Grants talk:Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund/Rapid Fund/WikiProjects Facilitating the Phasing Out of Projects on ResearchGate (ID: 22260212)

Feedback from the ESEAP regional funds review team

Hello Fpa1981, thanks for submitting this Rapid Fund request. The ESEAP funds regional team has reviewed your application and we have the following comments and requests:

• We appreciate the project idea and your plan to preserve projects from the ResearchGate on Wikimedia projects. Thanks for putting together this detailed proposal.
• First, we wanted to confirm that the content which you plan to preserve from the ResearchGate is compatible with Wikimedia projects licenses and practices. (question 7)
• Thanks for describing how you actively contribute and collaborate with other Wikimedians and projects. However, in question 11, we would also like you to describe how you actually discussed this particular proposal with the Wikimedia communities on or off wiki. (question 11)
• Thanks also for providing your detailed budget. However, it seems that the compensation amounts mentioned in the detailed budget are a bit arbitrary. How did you calculate the compensation amount? For how much work? Could you please describe your roles a bit more? We need to make sure that this project does not include any paid editing work on Wikimedia projects. (question 8, detailed budget)
• Finally, because this project includes software development, it should be reviewed by our colleagues at the Technology department. Here are our criteria about funding software development projects.
  • Smaller-scale software development projects may be eligible for funding pending review from Community Resources and Technology department staff.
  • Project code must be publicly available and published under a free software license compatible with relevant Wikimedia projects. A documentation plan should be incorporated as a part of the proposed activities.
  • Proposals that depend on multiple or continuous Rapid Funds for long-term maintenance or development goals are generally ineligible.

Please add the following information to your proposal if it is not there (question 7):

• • Is the code to be public and under an OSI approved free software license?
  • Does the project have multiple maintainers / planners? Or is it a small experiment?
  • Is there documentation planned?

We have sent the application back to you to add your responses to the corresponding questions on the original application in Grantee Portal (Fluxx). You have received an automated email with instructions. Please complete this by October 11, 2023. In the meantime, we will send this proposal for review to the Technology department. We are sorry but the review process may be delayed. We will let you know once we have additional questions or feedback.

Thanks again for your contribution and time. Let us know if you need any support. --DSaroyan (WMF) (talk) 15:41, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Additional feedback

Hello Fpa1981, thanks for adding your responses. However, we think that your responses did not fully address some of our questions. Additionally, please see feedback and questions from our colleague at the Technology department.

1. We kindly ask you to avoid using external tools to paraphrase or generate the responses. We are sorry but the responses that you have added or changes that you have made in some sections seem complicated and machine generated, to the extent that they are hard to understand. For example:

An essential caveat graces our solemn covenant: the trinity of luminaries steering this celestial enterprise shall, in adherence to a sacred decree, abstain from the entanglements of paid editing on the hallowed tapestry of Wikipedia projects, thereby averting the spectre of potential redundancies.

or

To further cultivate ties with newfound collaborators, our aspiration is to not merely extend an olive branch but to embrace their projects into the welcoming embrace of Wikidata. This entails elucidating the fundamental tenets of Wikidata integration, thereby laying the foundation for a burgeoning partnership to take root and flourish.

or

This ambitious initiative endeavours to collectively inscribe a compendium of computer functions, orchestrating the alchemy of source code creation, modification, and rejuvenation. Fernando's spirit extends to the fastidious documentation of code upon the sacred scrolls of GitHub-wiki. His watchful eye not only oversees the august edifice of our project platform but also ardently contributes to the arcane art of data gathering. A maestro of collaboration, Fernando weaves an intricate tapestry by assimilating codes from kindred wiki-projects nested in Toolforge whenever the cosmic winds permit. Though a neophyte within the wiki-community, Fernando's devotion to the sanctified cause of Open Science radiates through the luminescent pages of his personal opus and the ventures nurtured under the aegis of WMF.

or

As a nascent stride in this cosmic dance, we are ardently propelling the "Invasive Species" wiki-project forward. This endeavour has borne fruit in the augmentation of numerous Wikidata items, a testament to our commitment to scholarly enrichment.

2. We wanted to confirm that the content which you plan to preserve from the ResearchGate is compatible with Wikimedia projects licenses and practices. (question 7)

We could not find a response to this question.

* Response: Over the years, ResearchGate (RG) has adapted its model to steer clear of copyrighted material. As a result, the information currently displayed is exclusively sourced from Open Access publications, aligning with Wikimedia project licenses and practices.

3. In question 11, we would also like you to describe how you actually discussed this particular proposal with the Wikimedia communities on or off wiki. (question 11)

Thanks for adding details on how you have discussed the proposal. We also recommend reaching out to the "Wikimedia Tool Sustainability" Telegram group and other relevant places where Wikimedia community members working on tools can discuss your tool.

* Response: Thank you for bringing this to our attention. We are now taking into account the new group "WTS," which was not known to me previously. There have also been discussions on this topic on Wikidata, as seen here: [1]. While the provided link addresses other features that could be beneficial to researchers in the medium or long term.

4. Thanks also for providing your detailed budget. However, it seems that the compensation amounts mentioned in the detailed budget are a bit arbitrary. How did you calculate the compensation amount? For how much work? Could you please describe your roles a bit more? We need to make sure that this project does not include any paid editing work on Wikimedia projects. (question 8, detailed budget)

It is still unclear how you calculated the compensation amount. I understood that you took the maximum available amount for the Rapid Fund and shared it with the team members 20%, 20%, and 60%. While the logic is clear, it does not explain why you plan to compensate 1000 USD, 1000 USD and 3000 USD for the work done. If the Rapid Fund maximum available amount was, for example, 20,000 USD, would you instead share this amount with the team members?

* Response: I am seeking a total amount of 5000 USD, and my distribution plan is as follows: 20% for Daniel Mietchen, 20% for Lane Rasberry, and 60% for Fernando Andutta. This allocation is based on our collaborative efforts on various ideas over the past few years.

It seems that the role descriptions were just paraphrased through an external tool and it is now even more hard to understand, as mentioned above.

5. Is the code to be public and under an OSI approved free software license?

Is still unclear. There is no software source code published as the code page is empty and linked from another page. Maybe you need to update the actual location?

* Response: Thanks for pointing some needed updates. All our codes are open source, but it might be necessary to clearly specify the Creative Commons (CC) license within the documentation. This includes providing explicit indications for all external codes used in this project as well (e.g. citation-js, grobid and a few other OS codes).

6. enkore.toolforge.org is currently violating the Privacy Policy by loading third-party resources, please see this ticket for more details (T348445).

* Response: In the coming days, we'll be making adjustments to the code to prevent the display of any third-party resources. Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention through this ticket.

7. The main challenges mentioned in your original application is:

Our main challenge lies in two significant aspects: firstly, enhancing the appeal of wiki-projects to the broader scientific community, and secondly, in future phases, streamlining the user experience by providing simplified guides for incorporating scientific information into Wikidata. Notably, even Wikipedia has faced and continues to face scepticism regarding its quality, often stemming from its high degree of openness and transparency, allowing contributions from anyone.

From our understanding, you will use code behind enkore.toolforge.org to improve 7000 Wikidata items. Other activities mentioned are: presenting the project outcomes and establishing new partnerships. However, the activities do not show how you will address the challenges described:

• enhancing the appeal of wiki-projects to the broader scientific community
• streamlining the user experience by providing simplified guides for incorporating scientific information into Wikidata

Could you please describe what concrete activities you will implement to address the challenges described? Are there any other activities that are not described in the proposal?

* Response: We aim to enhance our publication database by compiling a comprehensive list of Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) from our publications. This curated list will specifically include articles that adhere to Wikimedia projects licenses and practices. Subsequently, leveraging this DOI list, we intend to execute code scripts to selectively download PDF files from various endpoints, such as https://openaccessbutton.org.

Once we have obtained these PDF files, our next step involves running specialised code to extract complete metadata. This step is crucial as it can fill any gaps present in Wikidata, contributing to a more thorough representation of the publications. Furthermore, we plan to utilise Natural Language Processing (NLP) tools for summarisation.

This initiative will significantly enrich Wikidata entities related to publications. The additional metadata and summarised content will enable more advanced exploration, going beyond the examination of just titles and abstracts. This broader approach opens up possibilities for uncovering text similarities at a higher level of detail.

Regarding the appeal of the wiki-environment, the structure provided by WMF is well-organized. We are currently navigating it through links like:

https://github.com/InvasionBiologyHypotheses/enKORE-corpus-processor/wiki

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Invasion_biology

https://enkore.toolforge.org/

However, there is a need for additional simplified information to empower other researchers interested in specific research topics of their own taste. This information would guide them in creating their own environment using our established "recipe." By providing such guidance, we aim to motivate researchers to contribute more content to Wikidata that aligns with their scientific interests. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fpa1981 (talk)

We are sorry if some of these questions seem redundant but after your last update of the proposal, it is even more difficult to capture the information.

Please add your responses on this discussion page. We will make the final decision based on the provided responses. DSaroyan (WMF) (talk) 10:52, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Not funded

Hello @Fpa1981, thanks again for submitting this Rapid Fund request and for your engagement in the review process. After reviewing your proposal and responses, we decided to not fund this grant request. We highly appreciate your contributions to the Wikimedia movement but we think that the project proposal and implementation plan are generally not clear. We have concerns that we were not able to address during the review process.

Thanks again for your work for the movement and apologies for any frustration caused. Best regard, DSaroyan (WMF) (talk) 07:02, 19 October 2023 (UTC)