I would mention that in your comments.
Pinging Siko to see if she wants to share a grantmaker's perspective. (Siko is dealing with some of the fallout from Wikimaniagate, so I'm not sure if she will respond.)
Pine On Oct 6, 2015 9:10 PM, "Brian Wolff" bawolff@gmail.com wrote:
I feel that way about all of them, except maybe StrepHit and Vietnamese categories (Pan-Scandinavian lang is on the border imo)
I feel like the only things really being assessed here is the reputation of the author, if the funding is orders of magnitude off-base, if the goal is remotely in scope of strategic goals, and if the author said anything outright ridiculous in the proposal.
Most of them don't even have a definition of a minimum viable product that you could use to determine if the grantee actually even completed the proposal as promised.
-- -bawolff
On 10/6/15, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
Disclaimer: I was a founding member of IEGCom, for a time I was one of
its
coordinators, and I currently have a grant proposal for this round of
IEGs.
Comment: if you think that a proposal needs further development before funding it, please say so on that proposal's talk page. When I was on the Committee, I found it helpful to have public comments to read; the responsiveness and articulateness of grant proposers when replying to public questions and comments was also a factor that I considered when evaluating proposals. And as a grantee, I find that good-faith comments help me to improve my proposal.
Thanks for your interest in IEG!
Pine On Oct 6, 2015 8:05 PM, "Brian Wolff" bawolff@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/6/15, Chris Schilling cschilling@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hey folks,
Applicants for the current round of Individual Engagement Grants (IEG)
have
submitted many proposals that involve new tools, bot tasks, and other technical elements. I’ve provided the list of these proposals and
brief
descriptions below.
Your feedback in these technical proposals is requested! If one of these ideas interests you, consider reading it over, and feel free to
endorse,
express concerns, make suggestions, and ask questions. Your input and expertise will help the applicants develop better proposals, and
support
the IEG Committee during their evaluation. Comments are requested
until
October 19th.
With thanks,
Jethro
Wiki Needs Pictures https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Wiki_needs_pictures
Developing a map to show entities around the world that need photographs
on Wikipedia
Wikimedia Maps Rendering Improvements <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Wikimedia_Maps_Rendering_Improvem...
Improving road labels and borders on Wikimedia Maps
Wikimaps Warper 2.0 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Wikimaps_Warper_2.0
Refactoring Wikimaps Warper code to make the project more accessible
for
volunteer contributions
Alt Text Tools <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Alt_text_tools%3E
Tool to make it easier to improve text alternatives for images
Batch Uploader for Small GLAM Projects <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Batch_uploader_for_small_GLAM_pro...
Creating a simple batch uploader for small-to-medium entry level
partner
institutions.
Bot Development for Azerbaijani Wikipedia <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Bot_Development_for_Azerbaijani_W...
Developing a translation bot for Azerbaijani Wikipedia
Proofreading semiautomatically the Catalan Wikipedia with LanguageTool <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Proofreading_semiautomatically_th...
Proofreading the whole Catalan Wikipedia using the LanguageTool with
the
help of scripts and appropriate supervision.
Color Blindness Content Checker <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Color_blindness_content_checker
Make Wikipedia chart and diagrams color blind accessible
Pan-Scandinavian Machine-assisted Content Translation <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Pan-Scandinavian_Machine-assisted...
Creating more machine translation language data for use in Content
Translation, for Swedish, Danish and Norwegian Bokmål+Nynorsk
projects.
StrepHit: Wikidata Statements Validation via References <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/StrepHit:_Wikidata_Statements_Val...
Creating a process that extracts facts from text and produces Wikidata
statements with reference URLs.
Semi-automatically generate Categories for Vietnamese Wikipedia <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Semi-automatically_generate_Categ...
Generating new categories for small-scale & medium-scale Wikipedias where
editors are lacking.
-- Chris "Jethro" Schilling I JethroBT (WMF) <
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:I_JethroBT_(WMF)%3E
Community Organizer, Wikimedia Foundation https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Home _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
It would be nice if before asking for general review, the proposals were vetted to have sufficient detail. Some of these seem to be "I want X$ to do Y, and I'm not going to tell you how I plan to do Y, or how I determined X$ is needed, or even give a detailed definition of what Y is".
For a grant proposal, I'd expect to see budget justifications, time estimations broken down by rough sub tasks, a general plan of attack, potential risks and how the grantee plans to mitigate them, user acceptance criteria, etc
-- -bawolff
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l