Grants talk:Project/txolo/Wiki Loves Monuments 2017 in Perú

Questions from Superzerocool

Hi txolo, nice to see a country in my neighborhood submit a proposal! :). I have some questions and recommendations to do:

1. Questions
   1. Do you have a previous experience with Wiki Loves Monuments, Where is documented?. I read the proposal and this is your second year to organize the contest, so I can't find anything about your previous experience. This is important, because you could understand the "good-bad-ugly" things developed in the past, and how make it better this year.
   2. The main (and only) goal for the project is reach more people to make your local organization. Is that right?.
   3. The final goal about participation in WLM Peru is create the local chapter. Are you trying to establish it with contestants or new organizers? (I saw the "Do you have any goals around participation or content?" section)
2. Suggests
   1. I know you are running out time, but you could improve the budget section using a table, one line per item.
   2. In the participant section, please, ask to your colleagues if they can sign in the section as volunteer or participant: in the project you said "we (...)" but in the section "Participants" you said "I (...)", so I don't figure out how is the contest organized in your local country... Is a one-man project?
   3. Going deeper in the section "Do you have any goals around participation or content?". You could add "we want a 5% more participants than last year" or "get a 1% more new images from the contest". The creation of the local chapter is a side goal, but not the main goal around the participation in the contest.

Lastly, if you want more guidance, don't hesitate to ask in Spanish in my user page in Meta. Greetings Superzerocool (talk) 15:09, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Eligibility confirmed, round 1 2017

This Project Grants proposal is under review!

We've confirmed your proposal is eligible for round 1 2017 review. Please feel free to ask questions and make changes to this proposal as discussions continue during the community comments period, through 4 April 2017.

The committee's formal review for round 1 2017 begins on 5 April 2017, and grants will be announced 19 May. See the schedule for more details.

Questions? Contact us.

--Marti (WMF) (talk) 23:30, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Round 1 2017 decision

Congratulations! Your proposal has been selected for a Project Grant.

The committee has recommended this proposal and WMF has approved funding for the full amount of your request, $4090 USD

Next steps:

1. You will be contacted to sign a grant agreement and setup a monthly check-in schedule.
2. Review the information for grantees.
3. Use the new buttons on your original proposal to create your project pages.
4. Start work on your project!

Upcoming changes to Wikimedia Foundation Grants

Over the last year, the Wikimedia Foundation has been undergoing a community consultation process to launch a new grants strategy. Our proposed programs are posted on Meta here: Grants Strategy Relaunch 2020-2021. If you have suggestions about how we can improve our programs in the future, you can find information about how to give feedback here: Get involved. We are also currently seeking candidates to serve on regional grants committees and we'd appreciate it if you could help us spread the word to strong candidates--you can find out more here. We will launch our new programs in July 2021. If you are interested in submitting future proposals for funding, stay tuned to learn more about our future programs.

Aggregated feedback from the committee for Wiki Loves Monuments 2017 in Perú

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?	6.7
(B) Community engagement Does it have a specific target community and plan to engage it often? Does it have community support?	5.4
(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?	5.7
(D) Measures of success Are there both quantitative and qualitative measures of success? Are they realistic? Can they be measured?	4.3
Additional comments from the Committee: Wiki Loves Monuments is clearly aligned with Wikimedia strategic objectives. In this project, the local organization is trying to organize WLM in a country (Peru), but I don't see the alignment with Wiki Loves Monuments objectives. Fits with strategic priorities to increase content coverage and reach in emerging communities (in this case, in Peru). However, I'm skeptical about how new users will be retained/supported after the photo outings. Lack of participation impairs the intended impact due to the risk. Anything WLM related fits with Wikimedia's strategic priorities but I am not sure whether this project has any relation to WLM. And does the applicant understand what WLM stands for? There is no information about Peru on the WLM's Commons page. Double impact potential: both in terms of quality WLM content and by boosting activities of the local group. Concrete measures and targets are not provided. A clear connection between participation in Wiki Loves Monuments and formation of a chapter in Peru is not made. Project of this scale should have multiple participants. It seems like only a single user is spearheading this, which is too much risk. Applicant isn't very active either. The impact is unclear as well as the measures of success. Grantee did not provide a link to show us that community is informed about project. This is one of the best project examples where community engagement is appreciated for work "behind the scenes" (update the list, categorization, checks...) WLM in itself is an iterative project, but I have doubts the local team has really worked with any more experienced WLM organisers. The grantee hasn’t made many editions in Wikipedia, and I don't see the contributions from the previous edition. The grantee is unresponsive after a comment in the discussion. Last year, the team in Peru participated in Wiki Loves Monuments for the first time and had some success (1500+ photos; 90+ participants; ranked 26th out of 42 countries). It would be nice to know more about the user group and what they have achieved to date. The budget is realistic and acceptable, the problem is the number of participants. The ability to execute is not clear as the participant's skills seem to be limited. The participant also does not appear to have any track record with WLM. Budget is reasonable but I would like to give support next time for a better presentation using transparent tables. The budget is not very good, in particular I am surprised that the only prizes participants will get will be T-shirts (countries with budget usually provide more important prizes). The team also lacks experience organising WLM; some support will be probably needed. Plans to engage individuals outside of Lima but need more details on who will be engaged and how. No one has endorsed the proposal; would like to see support from others in the user group. While the event is entirely intended for community engagement it doesn't demonstrate it has backing of the community. The community engagement is low for a project which success depends on community involvement. Grantee did not provide a link to show us that community is informed about project. This is one of the best project example where community engagement is appreciated for work "behind the scenes" (update the list, categorization, checks...) Moderate community engagement: this project is rather well-supported by a yet to be formed group. The explanation is too vague and the main objective is not to host the new WLM edition, it's to create the local community. This step must be natural after a few in-person meetings or other instances before the project. It would be helpful to see reporting from other projects that have employed photo contests and outings as a way of engaging new users and increasing content. This proposal shares a lot with the "Initialization project for Iraq user group" (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/Initialization_project_for_Iraq_user_group) - is it possible to get an update on that project? Unless there is demonstrable evidence of community support of local Wikimedians, I cannot support this grant. The goals of project are unclear. Are they really WLM related? The skills and ability to execute the project are also questionable. The proposal itself is not written in clear language. WLM is a valuable source of free photos I would support this provided they will re-adjust their budget, potentially with the help of the international WLM team, and improve their project plan. The amount proposed is decent for a good contest, the problem is in the line-by-line spending.