Hi Phillipe and Tulsi,
As you may or may not be aware, I have been guiding an effort to pilot Wikimedia Foundation capacity for supporting community content campaigns: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Campaigns/Foundation_Campaigns_Team
So we have seen a wide range of different naming conventions for community campaigns. Wiki Loves typically include photography campaigns, while Wiki for (or 4) campaigns are typically writing activities with a focus on an advocacy topic with broad international agreement i.e. representation of women, SDGs or Human Rights (as Phillipe notes advocacy positions are complicated ). There are of course exceptions to this pattern (i.e Wiki Loves SDGS: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/Rapid/Wiki_Loves_SDGs_Nigeria ) because the conventions are accidental cultural phenomena rather than planned and deliberate .
However, suggesting that there needs to be a uniform naming convention isn’t very helpful across widely divergent campaigns with different goals, different audiences, and different communication contexts (i.e. languages or cultures). For me, the more important concern is helping organizers choose the right name for the audiences they want to engage (that, for example, activists need to know we are supportive of SDGs, Climate action or representation of Women rather than trying to document something en-mass i.e. Butterflies or Monuments). For example, Wikipedia Pages Wanting Photos, WikiGap, Black Lunch Table and InvisibleWikiWomen all have very deliberate communication and branding choices behind their names.
If new organizers need help thinking through naming for their own campaigns – it’s worth exploring the various bits of documentation we are gathering at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Campaigns or reaching out to my colleague Felix Nartey or myself.
Glad that we are thinking publically about how we show up in campaigns :)