- to file charges, to push for reform, or something else; 2) shed light to a wider audience about lack of support for women (and the very real, but fewer, men) dealing with these issues. Wikimedia being involved with these conversations would potentially surface patterns of interaction around abuse, to better inform detection and response in the online space as well.

3. How much content needs to be developed in order for the tool to be a comprehensive source of information? I note that community organizing efforts around content creation are not outlined in your plan of activities. Are there other ways you plan to increase the number of articles related to legal knowledge containing gendered issues?

My idea is to iteratively increase content. The content on wikipedia by far good enough to start with.
I'd say the framing on Wikipedia is by far good enough to start with, and that the interest in this as a challenge is sufficient to populate on that framing. Willowbl00 (talk) 19:10, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
(con't) During phase 2 and 3 the plan is to have activities which will iteratively increase this content across various regions and also form a comprehensive source of information. This we will be doing by creating a general framework and guideline of laws and articles that need to be created. Then, conducting events across various regions along with local communities to work on this list. So in essence the application when created by might not be comprehensive but through the entire process it would make it a concrete solution.
I would say the effort to thoroughly document relevant laws in one region, followed by an event in the same region to clarify, edit, re-word into accessible language; as well as checking self-reporting against those laws would be sufficient to demonstrate the theory. Follow-on events would not only see which parts of the framing itself works, but also what of the events is easily replicated, so as to be scalable beyond the resources requested and the time of the instigators.

I hope I have answered the questions satisfactorily. I see that the proposal needs more details from your questions I will edit to reflect the process better. But feel free to ask more questions . I am personally very excited to see the interest. Thank you --Chinmayisk (talk) 22:52, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for taking time! Willowbl00 (talk) 19:10, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Comments from SuperzerocoolEdit

Hi @Chinmayisk:, thanks for your idea. I have some questions and comments about your idea:

  1. How far do you want reach about legislation in the countries? Will you investigate other continents or just the principal countries (USA; some countries in Europe, etc)?
  2. Which are the languages target?
  3. How the project could impact in the "editorial number"? (I refer to Measure of success section)
  4. If you want develop an application, please consider that must be public available and with open source licenses (as I remember, it is a requirement in Wikimedia Labs)
  5. If you divide the project time in frames, you should consider the creation of a document or an activity to close the frame. It is like a revision of the tasks developed in the frame.

I like the idea, but I have little problems related to the WMF goals and how this mobile application is breaking the gender gap. Regards Superzerocool (talk) 17:30, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello @Superzerocool: , I understand you concerns and here my answers for each of your questions

1. How far do you want reach about legislation in the countries? Will you investigate other continents or just the principal countries (USA; some countries in Europe, etc)?

We will investigate other continents. Infact we would like to begin our work with Asia and then move to USA , Europe and other continents and countries

2. Which are the languages target?

We will for the purpose of this project start with english but will try and incorporate internationalisation and encourage translation to other languages.


3. How the project could impact in the "editorial number"? (I refer to Measure of success section)

So in the Phase 2 and 3 we plan to conduct event through out the world . Atleast 15-20 events and each of these events will bring in fresh set of editors we typically would aim at getting a group of 30 people for each of these events . This is the direct impact on editorial numbers. Indirectly this will encourage more editors to come to wikipedia when a project like this demonstrates the support for equality.

4. If you want develop an application, please consider that must be public available and with open source licenses (as I remember, it is a requirement in Wikimedia Labs)
Yes offcourse , we would release the work under open source licenses and will also open code for collaboration even during the development cycle.
5. If you divide the project time in frames, you should consider the creation of a document or an activity to close the frame. It is like a revision of the tasks developed in the frame
Thanks for this input will definitely work on this and add more details

Please let me know if you have any other concerns to be addressed. Thank you for all the lovely inputs --Chinmayisk (talk) 22:07, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

NotificationsEdit

Hello @Chinmayisk:. Just doing my rounds reminding applicants about the community notification part of the process. This is to let Wikimedians know about the idea. If you need help with figuring out where or how, let me know and I can help. PEarley (WMF) (talk) 17:30, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello @PEarley (WMF): , It will be great if you can help figure out who would be suitable to reach out to based on my application. --Chinmayisk (talk) 18:32, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RaviEdit

Chinmayi, I have endorsed the grant request and wish you good luck. Here are some things to consider:

  • Please quantify at least some of your success measures. This helps to track your progress based on your own assessment.
  • Please include media coverage as a success measure. Media coverage can be both a strategy and result in this initiative.
  • While you design the app, please structure it in such a way that is easily reusable for another purpose with minimal efforts. For example, If I can use this app to engage child rights, human rights and heritage lovers group with minimal tweaking, the app itself will be a great deliverable.
  • When you do outreach, please filter groups with more potential and follow up with them at least twice again with more focus and refined agenda. Globally, it has been observed that one time outreaches are not so effective. So, your initial outreaches should be designed in such a way to identify potential groups and engage them again. If you have planned to do 30 outreaches in total, you can do 20, identify 5 groups and again do two more outreaches with them. This has a better chance for editor retention and activity that will contribute to your success measures.--Ravi (talk) 16:30, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Dear @Ravidreams: , Thank you for all your valuable suggestions . I think they all make a lot of sense will definitely amend my proposal to reflect the same. --Chinmayisk (talk) 18:36, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Comments by RohiniEdit

Chinmayi,

Many thanks and congrats for this excellent proposal.

Here are a few thoughts I have about it:

-- A word of caution: The purpose of the app should not come across as advocacy towards any group. This would potentially subvert and violate several Wikipedia policies including WP:RightingGreatWrongs, WP:Advocacy, and WP:ConflictOfInterest. This is essentially important when editing or referring to articles pertaining to laws, legal issues, and socio-legal issues. The Five Pillars should be upheld at all times. If we have happen to find data that suggests we need to modify some of these policies to address certain concerns better, it would be fantastic.

-- Would the app support languages other than English? There are approximately two dozen Indic language Wikipedias and corresponding sister projects. Also, many of these communities are small in terms of the number of active editors. There are several editors in India who only contribute to Indian language Wikipedias, and they could make a huge difference to the statistics gathered.

I have a few queries:

-- How would you define "abuse"? What kinds of abuse would be covered? While the proposal is technical in nature (to design an app), this is a topic sensitive enough to warrant having a policy drawn up by community consensus before an effective technical implementation is possible.

-- Would it be a cross-platform app? What security measures would you have in place?

-- I hope you consider the needs of users who may not have advanced mobile devices or be on slow or shaky Internet connections. It makes all the difference to access!

-- Rohini (talk) 15:04, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Aggregated feedback from the committee for Gender, Laws, and WikipediaEdit

Scoring rubric Score
(A) Impact potential
  • Does it have the potential to increase gender diversity in Wikimedia projects, either in terms of content, contributors, or both?
  • Does it have the potential for online impact?
  • Can it be sustained, scaled, or adapted elsewhere after the grant ends?
3.9
(B) Community engagement
  • Does it have a specific target community and plan to engage it often?
  • Does it have community support?
4.0
(C) Ability to execute
  • Can the scope be accomplished in the proposed timeframe?
  • Is the budget realistic/efficient ?
  • Do the participants have the necessary skills/experience?
3.5
(D) Measures of success
  • Are there both quantitative and qualitative measures of success?
  • Are they realistic?
  • Can they be measured?
3.6
Additional comments from the Committee:
  • The proposal appears to focus more on leveraging existing Wikimedia resources to effect (admittedly important and worthwhile) societal change rather than on improving the Wikimedia projects themselves. While there will likely be some level of increased participation as a result of the publicity associated with the proposed project, this increase would be largely incidental to the success of the project itself.
  • Unclear how the development of a separate mobile app with very different aims will impact the Wikimedia movement.
  • While I like this idea, I don't see it as a fit with Wikipedia or WMF. I'd encourage the participants to consider projects like Hollaback.
  • There appears to be limited engagement with the Wikimedia community.
  • Lack of specific target; few endorsements; no community notifications
  • There would need to be extensive community engagement for this tool/application to be useful in the Wikimedia movement.
  • The proposed budget appears low if the plan is to engage 4 staff members for 4-5 months each, even on a part-time basis.
  • With regards to providing a mechanism for users to report abuse, it seems to me that important partners (WMF? law enforcement? sexual assault support centres?) have not been engaged in discussions.
  • There needs to be clear measures of success that are linked to impact for Wikimedia movement. Adding 20 new editors is not nearly enough impact to fund the project. The content creation measure is too vague and too unfocused (I think the proposal plans to work in 4 languages which seems too broad for a pilot.) The main area of the project is creating an application but there are not measures of success directly related to the use of application.
  • Like the idea of feeding Wikipedia content into mobile apps but don't think the proposal provides enough details to warrant funding.
  • Instead of funding this proposal, I would encourage them to work with the other people who have created proposals around the topic of creating a safer and friendly editing community.

Inspire funding decisionEdit

This project has not been selected for an Inspire Grant at this time.

We love that you took the chance to creatively improve the Wikimedia movement. The committee has reviewed this proposal and not recommended it for funding, but we hope you'll continue to engage in the program. Please drop by the IdeaLab to share and refine future ideas!


Next steps:

  1. Review the feedback provided on your proposal and to ask for any clarifications you need using this talk page.
  2. Visit the IdeaLab to continue developing this idea and share any new ideas you may have.
  3. To reapply with this project in the future, please make updates based on the feedback provided in this round before resubmitting it for review in a new round.
  4. Check the Individual Engagement Grant schedule for the next open call to submit proposals or the Project and Event Grant pages if your idea is to support expenses for offline events - we look forward to helping you apply for a grant in the future.

Questions? Contact us at grants wikimedia.org


Return to "IdeaLab/Gender, Laws and Wikipedia" page.