Grants:APG/Proposals/2012-2013 round2/Wikimedia Norge/Impact report form
Purpose of the report
FDC funds are allocated to improve the alignment between the Wikimedia movement's strategy and spending; support greater impact and progress towards achieving shared goals; and enable all parts of the movement to learn how to achieve shared goals better and faster. Funding should lead to increased access to and quality of content on Wikimedia project sites – the two ultimate goals of the Wikimedia movement strategic priorities, individually and as a whole. Funded activities must be consistent with the WMF mission, must be for charitable purposes as defined in the grant agreement, must be reported to WMF, and must otherwise comply with the grant agreement. The WMF mission is "to empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally."
Each entity that receives FDC funding will need to complete this report, which seeks to determine how the funding received by the entity is leading towards these goals. The information you provide will help us to:
- Identify lessons learned, in terms of both what the entity learned that could benefit the broader movement, and how the entity used movement-wide best practices to accomplish its stated objectives.
- Assess the performance of the entity over the course of the funded period against the stated objectives in the entity's annual plan.
- Ensure accountability over how the money was spent. The FDC distributes "general funds", for both ongoing and programmatic expenses; these funds can be spent as the entity best sees fit to accomplish its stated goals. Therefore, although line-item expenses are not expected to be exactly as outlined in the entity's proposal, the FDC wants to ensure that money was spent in a way that led to movement goals.
For more information, please review FDC portal/Reporting requirements or reference your entity's grant agreement.
Basic entity information
Note you can copy this from your recent progress report if the information is the same.
|Entity information||Legal name of entity||Wikimedia Norge|
|Entity's fiscal year (mm/dd–mm/dd)||01/01 - 12/31 , also reports 07/01 - 06/30|
|12 month timeframe of funds awarded (mm/dd/yy-mm/dd/yy)||07/01/13 - 06/30/14|
|Contact information (primary)||Primary contact name||Erlend Bjørtvedt|
|Primary contact position in entity||Vice chairman|
|Primary contact username||Bjoertvedt|
|Primary contact firstname.lastname@example.org|
|Contact information (secondary)||Secondary contact name||Jarle Vines|
|Secondary contact position in entity||Chairman|
|Secondary contact username||Jarvin|
|Secondary contact email@example.com|
Overview of the past year
The purpose of this section is to provide a brief overview of this report. Please use no more than 2–3 paragraphs to address the questions outlined below. You will have an opportunity to address these questions in detail elsewhere in this report. Also, we encourage you to share photographs, videos, and sound files in this report to make it more interactive, and include links to reports, blog posts, plans, etc as these will add context for the readers.
- The highlights of the past year are that Wikimedia Norge has managed to get Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons strongly on the map of flagship GLAM institutions of Norway, resulting in broad participation of GLAM professionals in Wikimedia events, a substantial donation of photos and other materials to free license, and a quality-based uploading of approximately 25,000 new photos of Norwegian cultural heritage from these institutions, to Wikimedia Commons. Besides, Wikimedia Norge has recruited leading women in Norway - including members of government and the business and civil community - to publicly step forth and promote the Wikipedia by means of personal editing. At Women's Day in March, this was toppled by a female topic editing competition resulting in 592 new articles, the best result ever for a Wikipedia editing competition in Norway. Third, Wikimedia Norge has produced it's first ever professional promotion video to reach out to prospect wikipedians. And, fourth, Wikimedia Norge has managed to get Wikipedia editing integrated in two Master courses at the University College of Lillehammer, from the fall 2014 semester. The main lesson learnt is that work towards external stakeholders has yielded results, while mobilizing the internal Wikipedia and Commons community is still challenging.
- Highlights in numbers:
- 1 new office rented at Tøyen in the central-eastern Oslo
- 1.6 full-time-equivalent staff - in 3 skilled colleagues!
- 2 hackatons, creating interface to the cultural heritage registry
- 3 Wikipedia editing circles established in national GLAM institutions
- 4 women leaders publicly edited the Wikipedia, including Minister of Culture
- 5 wikipedians lectured for 150+ experts at the national GLAM Seminar in Oslo
- 6 Wikipedians-in-Residence at work in cultural institutions in the Oslo area
- 7 weeks of targeted WMNO Competitions of the Week, yielding c. 1,000 new articles
- 8 wiki workshops organized in greater Oslo area, attracting 250+ participants
- 9 board members worked hard to achieve results on behalf of the Wikimedia movement
- 10 wikipedians writing new entries about women during Women's Day editing competition
- 14 totally new institutions did some form of partner activity with Wikimedia Norge
- 18 GLAM institutions altogether had significant, Wikipedia-related activities
- 19 wikipedians received grants, writing a few hundred new cultural heritage entries
- 150 seconds of high-quality recruitment film produced, to mobilize new contributors
- 152 new articles about cultural heritage sites added in 2-week editing competition
- 350+ individual GLAM experts altogether given individual Wikipedia editing training
- 592 new articles about women added at the Women's day editing competition
- 960 new Wikipedia articles created in the category Cultural heritage
- 2,500 new photos of Norwegian heritage uploaded for Wiki Loves Monuments
- 4,500 images uploaded from the Directorate for Cultural Heritage
- 9,000 images uploaded from the National Library of Norway
- 25,000 GLAM-related images added to Wikimedia Commons
- Strengths: Wikimedia Norge clearly managed to recruit three very able and "self-propellant" staff colleagues, with full retention of all employees into the next grant period. Together with the competencies and fresh views of employees, the successful co-operation between them and with the board has secured both learning and continuity that clearly allowed a more seamless and straightforward progress than what would have been if recruitment worked less well.
- Weaknesses: Wikimedia Norge still has limited numbers of volunteers, and substantial difficulties in staging events outside of Oslo. Travelling costs are very high and for all practical purposes every event takes place in the Oslo area, reaching geographically to perhaps 25 % of the entire volunteer community. This is a major hurdle.
- Opportunities: Wikimedia Norge has enjoyed an unprecedented maturing and awakening of GLAM institutions when it comes to sharing content, data, photos and text in free licenses. A major seminar organized for the sector this spring, with 150+ GLAM professionals from a large number of institutions all over the country, paved the way for an almost limitless potential and co-operation with institutions. After having started "from the top" co-operating with national flagship institutions since 2012, Wikimedia Norge now takes the GLAM outreach further into regional and local centras outside the Oslo area.
- Threats: Wikimedia Norge has limited resources, volunteers, and routines. The main risks consist in discontinuation of operations, disorganization or misconduct, including future risks of financial misconduct or mismanagement.
- Wikipedia Bokmål, Wikipedia Nynorsk, Wikipedia Northern Saami, and Wikimedia Commons.
- The number of wikipedians and edits per capita in Norway is extremely high, only comparable to countries like Israel, Estonia, and Iceland, and far above that of the large language communities. Every month, there are 2,000 editors making changes to the Wikipedia in Norway, with 10-15 % of these wikipedians at the Nynorsk version and the rest at Bokmål. The Wikipedia versions in Norway witnessed stagnation during the last year. In May-June of 2014, the number of editors was just slightly lower than in May-June 2013. There is all in all a standstill in the number of editors, edits and articles, in Bokmål and Nynorsk Wikipedia. In Q3 there was a very strong growth in the number of articles, reaching numbers not seen since 2008. The reasons for this unexpected growth are not fully known. It followed the Wikipedia Academy and coincided with the large GLAM seminar which attracted 150+ participants in Oslo, and some other outreach intensification. Apart from the extraordinary and non-durable spike in editing activity, there seems to be a tendency in Norway towards a reverse relationship between the number of new editors, and the number of new articles and edits. It seems, through time, that intensive recruitment activity might create wikipedians in the longer run, but at the expense of short-term article creation. This might be connected with patrolling and training costs among active wikipedians and patrollers who might otherwise have edited as an alternative to training and guiding new editors. The reverse relationship is not total and omnipresent, but can be indicated by careful study of the editor and editing statistics for Bokmål and Nynorsk Wikipedias (graphs to the right).
- The number of members of Wikimedia Norge marginally increased by 6 new members in 2013. The total number of accepted members at the Annual assembly of April , 2014, was a total of 80 members, while the total number of paying members was 70, in march 2014. Four years ago, the number of paying members was 38, so there is close to a doubling since then. The number of volunteers is stable at about 20-30 that more or less frequently attend social gatherings, seminars, etc.
- The number of GLAM institutions enlisted and mobilized for sharing of content through Wikipedia or Commons, has evolved strongly. In early 2012, Wikimedia Norge initiated co-operation with the Arts Council Norway, and had our first co-operation with the Directorate for Cultural Heritage. At that time, there were Wikipedians-in-Residence already at the Oslo Museum and the Norwegian Museum of Cultural History. That included, i.e., two national GLAM authorities and two museum institutions. In 2012-2013, we established a Wikipedia project with Arts Council Norway with participation from many institutions in three reference groups, and started a campaign of around 35 editing courses targeting GLAM experts. These were arranged from fall 2012 till early spring, 2013. Since then, during 2013 and 2014, there have been prolonged and self-sustaining Wikipedia and Commons activity at the National Archives, the National Library, Digital Museum, Bergen Library, Preus Photo Museum, Sogn & Fjordane Archives, Bergen City Archives, Stavanger Art Museum, the NTNU University Library, Larvik Museum, Nordland Museum, the Telecommunications Museum, the Norwegian Mining Museum, and Hordaland County Archives. Thereby, the number of GLAM institutions with noticeable activity increased from 4 to 18 institutions.
- Discussions on co-operation and Wikipedia / Commons projects are also had with the Science Museum in Trondheim, the Labour Movement Archives, and some educational institutions within the fine arts.
- From February, a GLAM Wiki workshop series attracted good participation. The workshops were open to both community members and external newcomers and GLAM experts. The total number of people reached during the grant period was 130-150, plus the 150+ participants who attended the full-day GLAM Wikipedia seminar in November. Each workshop typically yields 3-5 totally new articles, and 10-15 articles edited on. Several new institutions have been mobilized to share content for the first time through these seminars and workshops, including the museums in Horten, Kongsberg, Nordland, Hordaland/Bergen, the Telecommunications Museum in Oslo, and the Science Museum in Trondheim. All of these museums had their first encounter with the Wikipedia movement through the seminars and workshops, and initiated specific sharing with the movement afterwards.
- Four new Wikipedians-in-Residence were added in 2013, of whom three still work in the institutions, together with two that were already present in 2012. I.e., the total number increased from 2 to 5 Wikipedians in Residence.
- There has been a very strong growth in the release of public photos in free licenses during the last 1-2 years. Uploads are also gaining ground. The main release institutions include Folkemuseet in 2012 (200-300,000 photos), Oslo Museum in 2012 (100,000+), Vitenskapsmuseet in 2013 (100,000+, release), and the National Library in 2014 (several thousand photos). Uploads are ongoing and totaled an estimated 25,000 photo uploads during the grant period. Dialogue on new releases are ongoing with several more institutions.
- Most museums and archives in Norway have done some digitalization of their photo collections after 2009, and started to upload images to Digitalt Museum (Digital Museum) from around 2010, in a proprietary format but often with an open CC-BY license.
The following table depicts how image uploads to Wikimedia Commons has grown in the Norwegian context, with indication of when each institution started first proprietary digitalization, then uploading to Flickr or Commons in open license, and finally an indication of which groups took part in the categorization and uploading process.
|Institution||Digitalization||Public upload||Commons upload||Files on Commons (2014)||Commons uploaders|
|Trondheim Archives||n.a.||2008 - Flickr||2012-||2,572||Volunteers|
|Oslo Museum||n.a.||2009 - Oslobilder (CC-BY)||2012-||1,446||Volunteers, Wikipedian-in-Residence.|
|Oslo Archives||n.a.||2010 - Oslobilder (CC-BY)||2012-||332||Volunteers, employees, WMNO activist|
|Bergen Library||n.a.||2010 - Flickr||2012, 2014||615||Norwegian volunteers, mostly in 2014|
|Sogn & Fjordane Archives||2009-||2010 - Flickr||2013-||185||Volunteers, WMNO activist|
|National Archives||n.a.||2011 - Flickr||2012-||117||Volunteers, since 2012|
|Marine Mapping Survey||2011||2011 - Commons||2011||296||Mapping Survey employees|
|Norw. Museum of Cultural History||n.a.||2009 - Digitalt Museum||2011-||1,663||Volunteers, Wikipedian-in-Residence, WMNO activist|
|Preus Photo Museum||n.a.||2010 - Flickr||2012, 2014||189||Volunteers, WMNO activist|
|NTNU University Library||n.a.||2011 - Commons||2011, 2013-||73||Wikipedian-in-Residence|
|Eidsvoll 1814||n.a.||2012 - Digitalt Museum (CC-BY)||2012||129||WMNO activist|
|Larvik Museum||n.a.||2013 - Commons||2013-||14||Museum employee, after WMNO/GLAM seminar|
|WMNO & Directorate for Cultural Heritage||n.a.||Wiki Loves Monuments||2013||2,489||Volunteers, WMNO|
|Norw. Maritime Museum||n.a.||Digitalt Museum (CC-BY)||2014||38||Volunteers|
|Norw. Telecom Museum||2013-||2014 - Commons||2014||5||Museum employee, after WMNO/GLAM seminar|
|Directorate for Cultural Heritage||n.a.||2014 - Commons||2014||4,747||Wikipedian-in-Residence|
|National Library||n.a.||2014 - Commons||2014||14,893||Volunteers, Wikipedian-in-Residence|
|. General collection||9,992|
|. Nansen Collection||2,894|
The FDC requires information about how your entity received and spent money over the past year. The FDC distributes general funds, so your entity is not required to use funds exactly as outlined in the proposal. While line-item expenses will not be examined, the FDC and movement wants to understand why the entity spent money in the way it did. If variance in budgeted vs. actual is greater than 20%, please provide explanation in more detail. This helps the FDC understand the rationale behind any significant changes. Note that any changes from the Grant proposal, among other things, must be consistent with the WMF mission, must be for charitable purposes as defined in the grant agreement, must be reported to WMF, and must otherwise comply with the grant agreement. The WMF mission is "to empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally."
If you'd prefer to share a budget created in Google or another tool and import it to wiki, you can do so in the tables below instead of using wiki tables. You can link to an external document, but we ask that you do include a table in this form. We are testing this approach in this form.
Provide exchange rate used:
- 1 USD = NOK 5.9
- The total FDC grant received from the WMF amounted to NOK 821,758, which implies a rate of USD = NOK 5.868,-
- Installments were paid with first transfer on November 19, 2013 with NOK 479,359. The second transfer on February 19, 2013 was NOK 342,399. Each transfer includes an incurred fee of NOK 100, totaling NOK 200.
- From these funds, we have spent NOK 820,748. This means that there is an under-spending of NOK 1,010 - or almost precisely USD 170.
Table 2 Please report all spending in the currency of your grant unless US$ is requested.
- Please also include any in-kind contributions or resources that you have received in this revenues table. This might include donated office space, services, prizes, food, etc. If you are to provide a monetary equivalent (e.g. $500 for food from Organization X for service Y), please include it in this table. Otherwise, please highlight the contribution, as well as the name of the partner, in the notes section.
Revenue source Currency Anticipated Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Cumulative Anticipated ($US)* Cumulative ($US)* Explanation of variances from plan Wikimedia Foundation FDC NOK 826.000 0 145.656 292.002 378.090 820.748 140.000 139.109 Revenue from FDC was NOK 821,758. This grant is accounted as income while activated, i.e. that only spent funds are accounted as received. The reminder is accounted in the balance sheet as "unspent funds FDC" and will be returned (NOK 1.009,89). Membership fees NOK 15.000 200 5.500 3.755 1.400 10.855 2.500 1.840 Memberships are most commonly renewed in spring before the annual assembly (late April). Private gifts & other grants NOK 30.000 1.098 948 3.082 1.682 6.810 5.000 1.154 Revenues are behind budget, WMNO has not had the capacity to trace potential corporate donors. Q2 numbers have been reduced from NOK 1.148 to NOK 948 because one payment for sales (below) was errenously accounted as gift. Participation fees NOK 15.000 0 20.200 0 0 20.200 2.500 3.425 Participation fees are ahead of budget due to the Wikipedia Academy. There were no fees taken from participants at events in Q3 or Q4. Public Funds (Saami) NOK 200.000 0 0 0 0 0 33.333 0 The Board applied for Government funds in Q4, but the appliactions were not assessed by the government within the timeframe of the grantmaking period.. Sales of t-shirts, etc NOK 0 0 800 0 0 800 0 135 Sales during the Christmas event, 2013. TOTAL NOK 1.100.000 1.298 173.104 298.839 381.172 859.413 186.440 145.665 The dominating factor in underperformance on revenues, is partly a slight underspending of FDC funds, and the fact that the Saami project and other government funding can not be released within the current grantmaking period due to delayed submission handling by government.
* Provide estimates in US Dollars
Table 3 Please report all spending in the currency of your grant unless US$ is requested.
- (The "budgeted" amount is the total planned for the year as submitted in your proposal form or your revised plan, and the "cumulative" column refers to the total spent to date this year. The "percentage spent to date" is the ratio of the cumulative amount spent over the budgeted amount.)
Expense Currency Budgeted Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Cumulative Budgeted ($US)* Cumulative ($US)* Percentage spent to date Explanation of variances from plan Salaries and personnel cost NOK 480.000 0 49.305 219.446 218.831 487.582 80.000 82.641 101,6 % The first two employees started work on December 1, 2013. The third employee started when the second quarter ended. The costs have been almost exactly on budget. Office costs NOK 100.000 0 14.524 19.962 96.608 131.094 16.666 5.748 131,1 % Offices rental costs were paid in May, for the period November 2013 - December 2014. Only the costs from November 2013 till June 2014 are accounted as costs, the remainder (NOK 40.000) is accounted on the balance sheet and will be activated on the 2014-15 FDC grant. Costs include furniture, IT equipment, rental, and cleaning. The main reason for the over-spending is that we had to pay a deposit on future rent. Program 1 GLAM NOK 50.000 0 0 0 G 0 8.333 0 0 For accounting reasons, costs related to GLAM activities are accounted at their respective posts as travelling, meeting costs, etc. Program 3 W-I-R NOK 50.000 0 0 0 G 0 8.333 0 0 For accounting reasons, costs related to W-I-R activities are accounted at their respective posts as travelling, meeting costs, etc. Public projects (Saami) NOK 200.000 0 0 0 G 0 33.333 0 0 Project preliminarily postponed due to reduced FDC funding. Board will apply for Saami project fund in the second half of 2014. Travelling, per diem, & meals NOK 70.000 4.471 7.675 23.980 10.563 46.688 11.666 7.913 66,7 % Cost include some GLAM and/or W-I-R activities. Includes all WMNO travelling costs, per diem (employees on abroad travels), and a few meals for the recruitment process and internal meetings with employees. Under-spending is mainly due to travel cost support from GLAM partners. Wikipedia Academy & other events NOK 75.000 0 58.776 5.035 14.407 78.218 12.500 13.257 104,3 % Costs include Wikipedia Academy, GLAM events, seminars, and Wiki workshops. There have been hardly any location costs, since GLAM partners have generally covered that. Changes to the numbers in Q2 and Q3 refer to a re-classification of activities in the final accounting. Prizes, gifts NOK 15.000 2.660 13.240 3.920 617 20.473 2.500 3.470 136,5 % This costs include accumulated "Competition of the Week" prices, and the WLM 2013 prizes. Also include a few GLAM writing competition costs. Nordic Activities NOK 20.000 0 0 0 0 0 3.333 0 0 The marginal Nordic Chapter meeting costs on December 15, are reported under Wikipedia Academy (above). This included NOK 1.132 of lunch costs. Besides, there was a NOK 3.386 travel cost for our participation in Wikimaps Nordic, which is accounted under travel costs. All other costs NOK 30.000 2.049 12.098 2.614 42.861 59.622 5.000 10.105 198,7 % The main activity in this item was film production, with NOK 37.780 in production costs for the promo video. This item otherwise includes accounting, bank fees, memberships, IT, post, telephony, recruitment advertising, etc. The board performs cost-less accounting, personnel administration, salary and tax reporting, etc. TOTAL NOK 1.100.000 9.180 155.617 274.957 383.887 823.641 183.333 139.600 74,9 % The underperformance is attributable to the fact that there were no allocations of government funds in 2014, against anticipation. The main public funds submission round was delayed through summer. The Saami funding process also runs after summer, which means that the budgeted costs of NOK 200.000 could not be realized.
* Provide estimates in US Dollars
Progress against past year's goals/objectives
The FDC needs to understand the impact of the initiatives your entity has implemented over the past year. Because the FDC distributes general funds, entities are not required to implement the exact initiatives proposed in the FDC proposal; the FDC expects each entity to spend money in the way it best sees fit to achieve its goals and those of the movement. However, please point out any significant changes from the original proposal, and the reasons for the changes. Note that any changes from the Grant proposal, among other things, must be consistent with the WMF mission, must be for charitable purposes as defined in the grant agreement, must be reported to WMF, and must otherwise comply with the grant agreement. The WMF mission is "to empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally."
- Wikimedia Norge was allotted a funding of roughly half the originally requested amount, which necessitated planning to achieve a reduced number of goals and initiate a reduced number of activities compared to the original grants submission. The original four programs outlined in the Round 2 application were: ( 1 ) Wikipedia for the GLAM sector, ( 2 ) Commons Outreach Norway, ( 3 ) Wikipedians in Residence, and ( 4 ) Professionalization of Wikimedia Norway.
- The board of Wikimedia Norway chose to totally abolish program 2 (Commons Outreach), and realized that the hiring of staff inherent in program 4 would require more time than available from the date of secured funding. The main focus and resources were attended to programs 1 and 3, stepping up the efforts to reach out to the GLAM sector in Norway with messages to share content, hire Wikipedians-in-Residence, and develop further the free licensing practice. However, some activities on program 4 (Professionalization) were also conducted, their impact reported below. Besides, the Board decided in 2013 to put more emphasis into Recruiting women editors, which is reported below.
- The original application also anticipated a Project in Northern Saami to be fully funded by public sources in Norway (NOK 200.000 = c. USD 33.333). With the reduction in the FDC funding, this program became dependent on government funding. Government funding was saplied for in October 2013 and April-May 2014, but the government handling of the many submissions was delayed until after the timeframe of this grant period. New submissions for government grants are awaiting during fall, 2014. The Saami Thing original submission deadline in September has been suspended in favour of an open application process, which the WMNO will pursue this fall.
'Program title 1. Wikipedia for the GLAM sector'
'Program title 3. Wikipedians in Residence'
'Program title 4. Professionalization of Wikimedia Norway'
'Program title x. Recruiting women editors to Wikipedia'
Lessons from the past
A key objective of the funding is to enable the movement as a whole to understand how to achieve shared goals better and faster. An important way of doing this is to identify lessons learned and insights from entities who receive funds, and to share these lessons across the movement. Please answer the following questions in 1–2 paragraphs each.
- 1. What were your in the past year, and how did you help to achieve movement goals?
- The main accomplishment was to assist the National Library of Norway in its first "wikipedization" efforts, recruiting a Wikipedian-in-Residence for them and discussion strategic directions and options with them in 2013 and January 2014. This has opened a vast boquet of possibilities of knowledge sharing, and resulted this year in the sharing of c. 10,000 images of great historic value, through Wikimedia Commons. This enhances the quality of the Wikipedia and the cultural heritage at Wikimedia Commons.
- Another accomplishment was the operative breakthrough in the GLAM sector brought about by the November 2013 GLAM Seminar, an event attracting 150+ GLAM experts and institution employees, and opening up a large number of partnerships and options of collaboration in the coming years. This will increase reach, article and image quality (in the GLAM field), and hopefully increase participation.
- The successful recruitment and retention of three able and skilled employees was another, major accomplishment.
- 2. What were your in the past year (e.g., programs that were not successful)?
- The major setback was probably the fact that applications for external funds have not been successful. Applications have included minor ones for funds from the Free Speech Fund (Fritt Ord), and a major one for state funds for encyclopedic activity, which was intended to be spent on editing training and outreavh among the Nynorsk and Saami communities.
- Another setback is the fact that we have never managed to firmly establish Wiki Loves Monuments as a really attractive and mobilizing event for Commons and Wikipedia in Norway. Participation is too low, and reflects an inability to prioritize the needed marketing and event-making efforts to get results.
- 3. What (organizational, environmental) enabled your success?
- The major factor was the ability and success in employing three able employees, and allowing them to develop an independent and autonomous environment, at the same time working closely with the Board on strategy and direction. Instead of micro-management, the Board allows employees to have substantial saying over their tasks and workday, at the same time keeping joint trach on strategic direction and priorities. The change during Spring 2014, where employees got their permanent seat in the Board, probably contributes to the better exchange between Board and staff.
- 4. What did you encounter and how did this affect what you were able to accomplish?
- WMNO encountered unanticipated resistance and opposition from substantial parts of the Wikipedia community towards a forward-leaning role of the WMNNO when it comes to setting objectives for the development of Wikipedia. The dichotomy between WMNO and the (Bokmål) community has always been alive, and has not been reduced during the last years. As an example, efforts by the WMNO to establish trainings or seminars for admins and patrollers attracted minimal support, and these and other in-community plans (like newbe mentoring) has had to be put on hold.
- 5. What are the that other entities can learn from your experience? Consider learning from both the programmatic and institutional (what you have learned about professionalizing your entity, if you have done so) points of view.
- Allow employees great practical autonomy and independence in their pursue of tasks and operations, but be clear on the strategic direction and priorities of the movement. Do not micro-manage employees, and do not let the employees doing simply "the boring stuff" like accounting or licking envelopes. It is paramount that employees are being let into the core purpose and business of the chapter, performing also tasks such as outreach, partnerships, and stakeholder management.
- Prioritize goals and efforts. Do not identify 10 goals (like we did in 2011), but stick to maybe a maximum of 3 or 4 objectives. Also, be picky on which partnerships to develop and which projects to pursue. If a project does not work, you must either make it work within reasonable time, or abolish it.
- Include a broad portfolio of competences into your Board. Do not go for a Board of 9 male IT students (no offence!). Try to let the electoral committee identify candidates from the different walks of life, of varying age, gender, and background.
- Train and recruit potential Wikipedians-in-Residence in time, if you want to go for that kind of project. Good Wikipedians-in-Residence who are social, skillful, technical, and knowledgeable of the partner sector, are extremely scarce and hard to get.
Lessons for the future
The Wikimedia movement grows as each entity in the movement reflects and adapts its approaches to changing needs and contexts. The questions below encourage you to apply your thinking in the sections above of "how well have we done" and "what have we learned" to the development and execution of future organisational and program strategies. The questions below can be informed both by your own entities' learnings, as well as the learnings of other movement entities (e.g., adding a new program that appears to have caused significant impact in several other countries or communities).
- 1. What organisational or program strategies would you continue?
- Recruiting and retaining Wikipedians-in-Residence.
- Focus on release of public data and upload of public images.
- Employ a mix of full- and part-time employees (enhance scope).
- 2. What might you change in organisational and program strategies in order to improve the effectiveness of your entity?
- Prioritize more relentlessly between goals, objectives, partners, and projects.
- Consider to attract a number of external board members to include externals' views.
- Get success also outside the GLAM area, probably in the educational sector.
- 3. Please create at least one learning pattern from your entity's experiences this year and link to it here.
Stories of success and challenge
Of all the accomplishments highlighted through this report, please share two detailed stories: one story of a success and one story of a challenge that your entity experienced over the past year in a few paragraphs each. Provide any details that might be helpful to others in the movement on the context, strategy, and impact of this initiative. We suggest you write this as you would tell a story to a friend or colleague. Please refrain from using bullet points or making a list, and rather focus on telling us about your organization's experience.
Case study: success
- From January 2014, Wikimedia Norge started a series of wiki workshops, reaching out to GLAM institutions not only in Oslo but also in Horten and Kongsberg. The series of 7 workshop plus the Wikipedia Academy (in December) created the kind of arena between wikipedians, activists, chapter, and partners that immediately attracted participants. The events were thoroughly marketed both at the Wikipedia village pumps, at the websites of the partnering institutions, and on Facebook and Twitter. From a beginning with 10-15 attendees, the events increased in scale and reached out to 40+ participants at the wiki workshop at the Cinemateket (Film Museum) in Oslo. Other workshops have been of a scale varying from 15 to 25 participants, but nonetheless successful in their own way. Some event locations opened their archives for image releases and uploads. Some participants even represented yet other external institutions who later started their own Wikipedia-related activities. The success of these events is due to their broad, yet attractive appeal. Invitation is being done very broadly, but the topic is rather narrow. In this way we manage to reach out to the 10-40 people in the Oslo area who are actually interested in that very topic. The sometimes "geeky" approach is not a hurdle as long as marketing hits broadly into many target groups. The 7 (8) workshops reached out to a total of 250+ participants, including the Wikipedia Academy.
Case study: challenge
- The major challenge that WMNO has, is to get Wiki Loves Momuments out to the general community as an attractive competition and event. The project has been poorly stewarded from the start, it appeared probably to many as an external program that WMNO "had" to implement and operate, In the board at the instance of the first participation (2012), we were unable to enlist volunteer photo enthusiast to help staging the competition, and the whole process was really one of writing letters to photo clubs, and hoping that somebody would show up. Photo safaris were few and little visited, and there were few events to take or upload images together. The situation has, by and large, persisted ever since. Each year the Board agrees that "this time we will make it better", but the drive and priority has not been on the side of the WLM. The responsibility to stage and organize the WLM is a kind of negative prize - each year "somebody has to do it", and instead of innovating and making it a real fun, the approach is rather narrow and fatalistic. This has worn on the enthusiasm for the competition and created some fatigue over WLM. One bright part of the story is that prizes are usually rather attractive and the awarding ceremony is always nice and social, being a joint event with the Directorate for Cultural Heritage and usually combined with the very social Christmas Dinner Table in December. But this does not outweigh the fact that participation is way to narrow. The result is a meager 2,000 or so annual upload, further hampered by the fact that objects have to be sought from official registries - which probably is a hurdle to some. The movement has yet not been able to mobilize enthusiasm, support, participation, and joint events to make the WLM a great success.
- 1. What are some of the activities that are happening in your community that are not chapter-led? What are the most successful among these, and why?
- Mapping success
- The agreement of cooperation between Arts Council Norway and Wikimedia Norge, was the starting point of a great movement of sharing and opening of public data, which would not had happened without this "call from above". The co-operation call in early 2012 said:
- It is in the interest of the public that sectors like archives, museums, arts and culture are, as much as possible, covered at the Wikipedia and other sources of knowledge, [...] with updated texts, illustrations, links, and statistics." Arts Council Norway has established a co-operation with Wikimedia Norge, the organization behind Wikipedia. Arts Council Norway wants that information available in various channels like the archives portal, digital museum, digital stories, Europeana, can be connected together with contents in vital sources of knowledge like the Wikipedia.
- In reality, this started substantial activity at institutional level, and at the Wikipedia, which got its own dynamics and force much of it independently of assistance from the WMNO. Wikipedization of public services and public information started to occur even without our knowledge, from 2012 on. One good example is the Norwegian Mapping Survey ("Kartverket"), who for long lingered on to a policy of selling public maps and mapping services, in a proprietary form. It is well known that the former Government instructed Kartverket to release a vast amount of new maps in high resolution to the public domain, free of charge, in summer 2013. However, this government body started releasing older maps even before that, and uploaded them to Wikimedia Commons. Norway's largest newspaper reported in 2014 that Kartverket was releasing "old maps", but employees within the government body started to upload old maps to Commons as early as 2011, together with a large number of other entities.
- That year, user Kcita uploaded 500 historical maps to Commons, and Karsten Lien started to update a number of Wikipedia articles on map topics. Karsten Lien started up working for Kartverket in 2010 with the Norway Digital project, which is also connected to the Heritage Here project. And the historic maps service of "Kartverket" already had funding from the Arts Council Norway. So here were some early advocates of the openness movement within the map services, who utilized Wikipedia as their platform of making maps and map history available to the public. Together they had already in mid-2011 created a Wikipedia entry on the historical nautic map collections published in Norway. In mid-2011 user Kcita also started to upload 500 historic maps from Kartverket's collections to Commons, including 200+ nautical maps. The much later 2014 dropping of historical land maps, however, has yet yielded only 5 uploads by volunteers at Commons. The story shows how interns of public institutions can succeed in releasing and uploading large numbers of valuable data and heritage, even independently of the parallel efforts of the Wikimedia movement. We call this development "self-propellant" (selv-forsterkende) and it illustrates how success at a general level, or at some levels, can initiate and ignite a burst of activity at lower, or other levels that the initial agents could hardly foresee.
- Competition, Featured and Good Articles
- Wikimedia in Bokmål has for long developed a sustainable practice of getting forth featured articles or lists, with a set evaluation structure and process with deadlines and rules. This is probably not uncommon at other Wikipedias, but in Norway the process has been orchestrated and maintained for many years by user Morten Haugen, a librarian from central Norway who is a veteran wikipedian and WMNO activist. Even before the WMNO existed, the featured / good article system was launched and has today brought forward 248 Featured Articles, 635 Good Articles, and 148 Good Lists & Portals. The topical spread is rather good, with strong presence of culture- and science-related articles among the many (typical) history articles. Morten Haugen has also managed to integrate the sytem with both the Article of the Week feature (Articles of the Week must be nominated and good/featured).
- The article distinction and evaluation system is also well integrated with the Competition of the Week movement. These are totally community-led and community-driven processes, even though Wikimedia Norge regularly (perhaps once a month, on average) nominates it's own Competition of the Week topics and yields extra prizes to the winners. That is often being done with GLAM partners, but the operation and integration of the various competition and distinction processes is totally managed by the community. In 2013, a community volunteer (and at that time, Board member of WMNO), developed a program that automatically computes editors' contributions, data add, number of new or revised articles, etc, during competitions. By simply relating the competition to a certain Wikipedia catageory (for example, "Women" or "Culture"), the program automatically computes and awards points and scores to the contestants, with both individual and aggregate scores and data adds visible (see yellow boxes here for example). Before this program, contestants would have to compute their scores themselves. One success in this story is that the program has also been offered to other Wikipedia communities, of which Wikipedia in Finnish language has adopted the Norwegian-developed program and setup. The process has been fully community-driven, but in Norway though the WMNO played a noticeable part in awarding prizes every week to the competitions in question.
- 2. Provide any links to any media coverage, blog posts, more detailed reports, more detailed financial information that you haven't already, as well as at least one photograph or video that captures the impact your entity had this past year.
Is your organization compliant with the terms defined in the grant agreement?
- 1. As required in the grant agreement, please report any deviations from your grant proposal here. Note that, among other things, any changes must be consistent with our WMF mission, must be for charitable purposes as defined in the grant agreement, and must otherwise comply with the grant agreement.
- Deviations restricted to mainly abolish program 2, due to reduced funding.
- 2. Are you in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations as outlined in the grant agreement? Please answer "Yes" or "No".
- 3. Are you in compliance with provisions of the United States Internal Revenue Code (“Code”), and with relevant tax laws and regulations restricting the use of the Grant funds as outlined in the grant agreement? Please answer "Yes" or "No".
- 1. Report any Grant funds that are unexpended fifteen (15) months after the Effective Date of the Grant Agreement. These funds must be returned to WMF or otherwise transferred or deployed as directed by WMF.
- From the accounts, there is an under-spending of NOK 1,010, or almost precisely USD 170, during the grantmaking period until July 1, 2014.
- 2. Any interest earned on the Grant funds by Grantee will be used by Grantee to support the Mission and Purposes as set out in this Grant Agreement. Please report any interest earned during the reporting period and cumulatively over the duration of the Grant and Grant Agreement.
- Accrued interests on the project account were NOK 173 until July 1, 2014. This corresponds to USD 30.