Grants:APG/Proposals/2013-2014 round1/Wikimedia Deutschland e.V./Progress report form/Q3

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Purpose of the report[edit]

This form is for organizations receiving Annual Plan Grants to report on their results to date. For progress reports, the time period for this report will the first 6 months of each grant (e.g. 1 January - 30 June of the current year). For impact reports, the time period for this report will be the full 12 months of this grant, including the period already reported on in the progress report (e.g. 1 January - 31 December of the current year). This form includes four sections, addressing global metrics, program stories, financial information, and compliance. Please contact APG/FDC staff if you have questions about this form, or concerns submitting it by the deadline. After submitting the form, organizations will also meet with APG staff to discuss their progress.

Global metrics overview - all programs[edit]

We are trying to understand the overall outcomes of the work being funded across our grantees' programs. Please use the table below to let us know how your programs contributed to the Global Metrics. We understand not all Global Metrics will be relevant for all programs, so feel free to put "0" where necessary. For each program include the following table and

  1. Next to each required metric, list the outcome achieved for all of your programs included in your proposal.
  2. Where necessary, explain the context behind your outcome.
  3. In addition to the Global Metrics as measures of success for your programs, there is another table format in which you may report on any OTHER relevant measures of your programs success

For more information and a sample, see Global Metrics.


Metric Achieved outcome Explanation
1. # of active editors involved
2. # of new editors
3. # of individuals involved
4. # of new images/media added to Wikimedia articles/pages
5. # of articles added or improved on Wikimedia projects
6. Absolute value of bytes added to or deleted from Wikimedia projects

Telling your program stories - all programs[edit]

Please tell the story of each of your programs included in your proposal. This is your chance to tell your story by using any additional metrics (beyond global metrics) that are relevant to your context, beyond the global metrics above. You should be reporting against the targets you set at the beginning of the year throughout the year. We have provided a template here below for you to report against your targets, but you are welcome to include this information in another way. Also, if you decided not to do a program that was included in your proposal or added a program not in the proposal, please explain this change. More resources for storytelling are at the end of this form. Here are some ways to tell your story.

  • We encourage you to share your successes and failures and what you are learning. Please also share why are these successes, failures, or learnings are important in your context. Reference learning patterns or other documentation.
  • Make clear connections between your offline activities and online results, as applicable. For example, explain how your education program activities is leading to quality content on Wikipedia.
  • We encourage you to tell your story in different ways by using videos, sound files, images (photos and infographics, e.g.), compelling quotes, and by linking directly to work you produce. You may highlight outcomes, learning, or metrics this way.
  • We encourage you to continue using dashboards, progress bars, and scorecards that you have used to illustrate your progress in the past, and to report consistently over time.
  • You are welcome to use the table below to report on any metrics or measures relevant to your program. These may or may not include the global metrics you put in the overview section above. You can also share your progress in another way if you do not find a table like this useful.
Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (at end of Q2) End of year (projected or actual) Comments
Example Example Example Example Example

Revenues received during this period (6 month for progress report, 12 months for impact report)[edit]

Please use the exchange rate in your APG proposal.

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

* Provide estimates in US Dollars

Spending during this period (6 month for progress report, 12 months for impact report)[edit]

Please use the exchange rate in your APG proposal.

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
A B C D E F G H I J J2 K

* Provide estimates in US Dollars


Is your organization compliant with the terms outlined in the grant agreement?[edit]

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.

Are you in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations as outlined in the grant agreement? Please answer "Yes" or "No".

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".


Once complete, please sign below with the usual four tildes.


Resources to plan for measurement[edit]

Resources for storytelling[edit]

Basic entity information[edit]

Table 1

Entity information Legal name of entity Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
Entity's fiscal year (mm/dd–mm/dd) 01/01-12/31
12 month timeframe of funds awarded (mm/dd/yy-mm/dd/yy) 01/01/14-31/12/14
Contact information (primary) Primary contact name Jan Engelmann
Primary contact position in entity Executive Director
Primary contact username User:Jan Engelmann (WMDE)
Primary contact email
Contact information (secondary) Secondary contact name Kasia Odrozek
Secondary contact position in entity Consultant to the Executive Director
Secondary contact username User:Kasia Odrozek (WMDE)
Secondary contact email

Overview of this quarter[edit]

The purpose of this section is to provide a brief overview of this report. Please use no more than 1-2 paragraphs to address the questions outlined below. You will have an opportunity to address these questions in detail elsewhere in this report.

CHANGES: Please describe how you changed your plans and budget based on the FDC allocation approved by the Board in December 2012, and your rationale for these changes. You can then use the changed plans and budget as the basis on which to report back on the first quarter.

  • We have revised the budgeted figures for 2014 based on our current expectations. The revised budget amounts to €4.700.000, both for revenues and spending. These figures have been officially approved by the Supervisory Board. You can find the new figures and respective explanations in the the financial section.
  • The Census Project and the Open Data Project were terminated early for several reasons. Concerning the Open Data project, we realized that the needs of the administration start at a much earlier point than with specific individual release projects. The German government published its plans to implement the G8 Open Government Data Charter in September, results from which are not expected until the end of the year. Another reason the projects can no longer be pursued is the departure of an employee who was instrumentally responsible for the content of both projects.

HIGHLIGHTS: What were 1–2 important highlights of the past quarter? (These may include successes, challenges, lessons learned.)

  • Wikidata: Several talks were held at Wikimania concerning the topic of structured data in Wikimedia Commons. This issue, which is being intensively worked on by Wikimedia Deutschland Software Development and the Foundation's Multimedia Team, was the subject of a multi-day work meeting at the end of Q3.
  • We intend to reach out to policy makers and representatives of educational and cultural institutions, raising awareness for Free Knowledge and getting them on board for long-term collaboration in pursuit of our organizational objectives. This requires targeted and sustained outreach activities. Several event series (Monsters of Law, The ABC of Free Knowledge, Digital Competences) addressing a variety of topics and target groups were held in the past quarter with which we managed to establish numerous contacts with stakeholders in the above-mentioned areas so as to extend our reach and pave the way for future collaborations and partnerships.

WIKI-FOCUS: What Wikimedia projects was your entity focused on (e.g., Wiki Commons, French Wiktionary) this quarter?

  • German-language Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons, Wikimedia projects involving the German and European legal areas

GROWTH: How did your entity grow over the past quarter vs. the previous quarter (e.g., Number of active editors reached/involved/added, number of articles created, number of events held, number of partipants reached through workshops)?

  • Members: 11,511 (1,881 active members and 9,630 sustaining members; as of October 8, 2014).

Financial summary[edit]

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."

Revenues for this quarter[edit]

Provide exchange rate used:

  • 1EUR = $1,35
Revenue source Currency Anticipated Revised budget Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Cumulative Anticipated ($US)* Cumulative ($US)* Explanation of variances from plan
Transfers from the Wikimedia Fördergesellschaft (direct donations to WMDE) EUR 2,104,000 1,929,860 1,600,575 192,490 136,795 1,929,860 2,605,311 2,605,311
Funds from the FDC EUR 1,296,000 1,296,000 1,296,000 1,296,000 1,749,600 1,749,600
Carry forward from 2013 EUR 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 675,000 675,000
Membership dues EUR 490,000 516,371 386,662 12,105 116,991 515,758 696,273.3 696,273.3
Third-party funding EUR 390,000 87,108 0 0 12,000 12,000 16,200 16,200 The rest of the grant is expected in Q4.
Other EUR 90,000 370,661 48 134,808.96 227,100.7 361,957.66 488,642.841 488,642.841 Among others: subsidies from the OER conference, final EU grants (TAO, RENDER) disbursements, revenues from the event space, Fundraising management overhead, reimbursement of Wikimedia Conference costs.
Total 4,870,000 4,700,000 3,783,285 339,403.96 492,886.7 4,615,575.66 6,574,500 6,231,027.141

Spending during this quarter[edit]

Expense Currency Originally budgeted Revised budget Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Cumulative Budgeted ($US)* Cumulative ($US)* Percentage spent to date Explanation of variances from plan
Volunteer Support: More attractive funding mechanisms EUR 30,000 3,196 413.5 0 2,123.18 2,536.68 4,314.6 3,424.518 79.37%
Volunteer Support: Free content from volunteer projects EUR 110,000 268,637 46,089.08 52,592.95 68,911.79 167,593.82 362,659.95 226,251.657 62.39%
Community Empowerement: Stronger initiatives and social processes EUR 595,000 259,769.72 8,273.01 61,938.3 107,251.01 177,462.32 350,689.122 239,574.132 68.32%
Community Empowerent: Proccesses for improvement of structures EUR 7,000 1,030 618.8 411.6 0 1,030.4 1,390.5 1,391.04 100.04% We expect no more costs for this item.
Institutional Partnerships : Declarations of intent to making free content available EUR 41,500 14,476 99.76 1,874.48 4,808.55 6,782.79 19,542.6 9,156.7665 46.86% The most events costs will arise in Q4.
Institutional Partnerships: Free content and best practises from institutional partnerships EUR 25,000 21,500 49.95 15,100.67 5,923.4 21,074.02 29,025 28,449.927 98.02% We expect no more costs for this item.
Legal and Social Framework: Strengthening advocacy capacities EUR 38,000 38,100 8,069.97 16,259.7 8,683.9 16,753.87 51,435 22,617.7245 43.97% Freelance costs, as well as other costs related to the presence in Brussels will arise in Q4.
Legal and Social Framework: Being perceived as an advocate EUR 135,000 122,688 1,322.14 12,617.18 80,910.77 94,850.09 165,628.8 128,047.6215 77.31%
Legal and Social Framework: Regulations and incentive systems EUR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - There are only personell costs planned for this item.
Wikidata EUR 29,000 33,000 6,810.85 12,787.55 12,427.8 32,026.2 44,550 43,235.37 97.05% We expect no more significant costs for this item.
Cross-departiamental projects EUR 42,500 56,595.28 13,659.03 27,483.1 9,912.03 51,054.16 76,403.628 68,923.116 90.21%
Community Project Budget rest disbursement from 2013 EUR 12,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - No more costs were generated.
Project Overhead Team Community EUR 15,000 14,000 3,330.43 651.4 2,273.98 6,255.81 18,900 8,445.3435 44.68% Costs for internal meetings/retreat and trainings will arise in Q4.
Project Overhead Politics & Society Department EUR 15,000 6,104 684.55 2,293.57 2,835.77 5,813.89 8,240.4 7,848.7515 95.25% We expect no more significant costs for this item.
Project Overhead Team Education & Knowledge Department EUR 15,000 17,000 1,247.77 3,308.61 4,062.22 8,618.6 22,950 11,635.11 50.70% Costs for teambuilding activities and trainigs will arise in Q4.
Project Overhead Software EUR 5,000 5,897 267.5 483.16 2,822.03 3,572.69 7,960.95 4,823.1315 60.58% Hackathon and conferences travel costs, as well as catering costs for visitors will arise in Q4.
Administration EUR 700,000 1,083,612 170,648.71 235,240.3 324,012.57 729,901.58 1,462,876.2 985,367.133 67.36% In addition to regular costs, costs of the newly formed Works Council and the costs of the ED transition arised in Q3 and will arise in Q4. See the revised budget for details.
Public relations EUR 220,000 104,021 13,555.37 36,023.06 45,582.2 95,160.63 140,428.35 128,466.8505 91.48%
Fundraising EUR 240,000 240,000 46,035.57 78,302.35 17,915.55 142,253.47 324,000 192,042.1845 59.27%
International affairs EUR 130,000 95,393 7,052.82 68,341.21 9,756.32 85,150.35 128,780.55 114,952.9725 89.26%
Evaluation EUR 80,000 9,559 2,268.16 3,870.49 1,993.86 8,132.51 12,904.65 10,978.8885 85.08%
Eventmanagement EUR 10,000 7,208 4,265.22 1,617.25 1,174.46 7,056.93 9,730.8 9,526.8555 97.90% We expect no more significant costs for this item.
Supervisory Board EUR 90,000 114,322 10,746.74 32,075.18 33,488.06 76,309.98 154,334.7 103,018.473 66.75%
Personnel costs WMDE EUR 2,525,000 2,423,891 591,238.24 566,886.17 628,661.34 1,786,785.75 3,272,252.85 2,412,160.7625 73.72%
Personnel costs WMFG EUR 200,000 200,000 29,629.68 46,543 55,401 131,573.68 270,000 177,624.468 65.79%
Total 5,310,000 5,140,000 966,376.85 1,260,441.58 1,430,931.79 3,657,750.22 6,903,000 4,755,075.286 71.16%

Comments on the finance section:

  • In October 2014 the Supervisory Board approved a revised budget for WMDE. We have revised the figures based on our current expectations. You can find the revised budget together with a respective commentary as a PDF here.
  • Note that fundraising costs are reported here for transparency reasons but are not part of the WMDE budget.

Progress toward this year's goals/objectives[edit]

This section addresses the impact of the programs / initiatives* and objectives your entity has implemented over the past quarter and the progress your entity is making toward meeting this year's goals. We understand that some metrics may not be applicable in this quarterly report, so please add metrics here if they are applicable.

*In the past, the FDC has used the term 'initiative', but we are using the term 'program.'

Program 1: Volunteer Support[edit]

More attractive funding mechanisms
What are the objectives of this program? Please include metrics.
  • Volunteers have found contact with Wikimedia Deutschland helpful.
  • The number of support requests that have been approved
  • The number of volunteers whose requests for support has been approved
Progress against these objectives (include metrics and # of volunteers/staff involved)?
  • One operational target addressed in the 2014 Annual Plan was increasing funding requests by 123% in the period September 2013 to August 2014. A total of 2,059 solicitations had been completed by the end of Q3 of the year under review (previous year: 1,040). This represents a sizeable 97.99% increase over the course of the year.
  • One foundation for this success was the increase in the number of page views on our new funding portal in recent months since the relaunch, up 250% in Q3 2014 versus Q3 2013. Another important step in improving funding was adoption of the funding guidelines developed jointly with the community; these simplify the request process considerably for volunteers (see below).
  • Volunteers: 23 volunteers participated in the online discussion, 9 attended the workshop.
  • Paid staff: See FTE Table Q2
Activities conducted.
  • Please see the table below
What worked and what did not?
  • The funding guidelines developed in a collaborative process were adopted by the community last quarter. The community rapidly identified existing gaps – such as unresolved questions regarding international funding and the appropriateness of costs and benefits of certain specific funding activities – and then continued the process down to finalization of the guidelines.

Any additional details: Further development of funding guidelines:

Workshop for the further development of funding guidelines:

Volunteer support workshop:

Activities conducted
Keywords Measures Activities
Processes Optimization of internal funding processes

The claim form was simplified based on feedback from the community. Internal agreements on funding programs and responsibilities were concluded with Wikimedia Österreich and Wikimedia Schweiz. At the jointly conducted Volunteer Support Workshop at Wikimania a discussion was held on ways and means to support volunteers on a global scale. A new mailing list has been set up as a platform for communication. Joint workshops initiated by the DACH chapters are now to be held around twice a year.

Funding Drafting of funding guidelines in collaboration with the communities
  • A platform for further discussion of existing funding guidelines integrated within the general Wikipedia funding portal was set up as a forum to reflect on, supplement and optimize the new guidelines that are already in place.
  • The extensive online discussion and preparation of drafts were concluded at a workshop. The page views for the funding guidelines further development pages doubled from July (344) to August (680).
  • Number of funding requests: 320
Free content from volunteer projects
What are the objectives of this program? Please include metrics.
  • Volunteers have contributed to free knowledge as part of the Wikimedia movement.
  • Type, quantity and quality of the free knowledge.
Progress against these objectives (include metrics and # of volunteers/staff involved)?

Funding: Approximately 26,000 media files were created and uploaded to Wikimedia Commons in Q3 with support from WMDE (+22% vs. Q2). In Q3 the number of images rose to around 145,000 thanks to WMDE support. Approximately 51,000 of these had been utilized in Wikimedia projects as of the reporting date; 1,277 of these are "quality images" and 198 are "featured images".

The Free Knowledge funding program – set up (Förderprogramm Freies Wissen – FFW): Eleven volunteer project ideas are now presented on the portal, four of which are in implementation.


  • The workshops on the "Videos for Wikipedia Articles" project were instrumental in passing on the expertise required within the Community for creating video material.
  • Implementation of the German Bundestag project promoted knowledge sharing and skills for holding more complex events among a group of roughly 40 volunteers. Through communication with individual members of the German Bundestag, new contacts, networks and partnerships were made. These topics were much discussed in the movement in an international context, at Wikimania in particular, and addressed within a workshop.
  • The Free Encyclopedia for Children research and pilot project “Freies Lexikon für Kinder” was launched in September. Content will be created by the end of the project term.
Activities conducted.
  • Please see the table below
What worked and what did not?

Funding: Improved support by assisting with volunteer project idea development. Example: Erfurt – A modest photo tour planned by a volunteer was turned into a project with 14 participants which so far has yielded over 2,500 photos, plus another 1000 from a follow-up project in Weimar

FFW: The German Bundestag project plan originally submitted for funding via the community budget was re-filed with the Free Knowledge funding program for funding due to the level of expenditure required, and subsequently approved and realized.

Any additional details: Ideas portal:

Videos for Wikipedia articles:

German Bundestag project:

Free Encyclopedia for Children:

Activities conducted
Keywords Measures Activities
Funding Drafting of funding guidelines in collaboration with the communities
  • The following individual grants have been awarded thus far:
    • WP:@ funding program grants: 162 (2011-2014, +8.9% in Q3 2014)
    • Literary grants: 254 (2011-2014, +6.72% in Q3 2014)
    • eLitstips: 2
    • Software grants: 10 (in 2014, +10% in Q3 2014)
    • Travel grants: 0 (in Q3 2014); the 47 Wikimania grant recipients from Q2 received systematic support before, during and after the event in Q3
    • Travel cost reimbursements: Around 165 (plus claims that have not yet been filed)
    • Total funding requests processed: 320
FFW Free Knowledge Funding Program Building up a funding program for external Free Knowledge projects
  • The portal is being operated on a trial basis.
  • To date (as of September 30) eleven proposals for larger projects have been submitted on the FFW (Free Knowledge Funding Program) portal. Two workshops on the "Videos for Wikipedia Articles" project have been held. The German Bundestag project was fully completed.
Stronger initiatives and social processes
What are the objectives of this program? Please include metrics.

A change model will be developed in 2014:

  • Initiatives and social processes from within the Wikimedia Movement are stronger.

A change model will be developed in 2014:

  • Which topics/initiatives/discourses did WMDE support?
  • What needs did we identify in the topics/initiatives/discourses supported?
Progress against these objectives (include metrics and # of volunteers/staff involved)?

Increased integrability of Wikimedia projects:

  • Edit-a-thons have been held in which in-person collaboration takes place on specific topics with the involvement of new authors aimed at promoting sharing of knowledge and skills among participants and enhancing support of new authors.
  • Events like the "Women in Science" Edit-a-Thon (August 30), the Wikipedia theme evening with the Digital Media Women held at Local K in Cologne (September 16) and the monthly Women Edit meeting (average of eight participants) last quarter helped attract new authors and further strengthen the network of female authors, who contribute an independent perspective.
  • Volunteers were involved in Wikimedia planning in two Wiki Dialogues. The Wiki Dialogue was thus made known to the community as a tool and demonstrated in practical application.

Improved local cooperation: *Cologne: In the third quarter Wikipedia enthusiasts were regularly invited to gather at the Local K in Cologne. The target group expanded through use of the space by the OK Lab as a regular meeting place. Other events held included the WikiTeam education workshop and preparatory meetings for WikiCon).

  • Hamburg: Support with finding space. A Wikipedia consultation session has been held in the city's central library since September.
  • Berlin: An Open Edit, an activity principally geared toward enhancing networking and knowledge sharing within the community, took place three times in the community premises and twice at the Wikipedia Salon, where Community members, non-members and prominent guests gather for discussions concerning Wikipedia.

Improved cooperation within the German-language Wikimedia movement:

  • WikiCon: Process support provided by WMDE helped stabilize the WikiCon 2014 team of organizers.
  • Wikimania: Intensive preparations by participants from the communities (Wikipedia publications, mailing list, Wikimania preparation workshop) allowed them to network in targeted fashion, present ideas and advance their projects at Wikimania.

International collaboration:

  • Chapters Dialogue: The Chapters Dialogue has revealed that the current situation is hindering the Wikimedia movement's ability to effectively work to further Free Knowledge. Instead of realizing its full potential, the movement is revolving around itself and getting in its own way. The common mission will be in earnest jeopardy if the movement fails to address the causes of the conflicts specified. The dossier for the Chapters Dialogue provides a comprehensive basis for informed strategic decision-making going forward on collaboration and responsibilities within and among the Wikimedia organizations.
  • Wikimedia Conference: The feedback on the Wikimedia Conference was mostly positive, foregrounding aspects concerning knowledge transfer and networking. See the evaluation document for details.
  • Wikimania (WMDE): WMDE employees used Wikimania to network with international stakeholders, renew acquaintances, further knowledge transfer and initiate partnerships.

Improved support on the part of WMDE:

  • Toolserver – the central problem collection point set up for the migration of the Toolserver identified the tools that had not yet migrated and that had been missed the most by the community; in some cases individuals were appointed responsible to supervise and further develop orphaned tools. The problem collection point also enabled wrong redirects from the Toolserver to the Tool Labs to be identified and fixed.

Software improvement:

  • TechKomm: Communication and transfer serve to increase community involvement in decision-making and active process participation.
  • Volunteers:
    • Four volunteers served as mentors in the Mate Edit-a-thon.
    • Two volunteers took part in preparing for and conducting the edit-a-thons
    • Ten community members actively participated in discussion at the Zedler Wiki Dialogue, 31 participated in voting. There were six participants in the Software Wiki Dialogue.
    • The Wikipedia consultation session in Hamburg is run by five volunteers. Eight volunteers have registered as supporters for a permanent Wikipedia meeting point in Hannover.
    • Two (organizers of the Wikipedia Salon), one (organizer of Open Edit)
    • The WikiCon organization team is comprised of ten volunteers
    • Wikimania: Three volunteers designed the program as speakers at the pre-Wikimania meeting; two others took part in the program discussion. Twenty volunteers wrote articles for the special Wikimania feature page in the Kurier. Three volunteers will be making presentations on Wikimania at WikiCon in October. Sixteen volunteers submitted Wikimania presentation proposals, six of which were actually held. At least ten volunteers actively participated in workshops at Wikimania; three volunteers made Wikimania leaflets and posters which were distributed there.
Activities conducted.
  • Please see the table below
What worked and what did not?

Women Edit: New authors were recruited and new content generated at the Women Edit meetings and events held in Berlin and Cologne. Implementation of the WikiWomen's concrete plans in other cities did not work (Women's Wikipedia meetings etc.) due to the amount of effort being devoted to WikiCon planning during the period under review. Planning of further Women Edit activities outside Berlin continues however.

Wiki Dialog: Wiki Dialogue: In contrast to the first Wiki Dialog, the two new Wiki Dialogs were much more focused and aligned toward a clearly defined goal. Because of the resulting higher level of discussion and relevance, the number of discussion participants decreased to 11 from 38. The low-threshold format extension of the Wiki Dialog to include online voting reached 33 participants. Currently there are eight participants in the ongoing Wiki Dialog on preparations for a workshop on technical development at Wikipedia. Voting has not yet been conducted in this Dialog.

WikiCon: Use of a dedicated work wiki and communication via conference call proved beneficial.

Chapters Dialogue: The documentation took up much more time than scheduled, taking until Q3 to be completed. The dossier published in August and the film received a lot of positive feedback and the players in the movement were given much recognition. As was evident following the presentation at the Wikimedia Conference, the problems exposed urgently need to be addressed and coordinated corrective steps taken. It is still unclear however who is to take the next steps, how a follow-up project can be conducted and how this is to fit in with the upcoming process of defining the "Movement Roles Strategy".

Wikimania (WMDE): Wikimedia Deutschland had a high profile within the event program, holding ten presentations including the keynote speech on the social benefits of Wikidata. Our stand at the Community Village was well-visited throughout, and the Data Pump attracted quite a lot of attention from wikimedians, the press and the public.

Wikimania (Communities): Both online and offline support worked very well. We made an effort to actively reach out to the community by anticipating and providing the information required and by creating forums and opportunities for community members to be in dialog with each other.

Toolserver: The communication and networking structure surrounding the migration worked well, information on the migration being provided via multiple channels.

Any additional details: Wiki Project Mate-Edit-a-thon:


Women Edit:

Wiki Dialog:


Local Berlin:


Chapters Dialogue: Dossier on Meta:

Final film:


Facebook page:

Presentation at Wikimania:

Video recording of the presentation at Wikimania:


Wikimedia Conference:

Wikimania (WMDE):

Wikimania (Communities):

WMF TechKomm: WikiCon event:

Wiki Dialog discussion:


Technical wishlist:

Keywords Measures Activities
Newbies (supporting volunteers who help new volunteers) Increased integrability of Wikimedia projects

Activities conducted to attract new authors included an edit-a-thon dedicated to the topic of mate.

Teahouse Development of a section of the English-language Teahouse for the German-speaking communities

A software developer was commissioned with developing a dialog box. The dialog box represents a partial implementation of the Teahouse project for the German-language Wikipedia, designed to enable newbies to ask questions to the active community. A concept for an event addressing the status quo of the Teahouse at WikiCon was developed jointly with a community member.

Women Edit (building up networks of women within the Wikipedia community) Increased integrability of Wikimedia projects In Q3 the monthly Women Edit meeting (average attendance of eight participants) was held in the WMDE premises with, at which content is regularly generated for Wikimedia projects and various topics are discussed such as relevance criteria and gender gap. Additionally, two major events were held at which new authors were recruited and content created, the "Women in Science" Edit-a-Thon (August 30) and the Wikipedia theme evening with the Digital Media Women at Local K in Cologne (September 16). A meeting was also held on September 22 concerning further activity planning for 2015 and preparations for future Edit-a-Thons.
Wiki Dialogue (cMOOC) Increased integrability of Wikimedia projects Two Wiki Dialogues were held addressing the respective highly involved Communities. These served to involve the Community in the planning of WMDE events, the output from which was to generate a Community requirements profile for WMDE.
Local (providing local facilities for in-person dialogue and collaboration) Increased integrability of Wikimedia projects
  • Active members in the Hamburg Community are planning to set up a local Wikipedia office for regular events. In addition, the Hannover Community is working on an idea advanced by the city's local Wikipedia office to have a permanent Wikipedia meeting place and regional go-to point available for experienced and new Wikipedia activists as well as any other interested parties.
  • A new Wikimedia Deutschland offering for promoting Community events conducted by volunteer via signs, flyers and advertisements in city magazines. Wikimedia Deutschland supported Open Editing by providing facilities space and catering and through the Wikipedia Salon. The Open Editing session was attended by 28 participants, the Wikipedia Salon by 32.
WikiCon Organizational support for the central Community conference for German-speaking Europe Three organizational meetings and a location visit were conducted in preparation for the big upcoming Community event WikiCon. Social process support was provided as well.
Chapters Dialogue International collaboration In August we published an extensive dossier (58-page PDF, MetaWiki portal) and the concluding film (30 min.) on the Chapters Dialogue. All 94 interview partners were personally informed about the publication, and the movement-relevant information channels (mailing lists, Facebook page, Twitter, WMDE blog) were utilized to disseminate the results as broadly as possible. At Wikimania Nicole Ebber presented the findings and the film in a presentation (attendance of around 50) and numerous individual discussions took place about the project and potential continuation with the Wikimedia Foundation and Chapter members on board.
WMCON Wikimedia Conference International collaboration In Q3 we evaluated the participant survey with the help of the evaluation team and published the results. Our event team provided the breakdown of costs on Meta.
Wikimania, WMDE Best practice sharing Eight Supervisory Board members and 24 staff members participated in Wikimania in London, holding ten presentations (incl. keynote speech) and manning a booth at the Community Village (with the Data Pump). In the run-up to the event many WMDE members participated in the Community preparation workshop in Berlin and being active on the specially created mailing list. The WikiWomen Lunch was extremely effective for introducing the recently published Kompass der Vielfalt to a large audience, printed copies of which were distributed there. Created as part of the Wikipedia Diversity project, the Compass keeps readers up to date on the latest research on gender and diversity in relation to Wikipedia, addressing the main fields of action and steps promoting a more diverse Wikipedia. The study was published in August and distributed through various channels, including discussion on Meta. The Compass is available in a German and an English version.
Wikimania, Communities Improved cooperation within the German-language Wikimedia movement Scholarship recipients received support from Wikimedia Deutschland before, during and after Wikimania. In July a three-day preparatory workshop was offered to all participants as an opportunity to become familiarized in advance with the location, program and structures of the Wikimedia movement and the possibilities which Wikimania holds. A special feature page in the Wikipedia Kurier informed participants and interested parties about Wikimania and the event's schedule. The content of the special feature page was provided mostly by volunteers and WMDE staff. Just in time for WikiCon, a few printed copies and a PDF were released to report comprehensively on scholarship recipients.
WMF Techkomm Communities and WMF software developers in productive cooperation
  • The Community Engagement team and software developers of WMF and Wikimedia Deutschland are in talks about integrating the German-speaking Community into software development going forward. To this end the Community Engagement team leader has scheduled a regular monthly appointment.
  • An open discussion forum was organized for WikiCon with the Product Manager of the WMF and Community multimedia teams.
  • A workshop on software development and cooperation structures between the Community and the WMF was offered for WikiCon. Ideas for workshop topics were gathered jointly with the Community at a Wikidialogue.
Toolserver migration (existing tools remain available the Communities) Software improvement A central German/English trouble desk was set up upon shutdown of the Toolserver at the end of June. Special support was provided for a particularly complex tool to enable migration.
Legal advice Improved legal certainty WMDE commissioned the preparation of a legal opinion on the liability implications of the Google decision on the "right to be forgotten". The WMF is to receive an opinion report as well to ensure the support team is versed on this issue.

Processes for improvement of structures
What are the objectives of this program? Please include metrics.

A change model will be developed in 2014:

  • Initiatives/social processes have contributed to the improvement of structures in the Wikimedia movement

A change model will be developed in 2014:

  • Our observations: What were this quarter’s most important topics/initiatives/social processes for improving the structures within the Wikimedia movement?
  • Our observations: To what extent did work on these topics/initiatives/social processes contribute to the improvement of structures in the Wikimedia movement?
Progress against these objectives (include metrics and # of volunteers/staff involved)?
  • The project took place in the first quarter.
  • No further changes took place in the second quarter compared to the first.
  • Freiwillige:
  • Paid staff: Please see the FTE table below
Activities conducted.
What worked and what did not?

Any additional details:

Program 2: Institutional Partnerships[edit]

Declarations of Intent to makeing free content available
What are the objectives of this program? Please include metrics.
  • Institutions have committed themselves to making free content available.
  • Institutions have developed an understanding of how free knowledge works.
  • Type, number and quality of requests
  • Type and number of declarations
Progress against these objectives (include metrics and # of volunteers/staff involved)?

HIVE Berlin – Learning Network: At the HIVE MeetUp in September a computer science teacher who is a member of the umbrella organization for computer science teachers, announced his commitment to OER and the use of open content in his classes and his intention to introduce this practice to the Berlin working group of computer science teachers. Networking and the cultivation of contacts by the fee-based employee hired for this purpose motivated four members of different educational institutions with no prior contact to Free Knowledge to participate in the July and September MeetUps. They would not have become aware of WMDE’s educational work without having been directly approached.

Science Year 2014: At the "Free Knowledge and Science" event held September 15 in Vienna, major science organizations called for open access to science data and findings, including event sponsor FWF – the Austrian Science Fund – which is Austria's largest source of state funding for scientific research. In addition to several prominent scholars, a staff member of EU Commissioner Nelie Kroos and a member of the Austrian Nationalrat attended the event and participated intensively in the dicussions.

Activities conducted.
  • Please see the table below
What worked and what did not?

Shaping access: No changes as results will only be available in the next quarter.

Hive: Attendees say that the Meetups are highly informative and interesting and provide valuable networking opportunities. The structure of the MeetUps has been improved in this regard. The problem remains however that MeetUps are too informal and that too little happens beyond the meetings themselves unless WMDE invests the decisive resources.

MS Wissenschaft: An array of prominent speakers made for a critical and controversial debate which raised awareness of the open science movement. Cooperation with the German-speaking chapters (D, AT, CH) worked very well, due in part to a good division of responsibilities among the project management team. Continuation and further development of the event is being considered. Because the event venue was in Austria however, few members of German and Swiss organizations attended the event even though targeted invitations were sent out.

Any additional details: Shaping access:


MS Wissenschaft:

Activities conducted
Keywords Measures Activities
Shaping Access presents the idea of free knowledge to GLAMs to encourage them to make knowledge freely available in future. Symposium on the cultural and political dimensions of free access to digitized cultural heritage

For the conference WMDE is organizing the panel "Cultural Heritage 3.0 – Opportunities for Digital Reuse" and the showcase for best practice projects which utilize open content. The concept development phase has been completed. All speaker and project requests have been placed. Around 90% of expected acceptances have been obtained. The focus next quarter will be on public relations and conducting the conference. Commitments have been received for twelve international projects to be showcased to serve as case studies for reuse and open content licensing. This will inform a broad section of the public of existing initiatives to copy and open up further options for collaboration.

Hive HIVE has helped institutions develop an understanding of how free knowledge works and of the idea of making knowledge freely available in future.

The HIVE MeetUp in July revolved around the Open Knowledge Festival. Several international guests presented their work to the Berlin HIVE group, including a guest from HIVE Pittsburgh and one from Wikimedia UK. The August MeetUp was not held on account of the school holidays, but in September some 15 institutions and participants attended, including a sub-chapter of the Chaos Computer Club and an educational media organization.

MS Wissenschaft WMDE is contributing to the floating exhibition with an exhibit on the topic of digital society. The exhibition will be travelling through Germany and Austria from May to October.

On September 15, 2014 the event "Free Knowledge and Science" was held on the MS Wissenschaft in Vienna, Austria, jointly conducted by Wikimedia Deutschland, Wikimedia Österreich and Wikimedia Schweiz with an attendance of 60. In addition to international scientists and researchers, the speakers on the panel included a representative of the European Commission "Digital Agenda". The event was sponsored by the FWF, the Austrian Science Fund. In addition to short presentations on the topics of "Open Science", "Open Data" and "Citizen Science" a lively debate was held including professionals in the audience on whether and to what extent science can and should be open. The event was attended by the Chair of the FWF and a member of the Austrian Nationalrat. A video is being produced documenting the event.

Free content and best practices from institutional partnerships
What are the objectives of this program? Please include metrics.
  • Institutions have contributed free knowledge to the Wikimedia movement.
  • Type, quantity and quality of the free knowledge that has been contributed.
  • best practice success stories from joint projects are documented and made available within the Wikimedia movement
Progress against these objectives (include metrics and # of volunteers/staff involved)?

Coding da Vinci: 17 programmed applications were submitted for the GLAM hackathon competition. They were based on 23 datasets from 16 cultural institutions, corresponding to 325,000 media files (items) available for use by coders under an open license. The contents ranged from digitized books from the imperial era to photographs, databases and animal sounds from Europe. The data in the applications were supplemented in part by material from Wikimedia projects. Spreadsheet with metrics

Glam on Tour: The GLAM on Tour station on the First World War at the Braunschweigisches Landesmuseum (BLM) was successfully concluded, with a writing competition Schreib and a photo competititon Fotowettbewerb. Prizes were awarded to three winners in each competition. The GLAM on Tour promotion with regional public broadcasting corporation Südwestrundfunk (SWR) in Stuttgart was also well-received and is starting to bear fruit. SWR staff have started putting open content on Wikipedia and integrating this practice into internal workflows.

  • Volunteers:
    • 50 volunteer programmers participated in the Coding da Vinci competition. Some 100 representatives of cultural and heritage organizations participated as well.
    • Five Wikipedia activists participated in the GLAM on Tour writing competition in Braunschweig, while eight volunteers participated in the photo competition. The competition judges were two longtime Wikipedians, a curator, the museum director and two Wikimedia staff.
Activities conducted.
  • Please see the table below
What worked and what did not?

Coding da Vinci: To date there has been no comprehensive and direct integration of newly acquired content into Wikimedia projects. The reasons for this are that no volunteers have been found thus far able to adequately devote themselves to this task and lacking resources to pay an employee to do so. Plans are to hold a workshop next quarter for the participating Coding da Vinci representatives educating them on the importance of making content easier to access and reuse.

GLAM on Tour:

  • Getting GLAM institutions to integrate the releasing of content into their workflows independently has only worked with SWR thus far. The rights situation is often so complex with GLAM institutions that it is difficult for decision-makers to take action despite good intentions.
  • Projects must be better documented so as to allow others to build upon them in their own work. In Q4 we will be launching a pilot project with the production of a video tutorial on the "GLAM on Tour" GLAM meeting format.

Any additional details: Coding da Vinci: Comprehensive press review:

Blog posts:

GLAM on Tour: GLAM on Tour Braunschweig Project page:


Writing competition overview:

Photo competition overview:

Blog post by volunteer Wikipedian Schlesinger:

GLAM on Tour Brilon Sauerlandkurier:

Brilon-Total lokal:

Radio Sauerland:

Activities conducted
Keywords Measures Activities
Ideally, Coding da Vinci could even provide best practices. The two-part hackathon competition with GLAM content demonstrates the exciting and innovative potential of digital cultural assets to GLAM institutions and programmers alike.

The final public event at the Jewish Museum with a presentation of the programmed applications and the awards ceremony was attended by around 150 people: 50 coders and around 100 GLAM representatives. Twenty-three datasets and 325,000 items from cultural institutions were released under an open license.

GLAM on Tour gets volunteers to produce content in collaboration with GLAMs. Local Wikipedians and GLAM institutions collaborating on-site

Thirty new items were created following the GLAM on Tour event in Braunschweig. 463 new photos were uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons included detail shots of Braunschweig's main cemetery. A press conference was held in Brilon for the next GLAM on Tour station, and has already yielded three articles.

„Census“ befreit WikiData-relevante Inhalte. Wikimedia Deutschland baut auf der Arbeit der OKFN für den Open Data-Zensus auf. Wir setzen uns für die Freigabe von zentralen repräsentativen Datensätzen und ihre Integration in die Wikimedia-Projekte (wo immer sinnvoll und von den Communitys gewünscht) ein.

Regelmäßige Abstimmungsgespräche mit den Kooperationspartnern

Program 3: Legal and Social Framework[edit]

Strengthening advocacy capacities
What are the objectives of this program? Please include metrics.
  • The Wikimedia movement has improved its specialist knowledge and method-based skills.
  • The Wikimedia movement is part of a network of allies.
  • Specialist knowledge within the Wikimedia movement
    • the Wikimedia movement has formulated its key issues
    • our argument for why more state-owned works should be in the public domain has been finalized and recognized within the Wikimedia movement
    • our position on open educational resources (OER) has become clear and recognized within the Wikimedia movement
  • Method-based skills within the Wikimedia movement.
    • the Wikimedia movement has established reliable communication channels
    • the share of EU chapters with guidelines for writing EU statements
    • the share of EU chapters with defined contacts at the Wikimedia Foundation
    • the Wikimedia movement has established binding decision-making processes, regular discussions, and contacts in order to position it at the EU level
  • Network of allies
    • Scope of cooperation with the allies
Progress against these objectives (include metrics and # of volunteers/staff involved)?

BXL Fact-Finding: The EU Observatory in Alicante (IPR Observatory) which we are members of together with digital freedom organization EDRi and the European consumer association BEUC, has now finally included the study we have called for on the economic benefits of open content in its work program. The economic experts of the Observatory then asked us to specify the meaning of the term "open content", define its economic benefit and provide information regarding measurability. We involved both the Advocacy List and our partners in the Communia Association in our response.

BXL Infrastructure:

  • New chapters have joined the EU Free Knowledge Advocacy Group (FKAGEU). Many new volunteers signed up to get involved in our project at Wikimania in London. Contacts with non-EU chapters are being stepped up – WMCH, WMNO, WMRS, WMUA
  • We worked on our communications strategy. This is particularly necessary if an organization's lobbying activities are to be conducted in decentralized fashion. Ensuring a coherent message will be a definite challenge for many organizations.

BXL Get Visible: In view of the postponement of the European Commission white paper on copyright law we have written a position paper (in collaboration with our contacts at FKAGEU). This paper is intended as a support for sections within the European Commission that are sympathetic to our cause in internal negotiations and to provide a reason for us to meet with the new DGs.

Monsters of Law: We were happy to gain Dr. Ellen Euler, Deputy Director of the Deutsche Digitalen Bibliothek (DDB) as an additional speaker, an individual whose high level of professional expertise attracts a very specialized audience, enhancing the prestige of the series. The relevance of DDB as a go-to for content-related questions in the field of digitization makes it extremely important as a close partner organization of WMDE and associates the organization with the topic of the evening in the public mind. Interest group representatives will thus get to know WMDE as an expert partner for discussion and consultation on legal issues concerning free knowledge.

Activities conducted.
  • Please see the table below
What worked and what did not?

BXL Fact-Finding: Participation by a large number of partners associated with Wikimedia worked well. Communication between the different channels (Advocacy and Communia lists) and between us and the Observatory is unbalanced however. This is to be improved through direct involvement of Communia in the Observatory.

BXL Infrastructure:

  • WMPT and WMFI have still not responded; WMDK has named a contact but has not signed the statement (or given any explanation). Participation by chapters in interested non-EU countries is not clearly defined, which causes confusion for these chapters – WMCH, WMNO, WMRS, WMUA *Holding a workshop on the day after Wikimania was a mistake. Everyone was too drained to actively contribute. The workshop attracted new interested parties nonetheless.

BXL Get Visible: Sixteen organizations have signed thus far. We expect at least another five. Originally we wanted to get it through within two weeks, but confirmation from the chapters and like-minded organizations is taking significantly longer. Slow response time is a foreseeable problem, and in this case has no negative consequences.

Monsters of Law: Efforts to attract prominent speakers worked well. We would like to increase the number of participants, which is likely to be low, but these specialized issues only inherently attract a small audience . In future we plan to make the titles of the events less legal so as not to scare prospective attendees away with legal jargon.

Any additional details: BXL Fact-Finding: Internal communications except for discussion on the Advocacy Advisors distribution list (see link). Will only be publicized after the Observatory plenary meetings on October 28 and 29, 2014.

BXL Infrastructure:

Initial efforts are being made to distribute financing for 2015 across multiple chapters. This will be addressed further in Q4.

BXL Get Visible:

Monsters of Law: Website with recaps:

Blog post:

Video "Culture and Knowledge Online" with Dr. Ellen Euler:

Twitter posts (#wmdeMoL):

Activities conducted
Keywords Measures Activities
BXL: Infrastructure

Ensuring the Free Knowledge Advocacy Group’s capacity to act over the long term by finding contact persons at all European Chapters and communities, establishing a main point of contact, building consensus on issues and developing a coordination model for responding to political events ||

  • New members: WMES, WMHU
  • We worked on our communications strategy in collaboration with the FKAGEU, both online and at a workshop at Wikimania.
BXL: Get Visible

Increasing our visibility in Brussels through the UNESCO World Book Day, brochures, catalogs of key pre-election questions and participation in politically important decision-making processes || The position paper was written internally within WMDE and then edited jointly with the FKAGEU. As a third step the paper was presented at Wikimania, where chapters and like-minded organizations were asked if they would be interested in being co-signatories.

Monsters of Law

This series of events centers on increasing awareness about the conditions necessary for free knowledge, with a particular focus on copyright and liability issues in the context of open content. || An event was held with Dr. Ellen Euler which was streamed live and is available as a video. An audience of around 25 professionals participated.


Making expert knowledge available to the Wikimedia movement ||

  • Like-minded partners ranging from WMF to Kennisland, ISCC-CNRS (Paris Sorbonne) and Creative Commons have become involved to help provide the best possible responses to the Observatory's questions.
  • The preliminary answers are to be discussed at a working group meeting with the Observatory in October.
Being perceived as an advocate
What are the objectives of this program? Please include metrics.
  • Decision-makers and influential institutions perceive the Wikimedia movement as an advocacy group for free knowledge.
  • Enquiries about key issues from decision-makers and representatives of influential institutions
Progress against these objectives (include metrics and # of volunteers/staff involved)?

BXL Get Visible: We have also made efforts to initiate contact with the new MEPs in the relevant committees.

Science Year 2014: Over the course of the Science Year we cooperated successfully with outstanding institutions. We have thus not only heightened the visibility of WMDE but also created a strategic framework for future partnerships. This will make it much easier to initiate joint Free Knowledge pilot projects.

OER Conference:

  • WMDE invited the working group of the Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs on open educational resources, which has met for about ten months now, to the OER-conference, where the group met in a separate room, visited the conference and then met with Wikimedia representatives for an hour. The working group is currently working on action recommendations on the subject for German education ministries. The paper, to be published in late 2014, could have a decisive impact on OER in Germany over the next few years. Working group members include representatives of various education ministries and scientific advisers.
  • Several politicians and ministry representatives attended the OER 2014 conference. WMDE representatives talked with Mark Rackles, State Secretary in the Berlin Senate Administration for Education, Youth and Science, and Member of the German Bundestag Saskia Esken.

OER Action Group:

  • The Free Education Alliance has commenced work on the OER policy recommendations under the leadership of WMDE. Numerous representatives of universities, foundations and civil society are involved in the process. As its first PR activity the Action Group published a joint statement on the German government's Digital Agenda.
  • WMDE received several invitations to speak about Free Knowledge in an educational context. In September Dr. Nils Weichert spoke about Free Knowledge before the state parliament of North Rhine-Westphalia. WMDE representatives are invited in October to present an opinion on open access to the state parliament of North Rhine-Westphalia. In late October WMDE representatives are scheduled to speak at a German/French university conference on "OER in Higher Education".

Digital Competences: In September around 110 people attended two "Digital Competences" events to meet the requirements for participating in Wikimedia projects. This yielded some 35 new relationships with academics and politicians with whom WMDE had no previous contact. Since the start of the event series roughly 200 people have been included in the e-mailing list in order to receive ongoing information about WMDE activities.

  • Volunteers: 9 (BXL), 10 (Science Year), 12 (OER Conference)
  • Paid staff: See FTE Table Q2
Activities conducted.
  • Please see the table below
What worked and what did not?

BXL Get Visible: The cooperation with WMUK worked very well. Not only did we succeed in getting into contact with MEPs from the United Kingdom on behalf of the British chapter, we also found volunteers to assist in these efforts, some from the relevant constituencies. Building up structures is more difficult in countries without active chapters or volunteers.

OER Conference:

  • A preliminary evaluation of attendee feedback indicates the conference was extremely well-received by all, in terms of both the program and organization/communication.
  • Registration numbers had been below expectations for a long time in the run-up to the conference, showing a significantly increase only in the last few weeks after a focused communications campaign targeted correspondence at educational institutions in different German states. Communications planning needs to be optimized if the conference is to be repeated in 2015.

OER Action Group: The working group has been highly active since commencing work in August. This late start, caused by organizational delays, was not ideal. An earlier start would have left more opportunity for discussion and room to compensate for additional delaying factors.

Digital Competences: We managed to both attract an audience of interested industry professionals to the events and include Wikimedia projects in the discussions.

Any additional details: BXL Get Visible:

Science Year 2014:

OER Conference: Radio and television

Print and online:

Blog posts WMDE:

Digitale Competences:

Activities conducted
Keywords Measures Activities
BXL Get Visible Raising the profile in Brussels

We endeavored to contact all relevant MEPs in the JURI and IMCO committees, both centrally in Brussels and via chapters and volunteers. To date we have established contact with seven of them, including the two chairs.

Science Year MS Wissenschaft (MS Science)

In Q3 of Science Year 2014 the following events were held with attendance numbers and interest groups represented as stated:

  • September 1, 2014: "Digital Competencies" event series – presentation and panel discussion on "Digital Natives", 66 attendees including around 30 interest group representatives
  • September 12/13, 2014: OER Conference 2014, 350 attendees including 150 interest group representatives
  • September 15, 2014: MS Wissenschaft – presentation and panel discussion on "Science and Free Knowledge" in Vienna, 60 attendees including around 50 interest group representatives
  • September 29, 2014: "Digital Competencies" event series - presentation and panel discussion on the "Digitalization of the Working World", 50 attendees including around 20 interest group representatives
OER Action Group Cooperation and networking project

The Free Education Alliance has commenced work on the OER policy recommendations. These recommendations are to be outlined by the end of the year by a group of around 15 collaborating OER experts. The first meeting was held on August 18, since which date work has been ongoing. Further meetings are scheduled for October and November.

OER Conference Establishing a broad basis for free education, building competences

The OER Conference held by WMDE on September 12 - 13, 2014 was a success and attended by roughly 350 people. This makes the OER Conference the largest individual event the WMDE held in 2014. The conference attracted considerable media attention, being covered for example in the midday edition of the Tagesschau, Germany's most popular TV news broadcast. The conference hashtag (# OERde14) was trending on Twitter on both days. The conference was opened by Dirk van Damme, Head of the OECD's Innovation and Measuring Progress division.

regulations and incentive systems
What are the objectives of this program? Please include metrics.
  • The general conditions for free knowledge have improved.
  • Decision-makers have created legislative acts, institutional rules and specialist recommendations that facilitate the creation, collection and dissemination of free content.
  • Monitoring and analysis: Monitoring of the most important conditions in the areas of copyright, culture, education, economy and science that concern the creation, collection and dissemination of free content.
Progress against these objectives (include metrics and # of volunteers/staff involved)?

This project was not conducted during this quarter.

Activities conducted.
What worked and what did not?

Any additional details:



Wikidata is a free database that can be read and edited by both humans and machines. What Wikimedia Commons is in regard to media, Wikidata achieves for other data: Wikidata centralizes the access and the administration of structured data such as interwiki-links, infoboxes and statistical information.

What are the objectives of this program? Please include metrics.
  • A change model will be developed in 2014
Progress against these objectives (include metrics and # of volunteers/staff involved)?

As in the past, community members are playing a major role in the development of Wikidata, getting involved through volunteer discussions and contributions on software development. In the third quarter six Wikimedia projects utilized Wikidata as a basis for their work through the integration of Wikinews (Wikipedia, Commons, Wikitravel, Wikisource, Wikiquote, Wikinews) . Wikidata was no longer in fourth place among all Wikimedia projects in new author measurement as in the previous quarter, having fallen to seventh in the third quarter. Wikidata is ranked fourth and fifth for active and highly active authors respectively.

  • Volunteers: The numbers of collaborating volunteers was unchanged versus the previous quarter. For software development tasks five to ten volunteers are very actively supporting us in the source code changes. Countless community members have helped improve the project by providing feedback and bug reports. With some 13,000 active users, Wikidata is one of the most successful projects in the Wikimedia movement.
  • Paid staff: See FTE Table Q2
Activities conducted
  • Work this quarter focused on the foundations for multimedia support.
  • Another focus was on completing the software improvements which were the results of the previous month's work.
  • Numerous software improvements were published, among other things. These include the integration of Wikinews, providing client functionality on Wikidata itself, supporting designations for outstanding or recommended articles, forwarding, the new "monolingual text" data type, display improvements for other Wikimedia projects, improvements to the Entity Suggester and the redesign of data serialization.
What worked and what did not?

In the second quarter we addressed too many development issues at once: redirects, simple queries, UI redesign, etc., which necessitated subsequent changes in the development plan. The development process was adjusted and focused in the third quarter. Successes were seen in the revision of the development plan. The work completed in the preceding months yielded a very large number of software improvements which were released in August and loaded onto the servers.

Any additional details: Wikidata statistics:

Statistics on data in Wikidata:

Overview of the current software development segments at Wikidata (SCRUM-Sprints)


Additional internal and external events and Nachnutzungstool (Reuse tool)
Activities conducted.

Zedler Prize: WMDE confers Zedler Free Knowledge Prize in the categories 'Best Wikipedia Article', 'Best Project within a Wikimedia Project' and 'Best External Project' to volunteers who have demonstrated outstanding dedication. In September a Wiki Dialogue was held with the community in preparation for the Zedler Prize in which potential format and content changes for the 2015 Awards were discussed. This Dialogue was attended by 33 Wikipedians, allowing targeted action on suggestions from the community, some of which have been in discussion for years. The community nomination phase for potential award recipients for 2015 opened in September as well.

Wikimedia Salon: WMDE holds discussion events every other month in which experts discuss issues of a networked society in relation to the 'ABCs of Free Knowledge'. The third cultural salon event was held in July, entitled 'C = Crowdrock: The Future of the Music Industry?'. Danny Bruder of C3S, the Cultural Commons Collecting Society, Olaf Möller, Chairman of the Club Commission, concept artist Christian von Borries and composer Johannes Kreidler were all on the panel, delivering a fascinating variety of perspectives. The Salon was streamed live and a video recording is available. The series continues in October with the topic 'D=Data: Benefits and Privacy Concerns Associated with Big Data' with speakers including Fukami and Anke Domscheit-Berg.

Links: Website:


Blog posts:

Video Salon 'C = Crowdrock. The future of the music industry?':

License reference generator: The license reference generator is a software tool for the license-compliant reuse of content on Wikimedia Commons. Based on the URL the software identifies the license of an image or other media and generates a ready text for proper license-compliant reuse in online or print media. The software for the license reference generator was newly created on the basis of a technical plan and flow chart. The plan was prepared by the Politics & Society department, with legal advice contributed by the law firm JBB. The finished prototype introduced by Mathias Schindler in a presentation at Wikimania 2014 met with considerable interest from the international community.

Lessons learned[edit]

Lessons from this quarter[edit]

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 from entities who receive funds, and to share these lessons across the movement. The purpose of this section is to elicit some of these insights, which will be shared throughout the movement. Please answer the following questions in 1–2 paragraphs each.

What were your major accomplishments in the past quarter, and how did you help to achieve movement goals?

  • The high level of participation in the Coding Da Vinci culture hackathon and the sophistication of the applications submitted by the coders came as a gratifying surprise. Targets were far exceeded, as not 50 but 100 coders registered, 16 institutions released data rather than only five, and instead of five apps, 17 were submitted for the competition. And the awards ceremony was attended by 150, rather than the projected 100. Now 325,000 media files are available for reuse under an open license. All partners involved definitely want to hold another GLAM Hackathon next year. A first copycat event is already being held in Baden-Württemberg imitations.
  • Publication of the insights obtained in the Chapters Dialogue has provided the Wikimedia movement a first-ever comprehensive overview of roles, interrelationships and responsibilities within and among the Wikimedia organizations, the chapters and the Wikimedia Foundation. While much of this information may not be exactly remarkable or novel, it does serve to create a new basis by compiling and linking together the various different aspects and perspectives. The Chapters Dialogue yielded the conclusion that the movement is obstructing its own progress, with power structures which hinder effective, cooperative work in the interest of Free Knowledge. The know-how which Wikimedia Deutschland is able to mine from this project for the movement forms a basis for downstream processes and informed strategic decision-making regarding cooperation, structures and responsibilities within and among the Wikimedia organizations.

What were your major setbacks in the past quarter (e.g., programs that were not successful)?

  • We underestimated the effort involved in making use of the datasets released through Coding da Vinci for Wikimedia projects. Individual media files are stored in Wikimedia Commons; we received packets of data sets which first have to be unpacked, transformed and categorized before they are reusable for Wikimedia projects. We are currently working on solutions here.

What factors (organizational, environmental) enabled your success?

  • We held major events which raised broad public awareness of WMDE and the issue of Free Knowledge while significantly expanding our partner network. Building upon these gains will make it much easier in the years ahead to diversify our income structure and extend the reach of our activities.

What unanticipated challenges did you encounter and how did this affect what you were able to accomplish?

  • At the end of the third quarter there was a change of Executive Director, as Pavel Richter was succeeded by Jan Engelmann. Jan will be Interim Director until a final solution has been found. His first tasks included preparing a revised budget covering costs associated with the change of leadership as well as preparation of the 2015 Annual Plan.

To ensure a smooth, orderly transition the former director will be advising Jan as a consultant until at least the end of January 2015.

  • Too many objectives were simultaneously pursued in the second quarter in efforts to develop Wikidata, ranging from redesign of the user interface to database queries and redirects. The Wikidata development plan was revised in the third quarter so as to substantially sharpen the focus of development work.

What changes might you make in executing your initiatives into the next quarter?

  • Going forward we will be better exploiting the continuity of our partnerships for long-term project planning in which project activities and the projects themselves interrelate more closely and build upon each other more substantially. Case in point: CdV – next year Coding Da Vinci will be more closely tied in with other WMDE projects and partner initiatives aimed at increasing open content and reusability. The partnerships we have in place are to be utilized more effectively to achieve our goals.
  • We need more professional partner management, a task seen as part of organizational development. The first step is to map partners on the organizational level; the second step is systematization according to defined criteria. Building upon this, gaps will be closed and areas yet to be tackled will be opened up.
  • As volunteers are showing greater courage to plan and take on bigger projects, WMDE is committed to providing volunteers with greater planning and logistics support and taking on liability risks. In large volunteer projects, support opportunities aimed at empowerment must be identified earlier on than has been the case.

Additional information[edit]

Provide any other relevant information that may be helpful or relevant for the FDC (e.g., links to any media coverage, blog posts, more detailed reports, more detailed financial information). Wikidata:


Is your organization compliant with the terms outlined in the grant agreement?[edit]

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.

  • We described all the changes in the "Overview of this quarter/Changes" section.

Are you in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations as outlined in the grant agreement? Please answer "Yes" or "No".

  • Yes

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".

  • Yes


Once complete, please sign below with the usual four tildes.