Grants talk:Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund/Wiki Wednesdays

Questions

@Vicstasiuk7, NavinoEvans Kseniya, Ksoldate, and IngaPetri: Thank you for your proposal. Always good to see initiatives that attempt to build better collaborations and knowledge bases. I had a few questions as I was going over this request:

• Is there a public report or evaluation of the first phase that you refer to, that was funded with Rapid Grants? Even a draft or preliminary/intermediate report would be helpful.
• In your overall vision you describe: " As an example of the difference, we were able to demonstrate in our knowledge graph the difference between Musée national des beaux-arts du Québec (MNBAQ) based in Quebec City and our colleagues in art galleries outside of Quebec. One of the differences is that MNBAQ has been successful in the process of creating a property proposal.". I am not sure if I fully understand this. Could you perhaps provide a little more context, or refer to a blog post/presentation slide(s) where you describe this? For example: Are you using the knowledge graph to demonstrate differences that exist in reality, or are you demonstrating that the knowledge graph (based on Wikidata?) suggests a difference that is not there in reality? What 'property proposal' are you exactly referring to? Given that this is a grant proposal, it may be that I'm having incorrect terminology in my head.
• Under question 13 you describe your connections with the Wikimedia groups, communities and affiliates as one person from the United Kingdom that found you via one of your activities (if I understand correctly). Are you a group of active Wikimedia (Wikidata) contributors? (if yes, please link your usernames) Have you reached out to Wikimedia Canada for input, advise, collaborations? Are any active Wikimedia volunteer contributors involved in your project? Is the content of your presentations for example vetted by Wikidata volunteers at any point in the development? Are there Wikimedia volunteers that explicitly or implicitly endorse your work?
• I don't believe I have access yet to the Canada Council for the Arts Digital Greenhouse application. However, could you for the sake of transparency describe in broad terms how this application would interlink with that? For example: Are there dependencies, would its approval change much about this application? Would the effectiveness of this proposal change based on the CCADG application? Or are they complementary but independent?

Effeietsanders (talk) 02:57, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I have been active with some GLAM edit a thons focused on Linked Open Data for the performing arts community. I received an endorsement for my rapid grant application from the University of Western librarians. They were very supportive of building competencies amongst GLAM workers in Canada. Here is a link to their program page that I have participated in over the past two years - Wiki Tuesday Western (outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org)

I have tried to approach Wikimedia Canada for support and they haven't answered my emails. I did contribute to them once and I did receive their newsletters for awhile. It can be challenging to approach them when many of them are based in the Province of Quebec where French is more commonly spoken. One of the reasons I started working with the University of Western Librarians was to build my skills by working with university librarians that speak English fluently. Vicstasiuk7 (talk) 20:53, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Here is a link to all of wiki events that I have participated in - Programs & Events Dashboard - My Dashboard (outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org) Vicstasiuk7 (talk) 20:54, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

In addition to the questions above, I had the following questions:

• Could you describe whether there is any retention strategy for the people that you engage with? If a partner gets excited about this, and they want to continue to be active on Wikimedia with their organization, what would be your approach to that?
• What are your goals with regards to retention? Are you planning to do any post participation survey and could you add one or two metrics from that to your targets?

Thank you! Effeietsanders (talk) 03:12, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@Effeietsanders: As a point of clarity, just want to acknowledge that the relevant Rapid Fund report was not due until after the proposal deadline for this round, and can be found here for review. I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 17:39, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

@Effeietsanders: With the last project funded by a rapid grant, we conducted a survey - you can look at the results here - Wiki Wednesdays Canadian Visual Artists (November 2022- March 2023) - Google Forms

These responses indicate the types of people that registered and attended the events funded by the Rapid Grant. We would like take this feedback into consideration when we plan our activities if we are successful with the General Support grant.

When I log into the Canada Council for the Grants application portal it indicates "Results Pending", so I don't know what else to really say here.

If we are unsuccessful with the CCAC funding, we have a number of interesting partners to work with to extend the learning outcomes to people that registered and participated in the webinars funded by the Rapid Grant.

Earlier on in the webinar series, we identified how the MNBAQ Wikidata item has more comprehensive than Art Galleries we looked at in Ontario. We have been approached by one Art Gallery to help them improve their Wikidata items. If successful with the General Support application, we will have an opportunity to help this regional art gallery worker. Vicstasiuk7 (talk) 20:25, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

We have another note in response to the question "Could you describe whether there is any retention strategy for the people that you engage with?"

"We aim to communicate the merits of having a Wikimedian in Residence for GLAM organizations as a means for continuing to engage with Wikimedia content for our 2023-2024 project. We also plan to provide resources such as customized queries and visualizations that help make the case internally for having a Wikimedia strategy. Many GLAM organizations have stakeholder, content or subject matter strategies for their art gallery or heritage museum. Linking these strategic planning goals to Wiki ecosystem can increase their success, discoverability through online search engines and new online audiences." Vicstasiuk7 (talk) 19:41, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Regional Committee Feedback & Questions

Hello Victoria, Navino, Kseniya, and Inga. Thanks for your proposal supporting online webinars and related programming supporting institutions in Quebec and more broadly in Canada. The US/Canada Regional Committee has initially reviewed the proposal, and wanted to offer some initial feedback and questions for your review:

• Thanks for your past reporting on these activities supported by the Rapid Fund program, and it’s great to see how you are supporting cultural institutions to use and contribute to Wikidata and address knowledge gaps related to this gender gap on visual artists.

• Would it be possible to provide more context and explanation around what knowledge graphs are and what benefits they have for institutions and other relevant stakeholders in your work? It would also be helpful to understand why you think these specific tools were not used by the previous partners you worked with in your recently completed Rapid Fund activities.

• Echoing earlier feedback, the proposal uses the term property proposal in a number of places (e.g. One of the differences is that MNBAQ has been successful in the process of creating a property proposal) Could you explain what this refers to?

In terms of the schedule for our review process, please complete your review and responses to committee feedback by May 8th. After this time, the Regional Committee will begin a final review of the proposal to make a formal decision. Thanks again for your work on the proposal and supporting our review.

On behalf of the Regional Committee, Redwidgeon (talk) 17:51, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

I first became aware of knowledge graphs from a webinar given by Andrew Lih at the Museum Computer Network. I believe that knowledge graphs are a powerful visual tool to show how interconnected visual artists and art galleries are. With many art curators and digital workers being very visual oriented, I appreciate how it shows the linked open data aspect of visual artists and art galleries through the Wikidata term "has works in the collection". With the Uninvited Exhibit as an example of Canadian visual artists who made work at the same time as the Group of Seven Canadian landscape artists, the exhibit provided a very good case example of women artists whose names are not as famous as they should be, based on the quality of their work.

To find examples of the knowledge graphs that we created during the webinars, please go to https://w.wiki/6BpU Vicstasiuk7 (talk) 20:34, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

In our final webinar conducted in March, we were able to concentrate on adding records for two art galleries - Art Gallery of Hamilton and the McMichael Canadian Art Collection. Vicstasiuk7 (talk) 20:36, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks,Vicstasiuk7, this knowledge graph example is very helpful.

Can you explain a bit about "property proposals"? Several of us on the Review Committee weren't sure what that meant in this context. Redwidgeon (talk) 17:47, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

When I examined the difference between MNBAQ and the two art gallery examples we used - Art Gallery of Hamilton and the McMichael Canadian Collection, I noticed that MNBAQ had a great deal more information in Wikidata for visual artists and has works in the collection. I was curious to know if the property proposal aspect of MNBAQ led to more discoverability on the internet for art galleries and visual artists. When I discussed the property proposal process with N. Evans and Chris Schilling, I discovered that this can take three months to be accepted and you may need to have a well developed Wiki Community for this to work. While this was an initial goal when I started to write the grant application, we found out at our last webinar, it might make more sense to help art galleries examining how their e-collections are structured so that it is possible for batch uploads to Wikidata. This type of activity might be easier to demonstrate how this can increase discoverability as well as build competency amongst glam workers in art galleries. Vicstasiuk7 (talk) 20:46, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

• Thanks for the additional context, Vicstasiuk7. I also found this explanation in the Wikidata pages: Wikidata:Creating a Property Proposal.

Redwidgeon (talk) 03:46, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for sending the information about creating a Property Proposal. Chris Schilling had given me this information earlier, but it was great for you to provide it as well. Vicstasiuk7 (talk) 18:06, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

General Support Fund proposal approved in the amount of 13,175 CAD

@Vicstasiuk7, NavinoEvans, Kseniya, Ksoldate, and IngaPetri: Congratulations! Your grant is approved in the amount of 13,175 CAD with a grant term starting 22 May 2023 and ending 29 February 2024.

The committee is pleased to support full funding to continue your work supporting digital literacy training needs for GLAM professionals in Canada focused on topics in linked open data and how open-source platforms like Wikidata and associated tools can benefit cultural institutions.

The committee noted some areas of strength in the current proposal, including:

• That your outreach work has the potential to reach new communities in Canada where participation in the Wikimedia movement is low,
• Partners identified in the proposal represent large galleries and museums within their province, suggesting the potential for impact is high
• That you have sought to apply for resourcing from other available funders, such as the Canada Council for the Arts Digital Greenhouse, which will help support the overall sustainability of the project, and
• Your team possesses important skills in outreach, training, and on-wiki knowledge that will support many of the goals in your evaluation plan, such as those related to collection matching, and overall participation.

The Regional Committee also had some areas of concern related to your community engagement work and follow-up plans with your participants, as well as suggestions for how to address these concerns:

• While it is clear that you have done good outreach with cultural institutions in Canada, there was not clear outreach work with relevant on-wiki communities, such as on Wikidata, relevant mailing lists supporting GLAM and Wikidata communities, or community social media channels. This outreach will be important to do for future proposals, but we also ask you to do so during the funding period for the following reasons:
  • The committee recommends that you partner with a small team of active Wikidata editors or an affiliate to help sustain your workshops and engagement over time, and this outreach will help connect you to these community members, and
  • to gather feedback on your workshopping materials. The community of trainers and GLAM professionals is quite active in the Wikimedia movement, and their perspectives could benefit your training work and goals.
• Importantly, there doesn’t appear to be a clear plan for follow-up with program participants, and this is a concern regarding the sustainability of the project. Based on this, the committee asks that your team do the following:
  • develop a basic communication plan for follow-up with your participants. If this work can’t be supported by your team, the committee asks that you reach out to a Wikimedia affiliate for support around this need. We can help connect you to potential affiliates for this support, if needed. The committee would need to see a clear plan for follow-up with WikiWednesday participants to continue funding this project in future years.
  • in your evaluation plan (under the Learning, Sharing, and Evaluation section), we would like to see some indication that the project can be maintained beyond the next year. For example, one measure of success in this project could be to evaluate the number of institutions that sign up for your program. Alternatively, you could instead evaluate the extent to which institutions who participate in Wiki Wednesdays share it with colleagues and peers.

One important change in the General Support Fund is that a written midpoint report is no longer required. We will continue to have a midpoint conversation to meet and generally reflect on your progress, needs, and updates on your ongoing and future movement work.

In terms of next steps:

1. You will be contacted to sign a grant agreement.
2. If you want to discuss the funding decision or have questions during the funding period, you are welcome to contact your regional program officer.

Thanks again for your hard work preparing the proposal and supporting our review process for the General Support Fund. We look forward to your work this year!

On behalf of the Regional Committee, I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 05:58, 29 May 2023 (UTC)