Grants:PEG/MADe - WM BE/WLM BeLux 2013/Report

Draft report

This is a draft of an interim grant report for a grant funded is fiscal year Pending. Please do not respond or comment on it just yet

it's not yet ready for review. To read the approved grant submission, please visit Grants:PEG/MADe - WM BE.

Compliance and completion

Are you complying with the requirements specified by WMF in the grant agreement?

YES

Do you expect this project to be completed by the date specified in the approved grant submission?

YES

Did you use any of the grant funds?

YES

Was this interim report requested by WMF?

NO

Activities and lessons learned

This section describes what the grantee did, and what the grantee learned from implementing the project. This section should be useful to others implementing similar projects and is an opportunity for the grantee to reflect on the project's performance.

Activities

Sept 7, Brussels kick off meeting

Sept 23, Antwerp meeting

Sept 28, Gent upload marathon

Sept 30, 'Last Participation Day': Bribing possible contestants with not just a beer. Only in Belgium!

Oct 22, final judging session

Exposition of the winning images

Award session: reception afterwards

Sat June 29 - preparatory meeting

Discussion on the steps forward with the project team. Meeting the volunteers. It was combined with the WWI edit-a-thon.

Wed July 17 - meeting KIK-IRPA

Discussing this years approach: venue, reception & drinks. Determining possible dates for the award session.

Wed August 14 - Social Media

Set up of the WikiLoveMonuments.be Twitter account. Main updates on the website.

Thurs August 22 - meeting Herita (Antwerpen)

Meeting Herita (heritage organisation), possible future sponsors. Preparing press reports

Sat September 7 - kick-off meeting

Meeting new contributors, explaining the rules, sharing tips and tricks. Meeting at the Halles Saint-Géry, Brussels. Meet fellow contestants, hear tips and tricks from people who participated last year. Learn how to upload and process the images. The event was no succes, no new contributors showed up, so we refocused on the more experienced contributores. We also discussed the steps toward a Belgian chapter.

Sat September 28 - upload marathon

Meeting in Gent. We explored the historical inner city of Ghent, en took additional pictures. We met and exchanged experiences. WM BE was discussed, too. The meeting resulted in a serious spike in uploads.

Mon September 30 - last participation day

Online rally to convince people to upload their last and best images.

Sun October 3 - Judging information session

Prepare the online voting system. Explain the system and how the judges should cast their votes.

Tues October 22 - Final judging session

Meeting in Ghent with judges. Final selection of images. Slight adaptations to the pictures. Preparations for the press communiqué

Tues October 23 - Press release

Practical preparations. Communication with winners. Press release, and contact with press contacts

t;Tues November 5 - Award session

Award session at the office of the Royal Institute at the Cinquantenaire, Brussels. Talks by the director of the institute, the organisors, the jury. Awarding the prices. Reception where we approached new members (can we help them?).

Finalising the Wikimedia Belgium statutes

Lessons learned

What lessons were learned that may help others succeed in similar projects, or that may change the way you are doing this project?

What went well, or is going well?

PLACEHOLDER TEXT

What did not go well, or is not going well?

• Our communication is shattered over multiple ways of communication and social media: website, email, Twitter, private messages on Commons, ... We lacked feedback on the communication. In the organisation of other WLMs, eg. in South Africa, we noticed that Facebook would be a better approach. We will investigate the use of Facebook for future editions.

Project goal and measures of success

This section should reference the project goals and measures of success described in the approved grant submission. See Grants:PEG/MADe - WM BE/WLM BeLux 2013 to review the goals and metrics listed in the approved submission.

Project goal

Provide the project goal here.

We want to encourage and facilitate the capturing and uploading of photographs of Belgian and Luxembourg heritage sites or monuments in September (goal I). On an organisatorial level, we want to strengthen our organisation (goal IIa), achieve a high media coverage (goal IIb) and anchor our relationship with the different collaborating organisations (goal IIc).

Measures of success

List the measures of success exactly as provided in the approved grant submission, and evaluate your project according to each measure listed there. Answer only for measures on which you are currently able to report since your project has not been completed.

• 10,000 uploads We collected 3531 images. This might be considered a low number compared with other countries. We believe this has two reasons:
  • Belgian has no "Freedom of Panorama" law, and we noticed that between 500 and 1,000 images were removed during the competition. This includes all images of the Atomium.
  • In the past years, we continued focussing on quality images. We do not give prizes for the "most active uploader", only the best images get a reward. This resulted in a lower amount of images, but a high number of high quality images. The judges gave 25 images the "featured image" status and 350 images the "quality images" status. Yes, this means about 10% of the images was a "quality image"!
• 40 new contributors 143 contributors participated in the Belgian or Luxembourg event, of which 62 participated for the first time, and 49 new users. 61 persons where recurring contributors that participated in earlier editions of WLM. We were happy that three of the winners were new on Commons.
• high 'diversity' We got a diverse set of images:
  1. geographically: a map overview of the pictured monuments shows a nice distribution over all the provinces. The winning image were nicely distributed over the Flanders, Walloon and Brussels region. One Luxembourg image fell just outside the top-10.
  2. on the languages partipating: we went the extra mile to make sure that both Dutch, French or German speaking people would participate to the competition. Our website is four lingual (NL, FR, DE, EN) and we posted multilingual Twitter messages. This resulted in a high participation grade in all language communities.
  3. we saw a good distribution between small uploaders and busy uploaders (95 uploaders with <10 images, 37 with <100 images, and 5 with > 100 images).
  4. We were baffled by the participation grade of 'non-Belgians', even non-Europeans, at the events. One of our organisators is Bulgarian, we have two (!) Czech winners, German and Israeli people showed up during our events, one of our judges was South African, one of the most active uploaders is from India, ...
• professional volunteering team For me personally (MADe), this is the biggest difference with the events in 2011 and '12. I felt the presence of a team of people that helped me during the events.
• media impact
  1. During the period August-November we were active on our Twitter channels. We saw a drastic increase in Twitter followers on these two channels.
  2. We made contact with press contacts of three different media groups (VRT nieuws, Roularta, Persgroep), and they published our press releases. We contacted them when they published general Wikipedia news, copied from international telexes (eg. on Wiki-PR, visit Jimbo Wales to Brussels), and added local content.
  3. Thanks to our press contacts, Wikipedia was highlighted about 30 min in a prime time radio programme (Hautekiet).
  4. Two media organisations published all 10 winning images on their website. The plan is to continue with the winnners of other countries as well.
• organisational commitments To be finished during the award session

Provide an overall assessment of how your project is going according to these measures.

PLACEHOLDER TEXT

While doing this project, have you decided to track any other measures of success not listed in your grant submission? If so, please list them here.

PLACEHOLDER TEXT

Impact

Remember that you will need to report on your project's impact on WMF's mission and strategic goals in your final report.

Reporting and documentation of expenditures

This section describes the grant's use of funds

Documentation

Remember that you will need to send receipts or documentation of all project expenses to WMF at the time your final report is submitted.

Expenses

Please list all project expenses in a table here, with descriptions and dates. Review the instructions here here.

This list is as of October 3. It includes all made costs. Costs borne by external parties are not included in the overview, as with future phases (judging, award session).

Description	costs requested from WMF (EUR)	Actuals (EUR)
Part 1: July meeting of the project volunteers
Travel expenses	180	172,64
Part 2: September start-up meeting
Travel expenses	120	163
Part 5: General costs
Cellphone expenses	100	23,89
Project Management Costs	1750	1000
Postal Costs (not foreseen)	0	10,25
Total
	5180 4340 EUR	1369,78 EUR

Total amount budgeted (with currency)

4340 EUR

Total amount spent (with currency)

1369,78 EUR

Based on your spending, will you need to request any changes to your budget? If you do, please see the guidelines for requesting changes to your budget.

NO

Expenses

List of all expenses will be shared on project finalisation.