Grants talk:Project/Rapid/Wikimedia UG Nigeria/Wiki Loves Women Radio Program/Report

Report submission

Hello, @Olaniyan Olushola: Please note that the submission date for this final report and expense documentation were due on 30 November 2018. Could you kindly complete the Finances section and submit the expenses to rapidgrantswikimedia.org so that we can begin reviewing?

Thank you, Morgan Jue (WMF) (talk) 17:38, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Incomplete sections

Hi, Olaniyan Olushola, thank you for submitting this report! Before we can begin reviewing it, could you please complete the "Goals" and "Remaining Funds" sections? Please let us know if you have questions! Best regards, LSmith (WMF) (talk) 21:31, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi LSmith (WMF) thank you for your observation. I have added the Goal achieved of the project to the grant page. Olaniyan Olushola (talk) 22:03, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Olaniyan Olushola! We will review the report as soon as we receive the expense documentation next week. Thank you for your hard work on it. Best regards, LSmith (WMF) (talk) 00:56, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Remaining funds

Hi, Olaniyan Olushola, I am following up to request that you complete the "Remaining funds" section of the report. Since the WUGN has submitted a new rapid grant application it is important for us to have an accurate sense of what funds, if any, are remaining from previous grants. Based on the amount spent it appears you would have $29.36 USD in remaining funds; please complete the section with the correct amount (if any) of funds remaining and request for what you would like to do with them. Many thanks! LSmith (WMF) (talk) 01:39, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Thank you @LSmith (WMF): for the review, i have effected the change. Olaniyan Olushola talk 06:19, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Questions from WMF

Hi, Olaniyan Olushola, I have just reviewed this report and have some questions for you:

1. In the list of new editors, a handful of them do not have links (even redlinks) to their pages. Could you please update the report with links to all the new editors' pages?

Done.

1. I understand that you had difficulties getting secondary sources for many of the women you created articles for. However, it appears that most of the articles are stubs and were created by experienced editors; the revision history shows little or no edits by the new editors recruited.

• Can you say more about why this is? How do you think you could have better engaged new editors to create or improve articles about these women?

• Due to the constraint of project time line and the ability of our new editors to start a new Wikiepdia page in relation to the fact that majority of our focused guests suffer person with botherline notability. We dont have any choice than to commit the writing of the articles to experience editors.

• Is there anything you could do now as follow-up to encourage more edits?

• Yes, this can only be achieved with organzing more meetups, however, we dont have fund for oraginzing any meetup at the moment. Though we have put-in a new grant for this prupose.

3. I am happy to hear that the show has gained momentum and is successful as a show. However, it seems like the part of the efforts aimed at adding content to Wikipedia or editing existing articles has not been as successful. Our hope is that before you consider continuing with the show you will put effort into using the information you have gathered already to create and improve articles about the women who have already been on the show.

Looking forward to your reply! Best regards, LSmith (WMF) (talk) 00:52, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi @LSmith (WMF):, kindly see my reply below to your queties

• The part of the show that focuses on content creation is continuous and can only be achieved when there is enough information that can support content creations. . Sincerely, at the moment, aside all the guests that we have created their Wikipedia pages ( reflected in this report) the remaining guests were not notable. We can only make them (the featured guests) notable if we could get secondary sources for their articles. We can only go further with content creation unless we were able to secure partnership with media organization that can help with publishing their stories. ( We are still working on getting partnership for this task). Meanwhile, if we continue with the show some of our new guest might be notable and therefore help with content creation.

In order to help you in taking your decision, I will be glad if you could consider the under listed narratives about the project:

• The above goal (content creation) form one of the four goals meant to be achieved by the project and we are working on addressing it.
• Apart from the above goal, the project on weekly basis has created a platform for teaching many Nigerians about Wikipedia. Through, a session of the program called ‘’’Do you Know Wikipedia’’’ that teaches Wikipedia related topics. Therefore, we are able to take Wikipedia to nooks and crannies of the country. In fact, there are testimonial of addicted listeners of the program. Therefore, the program has helped to boost knowledge of Wikipedia and its various components in Nigeria.
• As a group, we are experiencing influx of members joining our group just by listening to the program.
• Kindly note that Google pays millions of Naira to many radio stations in Nigeria to create awareness about their product ( Google) . Meanwhile, this is the only radio program in Nigerian that relate with Nigerians on Weekly basis about Wikimedia related projects.
• Kindly note that WMF didn’t pay a dime to the radio station for the publicity the radio station is giving our project ( Wikipedia) on Weekly basis . This implies that we have been to save for WMF the amount that could have been invested for publicity.
• The program is a live program and it involves a lot of commitment that goes beyond financial resources. Wikimedia user Group committed to the program because it has helped to boost the popularity of our community with Nigerian media by putting our community in the limelight. Kindly note that the last phase of this project ended since September of 2018 but we have gone ahead with the program with our personal fund because of the benefit of the project to our community. While, we are not requesting for refund of money that we have spent, however, continuation of this project will only serve as a means of encouraging our efforts.Olaniyan Olushola (talk) 10:59, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

Report accepted

Hi, Olaniyan Olushola, thank you for those replies and for updating the links to the users' profiles. I am accepting this report and I'll respond to a few points here, but Woubzena will continue discussing this program with you if/when you apply for more funding for it.

• It seemed that one points of the grant was to engage new editors, so we hope that you will focus your continuing efforts on getting new editors to improve the articles that do exist, and therefore grow their skills. Perhaps you could consider connecting experienced editors to new editors so they could provide some mentorship and answer questions, or maybe you could start a Whatsapp group to engage new editors.

While i appreciate your germane comment and guideance on this issue, the truth is that there is an extent to which you can improve an article-especial a stub, that doesnt have enough sources ( Sources cant be manufactured) . Even with the avaiablility of the best editors, unless new sources are available, for the subject matters nothing can be done. This is the reason some articles stay as "stub" forever on Wikipedia.Per skill development, i agree totally with you, however, face to face meeting play a major role in transfer of knowledge hence the need for regular meetup. In Nigeria, we have many whatsApp group chat that handles different projects including mentorship. At the moment, there is no centralised activity by Wikimedia User group Nigeria because we dont have fund for our meetupOlaniyan Olushola (talk).

• Also, given that experienced editors created the articles, in the future we would expect them to be more informative and developed. Again, we understand the difficulty of working with people who lack source information, but articles need to be more than stubs for us to consider that part of the grant a success.

Once again, thank you for this comment. It's important that we understand where we (the grantee) is operating from. unlike in other clime or continents. In Africa, we have a major issue about reliable sources. infact, even where some of the relaible sources were published. Often times they ( SOURCES) become dead link after days of publication because of the Ffact that most of the link are not properly archived.Olaniyan Olushola (talk) 10:46, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

All my best, LSmith (WMF) (talk) 00:11, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Acknowldged @LSmith (WMF):. Olaniyan Olushola (talk) 09:52, 26 January 2019 (UTC)