Grants talk:Project/Amyc29/Community of Soul: Writing Black Music History in Wikipedia

Reminder: Change Status to Proposed today to Submit

Dear Amyc29 and qcsoulman,

Today is the deadline for the 2020 Project Grants Round. If you would like your proposal to be considered for funding, the status= field of the Probox template will need to be changed from draft to proposed, per the instructions at the top of the application page. We have a strict deadline, so make sure to make this change by end of day today (February 20, 2020).

Warm regards,

--Marti (WMF) (talk) 20:17, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Metrics

Please don't use account registration as a metric for anything, it's not significant. Use New active editor. I would be very happy to see more active African-American users on the English language and non-English Wikimedia projects! Nemo 14:22, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Eligibility confirmed, Round 1 2020

This Project Grants proposal is under review!

We've confirmed your proposal is eligible for Round 1 2020 review. Please feel free to ask questions and make changes to this proposal as discussions continue during the community comments period, through March 16, 2020.

The Project Grant committee's formal review for Round 1 2020 will occur March 17 - April 8, 2020. We ask that you refrain from making changes to your proposal during the committee review period, so we can be sure that all committee members are seeing the same version of the proposal.

Grantees will be announced Friday, May 15, 2020.

Any changes to the review calendar will be posted on the Round 1 2020 schedule.

Questions? Contact us at projectgrants wikimedia  · org.

I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 16:55, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Generally very supportive of this approach, but questions about recruitment

In general, this model of experts with credibility in a field, running targeted events in partner settings works well. I.e. Black Lunch Table has been very high impact with this.

However, in the events that they have run so far, I don't see a track record of effective recruitment of participants -- the goal is 40 participants per event, but the events so far are in the less than 10 range from the documentation I can see on the grant page. How do the organizers plan to change the tactics in recruitment? What makes the gathering effective? As we have learned about editathons over and over again, simply publicizing one doesn't mean people will show up you need really good access to that local network of people, and organizers who can compel them to show up -- For example, we know that Black Lunch Table intertwines the Wikipedia component with a larger community effort of documentaiton that already has a community of traction around these topics, and the AfroCrowd community in New York is capitalizing on the strong community ties already in place. Additionally, editathons, in general, in the US and on underrepresented topic issues have a history of low retention/low content creation through one off events -- you simply don't have enough time to get people to build contribution habits and high quality content in the same setting. They are inspiring, great for literacy, but underwhelming in the stated goals.

I am wondering if there is a more creative tactic for using this volume of money for the same goal of engaging people deeper on this subject and creating high quality content on Black Music History -- (i.e. 3 day event with journalists, community members and academics that produces a larger volume of stuff following the same general principle of convening people (i.e the African Climate Change edit-a-thon). Or maybe recruiting folks before one of the conferences, and having some type of campaign strategy afterwards (like happened with Grants:Project/Smallison/Music_in_Canada_@_150:_A_Wikipedia_and_Wikidata_Project.

Anyway, happy to think about this as the grant process goes forward, Astinson (WMF) (talk) 16:44, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback! Happy to answer further questions about recruitment and community engagement

Hi Astinson! Thank you for your feedback--we are very much in agreement with you regarding the need for effective recruitment strategy, but one thing I would note is that thus far our dashboards are not an accurate reflection of participants at our last three events (particularly in the case of our Charlotte event as the majority of people did not sign in on the dashboard--there were multiple reasons for this, all of which we have plans to mitigate moving forward). Additionally, what we have done so far has been without any funding support at all. That being said, we truly believe in this project and are passionate about it, so we are continually iterating on our model during this beta phase in order to refine our approach.

I wanted to make sure to address some of your specific questions, so I have listed them below:

How do the organizers plan to change the tactics in recruitment? Thus far, our approach for the Charlotte event is the one we will build on moving forward. In advance of that event, I was a featured guest on two local hip hop stations' morning shows and the event was publicized via print and digital (local) newspapers and alternative arts publications--two of those being papers with a mission to serve the local Black community. We also worked with a local music promoter who spread the word through social media channels and events databases. A local designer (who does concert promotions) did our event flyer which generated interest within our target audience. By partnering with a local cultural center (the Gantt Center for African American Arts and Culture), they also made sure to promote, which aided in participant recruitment--and the local universities (UNCC and Johnson C. Smith, an HBCU) helped recruit participants. We have belief in this model of multithreaded community engagement with an emphasis on documentation (which is analogous to that of Black Lunch Table) with a focus on the musical genres that are culturally significant to our regional locations. For our next all-day event in Memphis next month, we have again partnered with a local music promoter (Neosoulville), the Memphis Stax Museum, the Memphis Slimhouse, and local artists to galvanize community participation. Now that we have a few similar events under our belt (and have made some adjustments in accordance with our review of outcomes), we believe this event will be even more successful. Through word of mouth, we are now fielding multiple requests from African-American Museums, HBCUs, and music industry folks (artists and promoters) in other cities (e.g. Atlanta, Dallas, Nashville, Mobile) to run similar Wikipedia community events, so we feel very strongly that this is a model worth continuing.

What makes the gathering effective? As outlined above, (1) establishing strong community partnerships is essential in getting people to come out to the event *and* to remain invested after the event itself is over, (2) clear communication to participants on the project's value proposition (e.g. documenting Black History and addressing attendant content gaps, improving citations), (3) accessible new editor training, (4) people see it as something "fun"--not just "work."

RE: the challenge of sustaining broad editor/community engagement and moving the needle in a measurable way toward creating quality content on Black Music History, we are currently in talks about creating a multi-day event with three partners: a music industry program, a music museum, and local recording studio. That said, we have plenty of creative ideas, willing community partners, and a strong network--and we are hoping for some funding to bring that vision to fruition. Happy to discuss further and/or answer any additional questions! All best --Amyc29 (talk) 20:37, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

@Amyc29: I think you do answer my questions, I would love to see this better reflection in the Grant itself. I suggest:

• Better documenting the participation in your previous events, the current documentation doesn't seem to reflect the kind of impact you seem to describe: numbers are important to demonstrate the track record.
• I don't see any documentation or discussion of the multithreaded approach here -- How are you measuring/evaluating that? I currently don't see that in the impacts described.
• I would suggest being a bit more explicit about the comms strategy and retention strategies.

Also, some provocative questions/ positions:

• If you are considering a multi-day event, that probably changes your budget a lot, or changes the funding/partnership model that you are assuming -- if you have a strong possibility of this coming through, I would endorse being a bit ambitious in that direction (I am not on the grant committee or the grant officer -- so don't know what is feasible, but this is a really important thing for us to get right in the movement).
• If you are fielding lots of requests, wouldn't it be better to develop a train-the-trainer model (could also be combined with the above multi-day strategy)? Black music has broad global appeal (and I am assuming community?), I could imagine a really interesting Art+Feminism style model of growth, that would decentralize the community more and build a large group of organizers -- instead of taking the core organizers on the road? -- just a thought -- but I get the impression that the black music scene/academic field has a similar amount of decentralized activist/organizer capacity, that might be a bit different than Black Lunch Table or the Audiences AfroCrowd usually work in.

Sounds super interesting, looking forward to more work -- and I am always open for consultation, especially if this aligns more with my focus on Campaigns. Astinson (WMF) (talk) 18:31, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Also, want to flag @Fuzheado, Rosiestep, and Jackiekoerner: who are exploring another organizer training in the U.S. leadership Bootcamp. Astinson (WMF) (talk) 18:31, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Aggregated feedback from the committee for Community of Soul: Writing Black Music History in Wikipedia

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?	5.5
(B) Community engagement Does it have a specific target community and plan to engage it often? Does it have community support?	4.5
(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?	4.5
(D) Measures of success Are there both quantitative and qualitative measures of success? Are they realistic? Can they be measured?	5.3
Additional comments from the Committee: This project fits with the strategic direction of knowledge equity (by focusing on Black music history) Interesting idea but I don't see the impact about recruitment. Beside the music, is there something else? Projects that promote diversity in established Wikipedia language is within the Wikimedia's strategic priority While the project had admirable goals and addresses a genuine need the proposal falls short of providing a sustainable realistic model to address that need. I think this is a fun and interesting approach, and am encouraged that the project team has already piloted some smaller events of this nature. However, it’s difficult to evaluate this proposal in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and uncertainty about future in-person events. Innovative approach We do need to see a clear plan on how the grantee and his team plans to measure impact and outcomes. Unfortunately, It is not clear from the proposal how they plan to follow up with editors (participants) after the training. Uses the standard model of editathon-style events which have limited impact both in editor retention and content creation. How do these events address or identify whether and why there are gaps in African American music and history. It's great to see an initiative to work more within the southern states of the USA but the project doesn't address the root causes of underrepresentation from those communities. No mention of quantitative outputs or plan for evaluation. A multiday event with strategic partners was mentioned in the discussions but not included in the actual application or budget. The project team seems to have relevant Wikipedia experience (editing and organizing). They also seem very receptive to feedback and suggestions for making the project more impactful. In terms of budget, it would be nice to see a proposal that relies less on air travel and focuses more on local opportunities to kick things off. Several concerns about the COVID. Everything is offline and I don't see any plan B. In case of a second wave, the project cannot be realized. Expected participation seems unrealistic. The project proposal has a goal of 40 participants per funded event - but according to the dashboard, previous events mentioned didn't attract more than 10 participants. Proposed project delivery hasn't been adequately adjusted to take into account the requirements of social distancing or travel with the impact of COVID-19. There are no assumed in-kind donations from partners. How will project partners, who I'm assuming will mostly be voluntary and community organisations, be supported to deliver the project - there are no venue/equipment costs in the budget? There is a handful of support from members of the community There seems to have been limited interaction with Wikiprojects and editors with aligned goals, such as Wikiproject African Diaspora or AfroCROWD. Would have also liked to have seen more evidence of involvement in project design, delivery and decision-making from partners in the target community. Limited evidence plans to build equitable relationships with partners. There is some good in this proposal but am not seeing enough planning to account for COVID-19 so just don't see how it could work given current circumstances I am not conviced about the impact. It seems to me more like a sponsorship than a Wikimedia activity. We do need to see a clear plan on how the grantee and his team plans to measure impact and outcomes. Unfortunately, It is not clear from the proposal how they plan to follow up with editors (participants) after the training. Having participants attend a series of events and create an account it isn't a good way to measure impact. We need to know how many editors would continue to contribute after these events, how the organizers plan to follow up with them, or encourage them to continue to contribute to Wikipedia and possibly other Wikimedia projects of their choice. It is at this point the Wikimedia dashboard that was mentioned in the proposal would be most useful. Projects that promote diversity in established Wikipedia language are within Wikimedia's strategic priority and worth funding, but, this project proposal relies heavily on offline or in-person meetings and I strongly believe offline events would play a key role in the success of this proposal if funded. Unfortunately, WMF would not fund any offline activities in line with the Foundation's response to COVID-19 and I am not sure the group could achieve optimal results if funded without offline events. I'd not be recommending funding for this proposal at this time.  I am not recommending funding this time - if the proposal is resubmitted would like to see a more strategic approach to identifying and addressing the barriers to increasing diversity of editors, specifically African-American editors. Does the one-off editathon model offer an effective approach. Would also like to see more evidence of the meaningful involvement from the target audiences and partners process of designing the application. In addition to the incorporation of the assumed in-kind donations from partners including time, venue costs etc and would like to see evidence of a project design that centers building and supporting equitable partnerships, including how grant resources are allocated.

Opportunity to respond to committee comments in the next week

The Project Grants Committee has conducted a preliminary assessment of your proposal. Based on their initial review, a majority of committee reviewers have not recommended your proposal for funding. You can read more about their reasons for this decision in their comments above. Before the committee finalizes this decision, they would like to provide you with an opportunity to respond to their comments.

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 carefully and post any responses, clarifications or questions on this talk page by 5pm UTC on Tuesday, May 11, 2021. If you make any revisions to your proposal based on committee feedback, we recommend that you also summarize the changes on your talkpage.
2. The committee will review any additional feedback you post on your talkpage before making a final funding decision. A decision will be announced Thursday, May 27, 2021.

Questions? Contact us at projectgrants wikimedia  · org.

--Marti (WMF) (talk) 03:34, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Round 1 2020 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 appreciates that the proposal represents an effort to address knowledge equity in Wikimedia projects with its focus on Black contributions to American musical culture in addition to the need to better represent the Black community amongst project contributors on English Wikipedia, which suffers from systematic biases that affect how information and history about the Black community is written and understood. It was also helpful to know that you have successfully piloted smaller events similar to your proposed activities, and we want to support organizers looking to grow their events or community when possible. The proposed use of music to engage and invite in communities to your activities is also novel and compelling.

However, the most significant concerns expressed by the committee were that:

• the risks and restrictions related to the COVID-19 pandemic appear to significantly limit the proposed activities that can be conducted during the grant period
• The proposal lacks a clear evaluation plan that indicates whether a goal has been achieved (i.e. Address content gaps in Wikipedia pertaining to Black History and Arts and Culture, Establish local community connections in order to "plant" Wikipedia groups that will grow after our events are over)
• the proposed activities may not promote sustained participation, as single edit-a-thons typically do not result in substantial retention of contributors, and that there is no explicit plan for follow-up with event participants.

We believe the proposal has promise, and if you would like to resubmit in a future round, Alex Stinson, Senior Program Strategist, Wikimedia Foundation has expressed in interest in supporting you in revising the proposal to address these concerns and increase the likelihood of future funding.

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.

I JethroBT (WMF) (talk) 00:16, 30 May 2020 (UTC)