Grants talk:Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund/Rapid Fund/EveryBookItsReader 2025:African Fiction Books (ID: 22971307)

Endorsement from 128.193.156.37

--128.193.156.37 00:02, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Endorsement from Bridges2Information (talk)

Why the proposal is important for your community and why you think the strategies chosen will achieve the results that are expected?

As a member of the #EveryBookItsReader leadership team, and a librarian in the United States, I know the importance of Wikipedia articles about books. In the United States librarians, students, and teachers use Wikipedia to learn about books: the author(s), the plot, reviews, awards, and censorship controversies. Unfortunately, the representation of books by authors who reside outside of North America and Europe is abysmal. Improving coverage about books by African authors is one step toward a better representation of the worlds knowledge.

2. Could you highlight any aspects that you think are particularly well developed: for instance, the strategies and activities proposed, the levels of community engagement, outreach to underrepresented groups, addressing knowledge gaps, partnerships, the overall budget, and learning and evaluation section of the proposal, etc?

The proposal is thoughtful and detailed. The organizers have reached out to the #EveryBookItsReader leadership team, and we are excited about their involvement. The budget is very reasonable for a multi-day, multi-prong event.

3. Could you highlight if the proposal focuses on any interesting research, learning or innovation, etc. Also if it builds on learning from past proposals developed by the individual or organization, or other Wikimedia communities?

Yes, it appears to me that they are bringing their past experiences with Wikimedia projects and translations to this project. In addition, they have looped in the #EveryBookItsReader team for feedback and input.

4. Do you think the proposal is going to contribute in any way to important developments around specific Wikimedia projects or Movement Strategy?

Yes, diverse representation in Wikimedia projects. As a librarian I would like to see more countries take-up the practice of published book reviews and book awards. It's possible that better coverage on Wikipedia could influence book culture and support in some locations.

5. Do you think if the proposal is coherent in terms of the objectives, strategies, budget and expected results (metrics)? YES!

--Bridges2Information (talk) 00:08, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Not funded

Hello Kingaustin07, thank you for submitting your Rapid Fund request. We appreciate your commitment to contributing to the Wikimedia Movement.

After reviewing your application, we have decided not to fund it. This decision was made based on the following reasons:

• Re-submission of an application that has already been declined in the previous round with no major changes in term of project's target, objectives and activities.

On behalf of the Sub-Saharan Africa Regional Review Team. WBuloso-WMF (talk) 07:52, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Dear @WBuloso-WMF,

Thank you for taking the time to review our resubmitted proposal and for providing your feedback.

We would like to respectfully express our concern regarding the comment that the proposal which was stated as follows "re-submission of an application that has already been declined in the previous round with no major changes in terms of the project's target, objectives, and activities."

To clarify, the feedback we received during the previous round (from @VThamaini (WMF)) did not indicate or request any change to the project's core objectives or activities. Instead, we were advised to collaborate more closely with language affiliates and explore how affiliate resources, including data support, could help strengthen the initiative. This feedback is publicly available here: [1].

The global EveryBookItsReader team, including @Bridges2Information, was aware of this feedback and has continued to support our efforts.

In response, and with the understanding that reviewer feedback is meant to guide and improve future proposals we made a concerted effort to address the suggestions provided. We engaged the relevant language affiliate, secured their support and endorsement, and clearly reflected this collaboration in the updated proposal, including the submission of an official letter of approval.

Since the original feedback did not raise concerns about the relevance or clarity of our project goals, we did not see the basis to alter the original goals, target and activities in the next proposal.

We kindly request that the proposal be reconsidered in light of the previous reviewer’s feedback @VThamaini-WMF and the substantial improvements we have made, particularly in regard to affiliate collaboration.

Thank you once again for your time. We look forward receiving your response.

Kind Regards, Kingaustin07 (talk) 10:12, 9 April 2025 (UTC)