Grants talk:Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund/Rapid Fund/WIKIMEDIA AWARENESS/EDIT-A-THON IN NILE UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA (ID: 21904732)

Endorsment from Mijesty (talk)

Mijesty (talk) 08:36, 18 July 2022 (UTC) this project will introduce new editors to Wikipedia as there are very few in the Nile University , it will also enlighten people more about Wikipedia and the advantages of using Wikipedia as a reliable source of information. --Mijesty (talk) 08:36, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Endorsement from Omorodion1 (talk) 08:27, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

This project present an opportunity to correct some of the misconception about use of Wikipedia in the academic community. I therefore endorse it. Omorodion1 (talk) 08:27, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Endorsment from Bukky658 (talk)

1. The proposal is essential to the Nile academic community because it will educate both faculty and students about the importance of promoting free knowledge and using Wikipedia as an open education resource to promote media and information literacy skills.
2. The proposal is well-crafted, with clearly stated goals, implementation strategies, and a high level of community involvement to address knowledge gaps and change academia's perception of Wikipedia as an online encyclopaedia. I believe that this project has the potential to address knowledge inequity by creating new articles and improving existing ones on culture, religion, ethnicity, and other topics of academic interest. Furthermore, the collaboration with Nile University, which has six faculties and offers 34 undergraduate and 47 postgraduate programmes, will boost student participation in Wikimedia projects and attract new editors to the free movement.
3. This proposal is based on research which found that most faculty members in Nigerian tertiary institutions do not consider Wikipedia to be a reliable source for research or when vetting students' assignments. It was also discovered that students at Nile University lack proper knowledge of assessing or editing Wikipedia articles. As a result, this project has the potential to significantly boost their digital literacy skills, research skills, critical thinking skills, and assist them in acquiring new knowledge outside of their regular academic activities.
4. This project proposal will educate and train the academic community at Nile University of Nigeria on how to use Wikipedia articles for research purposes, as well as how to provide reliable citations to Wikipedia articles. The project will also assist students and faculty in using Wikipedia (and other Wikimedia products) to effectively search, access, retrieve, interpret, and monitor the information consumed.
5. This project will help improve contents on Wikipedia, Wikicommons, and this project aligns with the recommendations of Wikimedia 2030 Movement strategy which include:

• Increase the sustainability of the Movement invest in skills
• Improve user experience
• Identify Topics for Impact
• Innovate in Free Knowledge
• Coordinate Across Stakeholders

1. The project proposal is carefully drafted and coherent in terms of the objectives, strategies, budget and expected results (metrics).

--Bukky658 (talk) 14:30, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Review of Wikidata experience

As this project mentions Wikidata, I have performed an evaluation of team members' experience and record on that project.

• Neutral Olabisi11: They have a modest editing history at Wikidata. Several of their item creations have been deleted, and many of the remainder do not exhibit notability. In particular, they seem to be focussed on representing only local librarians. They have not yet learnt how to compose Wikidata descriptions. While they show promise, they do not have a solid record that would recommend them as a Wikidata trainer.
• Neutral Mijesty: They have a substantial editing history at Wikidata, but this includes many non-notable item creations, now deleted. Their other edits include many small errors, and they do not respond to feedback.
•  Endorsed Tochiprecious: They have a modest ediitng history at Wikidata, but what they have seems to be solid. They could improve on their item descriptions. They are responsive to communication.
•  Endorsed Oby Ezeilo: They have substantial Wikidata experience. They do have some history of creating or working on items subsequently deleted as non-notable. They appear to be responsive to feedback.

Bovlb (talk) 00:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Concerns

The whole premise of promoting Wikipedia as a valid source for research work is flawed, and it is in conflict with our own approach to sources (see, for example, en:Wikipedia:Reliable sources). University professors would better continue not accepting Wikipedia as a reliable source for any serious research. MarioGom (talk) 00:08, 18 January 2024 (UTC)