Grants talk:Project/Ambrascura/3D cultural objects

Proposal Clinics

Hello Maria Pia,

Thanks for beginning to draft your proposal for the Project Grants open call! I wanted to make sure you are aware that we are hosting proposal clinics for applicants to ask questions and get feedback. If you would like to attend, you can find the dates, times, and videoconference links posted on this page Grants:Project. These are optional opportunities to get support improving your proposal. Let me know if you have any questions! Good luck with finishing your proposal for the February 10 deadline!

Warm regards,

--MCasoValdes (WMF) (talk) 23:34, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Reminder: Change status to proposed to submit

IMPORTANT: Please note that you must change your proposal status from "draft" to "proposed" by the submission deadline in order for your proposal to be reviewed in the current round. When your proposal has been successfully submitted, it will show up in the "Open proposals" list (it may take several minutes for the list to update after you submit it). Applications that are not completely filled out and correctly submitted by the deadline will not be reviewed. To submit your proposal, you must complete all fields of the application and then:

1. Click on "edit source"

2. Change "|status=DRAFT" to "|status=PROPOSED"

3. Click the "Publish changes" button.

Thank you,

--MCasoValdes (WMF) (talk) 23:44, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the reminder @MCasoValdes (WMF):, we set the project status to proposed and sent the email to the project grant team just before the deadline. --Camelia (talk) 11:27, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Cofinancing

My usual comment as for every wikimedian in residence proposal ;-) . I don't see what's the cofinancing from the entity here. I always recommend a 50 % cofinancing at least from the entity where the WIR is supposed to work, as it's the only way to ensure they'll find a fertile ground to work on. I see some mentions of some work expected from the Museo Egizio employees; if that's related to the work the WIR is expected to do, it would be good to quantify the extent of this activity towards the Wikimedia projects and register their time as in-kind contribution (e.g. 2 months FTE). Nemo 15:44, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Nemo bis:, It was agreed that the museum initially participates with a 500 euro extra grant and will make its employees available for photographic support.--Ambrascura (talk) 13:45, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Community notification

The places where the news will be notified to the community looks a bit scattered, can you consider the solution to create a specific project in it.wikipedia.org as common depository of updating news and commenting the milestones achieved with the progress on this project? --Bramfab (talk) 17:45, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Bramfab:, as your question is related to the wiki part of this project, I can answer on behalf of the organisational team. Yes, will be created a project section in itwiki (maybe the best location is under the GLAM section, you had this in mind?). But we also thing that - being a mix of different wiki projects (Wikipedia is only a part, the other consistent part is Commons and WikiData), a prototype that can be used by communities in other languages (and for that needs translations) - a Meta page is also needed. --Camelia (talk) 11:19, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Camelia.boban: It doesn't matter where to store the project progression, but in my opinion it shouldn't be dispersed, my concern is that I can't see a focal point where to make all the news easily available at a glance. This sentence This project will be brought to knowledge to the community through the publication of the news at the Bar (VillagePump) of Italian Wikipedia, to that of the WikiDonne project, on the various social channels of the wiki community on Facebook, Twitter, Telegram, Instagram. News will be given to that part of the wikitech community interested in software development and gamification. looks as a fuzzy indication about news repository. In my opinion this project is quite valuable as it has the potential to become a reference case history for a new step in the innovative way of studying archaeological finds and making them freely available to a wider audience. This is why I believe that a reference archive that documents the entire progress of the project would not only be essential but would double the value of the project.--Bramfab (talk) 14:04, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Any suggestione is welcomed. --Camelia (talk) 22:36, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Additional questions to better understand your proposal

Dear Maria Pia,

Thank you for submitting your project proposal. We appreciate your interest in defining innovative ways to contribute to the Wikimedia projects. We had an opportunity to review your project, and we have a set of questions for you that would help us better understand the proposed project.

First of all, we would like to make sure you are familiar with Commons with policies and restrictions as it relates to this kind of material. Particularly do you know if Commons allows for uploads of digital materials needed for people to access and play a video game? We are uncertain on how the content will be available to other movement members. Will this be done through Commons, or through some other platform?

We would also like some clarification if the proposal is to develop a virtual tour of the museum or involves the development of a game. If it is the latter, it would be helpful to provide some details on what would motivate users to play the game. For example, you could provide some initial ideas or concepts around the game itself, such as the type of game, goals, or story. While this need is separate from the eligibility criteria for your grant, providing this detail will be helpful for the Projects Grants Committee when reviewing the substance and purpose of your proposal.

If you want to make adjustments to the current version of the project, we will be glad to assist you. You would have until Wednesday, March 3rd, to make the adjustments.

With thanks,

--Mercedes Caso (platícame) 23:52, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Dear @MCasoValdes (WMF):

First of all I apologize for the delay in replying but one of my family members has died and I have taken a pause.

I take up your question and answer you.

• First of all, we would like to make sure you are familiar with Commons with policies and restrictions as it relates to this kind of material. Particularly do you know if Commons allows for uploads of digital materials needed for people to access and play a video game? We are uncertain on how the content will be available to other movement members. Will this be done through Commons, or through some other platform?

Personally I know the aims of the Commons project but at an operational level I asked for help from a volunteer member of Wikimedia Italia, @Camelia.boban:, who offered to upload the files that will be produced. The project provides that three-dimensional (3D) models are loaded into Commons through the 3D extension, which makes it possible to manage three-dimensional models for the MediaWiki platform with the ability to upload 3D models to Commons.(You can now upload 3D models to Wikimedia Commons).

I believe that the first level of impact of this extension can technically facilitate the entire community of MediaWiki users and insert 3D models in Commons, of objects that belong to the artistic heritage represents a general resource towards an audience of potential users to whom the resource cultural can be helpful. For example, it can be used by those who intend to develop video games that have a reference with artistic assets such as in this video game:Father and son,but also to those who work in the field of training as three-dimensional reproductions are available, making it easier to explain concepts and methodologies in schools or universities that have a 3D printer available In the case of cultural heritage, then inserting cultural objects also has a value of safeguarding and protection and could be useful to contribute to their restoration if they were damaged, in line with Gilles Dubuc's intent to preserve the historical memory of ancient objects such as example in the #NEWPALMYRA project.

• We would also like some clarification if the proposal is to develop a virtual tour of the museum or involves the development of a game.

The proposal includes two products: both the virtual tour and the video game.

• If it is the latter, it would be helpful to provide some details on what would motivate users to play the game. For example, you could provide some initial ideas or concepts around the game itself, such as the type of game, goals, or story. While this need is separate from the eligibility criteria for your grant, providing this detail will be helpful for the Projects Grants Committee when reviewing the substance and purpose of your proposal.

The story falls into an adventure genre and is inspired by Giovanni Battista Belzoni an Italian explorer, engineer and archaeologist who in turn inspired the creation of Indiana Jones, the film character conceived by George Lucas. The scenario is a dystopian environment, an Egypt projected into a distant future destroyed by an alien war that takes up the theories on the mysterious and extraterrestrial origin of the Pyramid of Cheops; In this case the aliens come to Earth to destroy mankind, unable to guard and govern it. The main character, an archaeologist / explorer, has the task of digging through the rubble and recovering the fragments of the objects of this ancient civilization to reconstruct their history in a laboratory (the Egyptian museum) and create a "model" of mankind in able to rebuild Egypt. The game moves through "adventures" that the player undertakes to search for every single object now belonging to the museum collection; there will be difficulties to overcome, traps left by the aliens but in the end each object will provide a fragment to create the ideal man. Through the adventure action, aimed at a mission to be accomplished, the player will be able, through a map that provides historical clues to the objects, to learn the cultural history of these objects and will then be motivated to see them concretely in the museum.

The virtual tour instead intends to be an augmented reality and we thought as a fruition experience to be inspired by this example made by Brooklyn MuseumThe idea was to create a virtual path with Osm and to get information on the objects, link to Wikipedia pages directed to these objects

• If you want to make adjustments to the current version of the project, we will be glad to assist you. You would have until Wednesday, March 3rd, to make the adjustments.

Yes, gladly, thank you for your help, in fact I need to better understand where to integrate the information you request.

Sorry again for the delay due to personal reasons and if I don't know English well.--Ambrascura (talk) 14:29, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Comment from Wikimedia Foundation GLAM & Culture team

Dear Maria Pia,

We’re excited to see such an innovative digitization proposal. We would like to know more about your digitization protocol and selection of Blender software. Have you modelled your approach on a project that was successful elsewhere? And have you considered sharing your 3D files with other repositories, such as Sketchfab?

How will the game be realized with the resources and within the timeframe of this project? Are you hoping that the Blender community will make a game in response to the release of the 3D models?

It’s great that you have such enthusiastic support from your local community. Have you considered working with communities from the collection’s country of origin to prioritize works for digitization? For example, could the WiR engage with the Egypt Wikimedians User Group?

We're really looking forward to seeing how this proposal develops.

FRomeo (WMF) (talk) 13:13, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Dear @FRomeo (WMF):

First of all I apologize for the delay in replying but one of my family members has died and I have taken a pause.

I take up your question and answer you.

• We’re excited to see such an innovative digitization proposal. We would like to know more about your digitization protocol and selection of Blender software.

I chose Blender because it is successful free software with a compelling history and its development team has decades of experience.

• Have you modelled your approach on a project that was successful elsewhere?

I was inspired by this videogame:,Father and son the first videogame in the world commissioned by a museum, the MAN - Archaeological Museum of Naples, an avant-garde initiative that aims to bring new audiences, and in particular those people who they would not normally think of entering a museum and may actually never enter one in their lifetime. Using the video game and therefore a language closer to them, they try to promote entry into the world of the museum, bringing to life, albeit in a digital key, its environment, with some of its stories from its works and collections.

• And have you considered sharing your 3D files with other repositories, such as Sketchfab?

Thanks for the suggestion, it can certainly be shared, our interest is that these cultural objects are enjoyed by the widest possible audience.

• How will the game be realized with the resources and within the timeframe of this project? Are you hoping that the Blender community will make a game in response to the release of the 3D models?

I have established a direct collaboration with the Blender Italia association which has several professional members to its credit able to reach the goal with set times by touching different aspects of 3D from modeling, to photogrammetry, to the game engine. Blender professionals who take care of different aspects and this will help us to optimize the times.

• It’s great that you have such enthusiastic support from your local community. Have you considered working with communities from the collection’s country of origin to prioritize works for digitization? For example, could the WiR engage with the Egypt Wikimedians User Group?

It seems to me an excellent suggestion that I welcome gladly: I could ask them to report the names of cultural objects in Egyptian Arabic and consult them for the description on the history and meaning of the objects --Ambrascura (talk) 15:32, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

I am so sorry for your loss, Ambrascura. Thank you for addressing my questions and being so receptive to collaboration with other communities. All of my best wishes, FRomeo (WMF) (talk) 12:10, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Eligibility confirmed, Round 1 2021 - Community Organizing proposal

This Project Grants proposal is under review!

We've confirmed your proposal is eligible for review in Round 1 2021 for Community Organizing projects. This decision is contingent upon compliance with our COVID-19 guidelines. Proposals that include travel and/or offline events must ensure that all of the following are true:

• You must review and can comply with the guidelines linked above.
• If necessary because of COVID-19 safety risks, you must be able to complete the core components of your proposed work plan _without_ offline events or travel.
• You must be able to postpone any planned offline events or travel until the Wikimedia Foundation’s guidelines allow for them, without significant harm to the goals of your project.
• You must include a COVID-19 planning section in your activities plan. In this section, you should provide a brief summary of how your project plan will meet COVID-19 guidelines, and how it would impact your project if travel and offline events prove unfeasible throughout the entire life of your project. If you have not already included this in your proposal, please plan to do so.

• If you are applying for funds in a region where there is a Wikimedia Affiliate working, we encourage you to let them know about your project, too.
• If you _are_ a Wikimedia Affiliate applying for a Project Grant: A special reminder that our guidelines and criteria require you to announce your Project Grant requests on your official user group page on Meta and a local language forum that is recognized by your group, to allow adequate space for objections and support to be voiced).

The Project Grant committee's formal review for round 1 2020 will occur through March 21, 2021. We ask that you refrain from making any further changes to your proposal until after period, so we can be sure that all committee members are scoring the same version of the proposal.

Please feel free to ask questions and make changes to this proposal as discussions continue after the scoring period ends. If you have not already done so, you can make use of our project planning resources to improve your proposal further, too.

Grantees will be announced Friday, April 22, 2021. Sometimes we have to make some changes to the round schedule. If that happens, it will be reflected on the round schedule on the Project Grants start page.

We look forward to engaging with you in this Round!

Questions? Contact us at projectgrants wikimedia  · org.

--Marti (WMF) (talk) 17:44, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Aggregated feedback from the committee for Ambrascura/3D cultural objects

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?	5.6
(B) Community engagement Does it have a specific target community and plan to engage it often? Does it have community support?	6.2
(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?	5.4
(D) Measures of success Are there both quantitative and qualitative measures of success? Are they realistic? Can they be measured?	4.8
Additional comments from the Committee: The 3D player does not add a big value for this kind of project. The creation of a game is fascinating but can be a big challenge in Commons. More value is added by the other part of the project. The virtual representation of an object in 3D introduces a dynamic dimension of use that is not limited only to vision but also implies an action, a direct interaction with the object. Looking at the photo of a cultural object implies a passive dimension of memory while a 3D object implies an interaction that potentially allows me to make it live in a dimension similar to the real one. In Commons a 3D object is not only loaded but a link to a virtual tour inside the Egyptian museum is associated with it, where these objects can be virtually visited and known in their cultural context through an augmented reality given by the connections that these objects will have in the Wikipedia entries and the Wikidata items will be created. Maybe I couldn't explain myself well but my project is based on 3 points:1) creation of 3D objects 2) creation of a virtual tour inside the Egyptian museum taking a cue from this model: https: //www.thequeenandthecrown.com/3) creating a video game. Points 1 and 2 will be uploaded to Commons, the items Wikidata will be created and I find that community users will be able to have great benefits if they can take advantage of an already structured path with a free license. The project fits with Wikimedia's strategic priorities but its scalability is difficult to evaluate. It is not clear if the project can be expanded beyond the initial fifteen 3D models. The project is a prototype which is not limited only to making models but to creating a virtual tour; objects have a small number because digitization has a cost; it will certainly be possible to expand the number of objects in the future if the Egyptian Museum believes that this experiment is positive for increasing visibility and the number of visitors. A virtual tour in this period of Covid is an ideal alternative to visit the museum and it is not excluded that you may decide to create other objects based on collections that the museum will want to enhance through virtual tours. Contribution of a 3D historical objects to Commons is laudable but creation of a video game is clearly not within the scope of the Wikimedia's strategic priority and there is no indication that the video would be realistically useful for educational purpose The project is a prototype which is not limited only to making models but to creating a virtual tour; objects have a small number because digitization has a cost; it will certainly be possible to expand the number of objects in the future if the Egyptian Museum believes that this experiment is positive for increasing visibility and the number of visitors. A virtual tour in this period of Covid is an ideal alternative to visit the museum and it is not excluded that you may decide to create other objects based on collections that the museum will want to enhance through virtual tours.Gaming tourism in Italia. Furthermore, gaming is an active learning methodology. The project looks innovative. However the impact in my opinion will be modest because only 15 models will be created and it is not given that the virtual tour and the game will be very popular. In addition, it is unclear how and by whom the game will be designed. So, there are some risks. There is an evaluation plan but it is not well developed. The 15 models are part of a specific collection to which we intend to give visibility. I could even make 100 but I would have to ask you for a lot more money and for our virtual tour project 15 objects are enough, as we present a scalable prototype that can be replicated within other communities and involving other partners. If there is good graphics and good communication, the virtual tour as well as the game will be appreciated as in Italy the innovative proposals made by museums are well received because they are unusual. For the technical part we have professionals who work with Blender who will develop the game while the narrative part will always be developed by the same professionals together with the Egyptian Museum. Skeptical about the release of the game in Commons. A game means interaction. The submitter does not seem to have a strong experience in Commons and in Wikidata and probably the proposal was not created on the basis of in-depth analysis. I may not have made myself clear but the game will not be released on Commons. On Commons there will be only the objects with the link to the virtual tour of the Museum. Giving access to the tour seems like a valuable contribution to the Commons community. The game is done to build a relationship with the Egyptian Museum, motivate him to keep a Wikimedian in residence who will help us to transfer other audiovisual material that the museum has available and that we have estimated as 1000 images. Basically we try to overcome the resistance of museums to release their materials with free licenses by also giving them a product like the video game that increases their visibility in exchange for their materials. The project can probably be accomplished in 12 months. The budget seems reasonable. As to participants, it is not clear who will be responsible for creating the game as Alessandro Passariello is not a programmer. Alessandro Passariello is the president of Blender Italy knows very well the professionals who work with Blender and knows how to select among them who program video games and those who use photogrammetry systems transposed into Blender. There has been some community engagement. The biggest cost is the rendering. 15 objects have a high cost for an advantage that is not clear. The realization of the game can be a good point but I am skeptical that this game can be released. My feeling is that that there is not a feasibility study and everything starts from an idea without checking if this idea can release a deliverable. I consider more relevant the other part of the project and as feasibility project the rendering and the realization of the game. I suggest to review partially the project using the experience of longtime user in Wikidata and in Commons. The rendering of the objects represents a condition for achieving the aim of the project which consists in reviving these objects within a virtual tour of the museum. The advantage of rendering is twofold: on the one hand we deliver objects that are unique in the world to virtual historical memory and on the other hand we give new life to these objects through their virtual use. These aspects affect Commons. The creation of a video game, on the other hand, represents a further application of a cultural object that is known through a playful use and that will make us gain the trust of the museum to continue the collaboration and upload a large number of images on Commons of the other collections of the museum through a Wikimedian in residence The project can be approved with some changes. The game development should be omitted in my opinion. I do not think that it will ever be popular and it is not within the scope of WMF mission to create computer games. The project also needs a better evaluation plan. In the digital age, knowledge, culture and learning have a social dimension that is conveyed by new digital tools. A video game like a learning object can transmit knowledge like reading an entry on Wikipedia. In this case, as this phone game demonstrates: http://www.fatherandsongame.com/ downloaded by 4.5 million users, the artistic and cultural asset manages to spread virally among those who are not interested in art and to culture. Consider that video game production is a monopoly of proprietary software multinationals and I believe that WMF could perhaps evaluate the possibility of setting up a project that plans to collect and make available cultural video games with free license that can be usable by the different GLAM wiki projects . It is super interesting to see an attempt is being towards documenting 3D orientation of the objects. This can pave way for further development in this area. Lot of documentation at GLAMs can take inspiration from this. Contribution of a 3D historical objects to Commons is laudable but creation of a video game is clearly not within the scope of the Wikimedia's strategic priority and there is no indication that the video would be realistically useful for educational purpose. The proposal includes organizing edit-a-thons for new users but it is not clear how the organizers plan to follow up with the new users after the event. I'd also like to see a plan on how the uploaded contents would be used on Wikipedia articles. Again are the objects already Public domain? Only the 3D objects ( containing the link to the virtual tour that you intend to make for these objects) would be loaded into Commons. 15 objects from a collection are chosen and in virtual form they are presented in an exhibition where information on their history is linked to a Wikipedia entry. The photos of the objects are released under a cc-by-sa license and the result will look like this:virtual tour example where instead of clothes there will be objects that will activate links on Wikipedia. The video game is not part of the Commons but it is an activity that we do with the museum to invite it to release the highest number of high resolution photographs of its objects on the Commons. We believe that this pilot project can be replicated for other museums.--Ambrascura (talk) 18:32, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

This proposal has been recommended for due diligence review.

The Project Grants Committee has conducted a preliminary assessment of your proposal and recommended it for due diligence review. This means that a majority of the committee reviewers favorably assessed this proposal and have requested further investigation by Wikimedia Foundation staff.

Next steps:

1. Aggregated committee comments from the committee are posted above. Note that these comments may vary, or even contradict each other, since they reflect the conclusions of multiple individual committee members who independently reviewed this proposal. We recommend that you review all the feedback and post any responses, clarifications or questions on this talk page.
2. Following due diligence review, a final funding decision will be announced on Friday, April 22, 2021.

Questions? Contact us.

Marti (WMF) (talk) 05:30, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Follow-up questions from the Project Grants Committee

Dear @Ambrascura,

I'm writing to see if you could respond to two additional questions from the Project Grants Committee:

1) If WMF funding is not awarded, would this project still proceed anyway in some form? If yes, in which scope?

No, if the project was not funded it would not go on. Currently the Egyptian museum, a private foundation without public funding, given the crisis of museums in Italy, which have been closed for some time due to Covid, would not have the resources to digitize the heritage envisaged in the project. This project aims to promote open licenses in Italy. The Egyptian Museum of Turin is the first large museum in Italy to have adopted the principles of Open Access, but it has not yet taken initiatives to actively promote the free reuse of images. If we do not receive the funding, not only will the Egyptian museum lose an opportunity, but the propulsive action of the museum with respect to the possibility of promoting the free reuse of digital resources in other Italian museums, traditionally very closed, will also fail. We would also lose the chance to have, as agreed, 1000 images from the museum's collections to put on Commons.This project in which free software and wiki projects are used is very important for us: it represents a unique example in the narrow Italian legislative sphere, of overcoming the distrust of the Italian GLAM towards free licenses.

2) Knowledge equity is a strategic aim of the Wikimedia movement. Could you share with us in what ways you have considered knowledge equity in relation to your proposed project? (for example: consultation with museums or Wikimedian community in Egypt in designing the project plan, consideration of Arabic language and Egyptian culture in the products to be created, referencing best practices for digitization of African cultural heritage, particularly in relation to current conversations about decolonizing museums in the GLAM space). These examples are just meant to give you an idea of the kinds of ways we see other GLAM projects incorporating knowledge equity. We would be interested in learning if these or any other strategies have been employed to incorporate knowledge equity into your project.

The cultural assets we digitize are part of African culture; it is our intention to involve the Egyptian Wikimedian community to translate the information relating to the objects chosen into Arabic-Egyptian so that the entire Arab community can benefit from their knowledge. In particular we could propose a collaboration within their education program where they promote knowledge of their culture through collaboration with Wikipedia Egyptian Program (WEP) universities. A good starting point is the support for our Italian wikidonne community project which allows us to promote female content and on the gender gap which is a sensitive issue in the Arab community by involving the Egyptian wikidonne group. This funding offers us a unique opportunity to make knowledge equitable because the practice of translating cultural contents that have a tourist value in the West into Arabic-Egyptian is not widespread. If you want we can insert this specification in the text of our project.--Ambrascura (talk) 14:29, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you in advance for your responses to these questions.

Warm regards,

--Marti (WMF) (talk) 22:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Round 1 2021 decision

This project has not been selected for a Project Grant at this time.

We love that you took the chance to creatively improve the Wikimedia movement. The committee has reviewed this proposal and not recommended it for funding. This was a very competitive round with many good ideas, not all of which could be funded in spite of many merits. We appreciate your participation, and we hope you'll continue to stay engaged in the Wikimedia context.

Comments regarding this decision:
We will not be funding your project this round. The committee found value in your plan to develop a model for museums to contribute 3D content on Commons. However, in light of the competitive nature of this review process and the priority focus on proposals the committee believed would most benefit the Wikimedia movement’s [Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Direction#Our_strategic_direction:_Service_and_Equity

Next steps: Applicants whose proposals are declined are welcome to consider resubmitting your application again in the future. You are welcome to request a consultation with staff to review any concerns with your proposal that contributed to a decline decision, and help you determine whether resubmission makes sense for your proposal.

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.

Marti (WMF) (talk) 00:43, 23 April 2021 (UTC)