Jump to content

Grants:Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund/Conference Fund/Open Knowledge Conference

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
statusUnder review
Open Knowledge Conference
grant start date02 April 2026
grant end date31 January 2027
amount requested (local currency)7748213.55 INR
amount requested (USD)87554.81 USD [note 1]
grant typeplease specify whether this grant is for an individual, group, or organization
decision fiscal year2025-26
funding program roundRound 2
applicantPavan Santhosh (OKI)
organization (if applicable)International Institute of Information Technology Hyderabad

This is an automatically generated Meta-Wiki page. The page was copied from Fluxx, the web service of Wikimedia Foundation Funds, where the user has submitted their application. Please do not make any changes to this page because all changes will be removed after the next update. Use the discussion page for your feedback. The page was created by CR-FluxxBot.

Applicant details

[edit]
A. Are you applying as a(n)

Nonprofit organization with Wikimedia mission

B. Full name of organization presenting the proposal.

International Institute of Information Technology Hyderabad

F. Do you have an account on a Wikimedia project?

Yes

F1. Please provide your main Wikimedia Username.

Pavan Santhosh (OKI)

F2. Please provide the Usernames of people related to this proposal.

Tanveer Hasan Pavan Santhosh (OKI) Ankit-OKI Krupal (OKI) Medini (OKI) Nitesh (OKI) Nivas (OKI)

G. Are you legally registered?

Yes

If you are applying as an individual or your group is not a legally registered nonprofit in your country, we require that you have a fiscal sponsor.

I. Fiscal organization name.

N/A

Objectives and Strategy

[edit]
1. Please state the title of your proposal.

Open Knowledge Conference

2.1. When will the event begin? Please enter the event start date.

2026-11-27

2.2. When is the last day of your event?

2026-11-29

3.1. When will you begin preparing for your event?

2026-04-02T00:00:00Z

3.2. When will you expect to complete your last event payment?

2027-01-31T00:00:00Z

4. In which country will the conference take place?

India

4.1. In which city will the conference take place?

Hyderabad

5. Is it a remote or in-person event?

Hybrid event

5.1. What will be the total number of participants at the event? (including scholarship recipients + organizing team + other guests + self funded guests) (required)

90

6. Please indicate whether your work will be focused on one country (local), more than one or several countries in your region (regional) or has a cross-regional (global) scope.

International

6.1. If you have answered regional, please write the country names and any other information that is useful for understanding your proposal.

Focus towards India along with collaboration from Wikimedia Brasil and ESEAP region

7. If you would like, please share any websites or social media accounts that your group or organization has.

Websites:

Social Media:

8. Do you work with any thematic or regional platforms such as WISCom, CEE, Iberocoop, etc.

No

8.1. Please describe what platforms and your work with them.


9. Please describe the target participants for this event.

The Open Knowledge Conference brings together people shaping the future of technology in service of open knowledge, digital collaboration, and shared public infrastructure. The event is designed to connect emerging contributors, experienced leaders, and mission-driven technologists across communities to understand contribution patterns, demonstrate social impact, explore emerging innovations, and critically engage with the ethics of technology in knowledge commons.

  • Early Contributors to Technology: This includes students, early-career developers, junior engineers, and first-time open source contributors who are looking for meaningful ways to apply their skills. The conference introduces them to real-world open knowledge challenges and pathways to contribute to collaborative ecosystems such as Wikimedia projects and other digital commons initiatives. Their participation helps us understand emerging contributor patterns and barriers to entry, as they bring fresh perspectives on what attracts or discourages new participation in open knowledge work. They also contribute new ideas and experimental projects in areas like AI integration, mobile-first editing, and automation. Mentorship, peer learning, and exposure to open infrastructure are key value points for this group.
  • Tech Evangelists: Community technologists, developer advocates, and open tech champions who actively promote free and open technologies fall into this group. They help translate complex technical ideas into accessible knowledge, grow communities around tools and platforms, and foster wider adoption of open practices. Their role is essential for amplifying the social impact of open knowledge projects by connecting technical work to broader audiences and demonstrating real-world applications. They also bring insights into emerging trends and adjacent projects from other open technology communities, and help the conference critically examine how contribution models can be made more inclusive and sustainable. Their presence helps amplify open knowledge principles beyond the conference and into broader tech ecosystems.
  • Knowledge Contributor Groups – Open Data: This group includes civic tech communities, open data collectives, transparency and accountability advocates, digital rights groups, and open knowledge practitioners working with public datasets and shared information systems. Their experience with open standards, community stewardship of data, and participatory knowledge creation aligns closely with the goals of building sustainable open knowledge infrastructure. They provide crucial insights into user and contributor patterns across different types of open knowledge projects beyond traditional wikis, and bring concrete examples of social impact through open data initiatives in governance, accountability, and public service delivery. They also introduce innovative approaches to data collaboration and community-driven knowledge systems that can inform wiki practices, and engage in critical discussions about data ethics, ownership, and power dynamics in knowledge creation.
  • Tech Leadership – Mid and Senior Level: Engineering managers, technical architects, product leaders, CTOs, and senior technologists who influence technology strategy and decision-making within organisations are an important part of the audience. They bring perspectives on scalability, governance, sustainability, and long-term infrastructure planning, all essential for strengthening open knowledge systems and ensuring they can serve diverse communities over time. Their experience enables deep analysis of contributor retention patterns and what makes technical communities sustainable, and they can articulate how open knowledge infrastructure creates social impact at scale. They bring knowledge of cutting-edge technical projects and architectural innovations that could benefit wiki and open knowledge platforms, and are positioned to lead critical conversations about ethical technology design, responsible AI integration, and governance models that protect community agency while enabling innovation.
  • Change Leaders Driving Tech Integration: This includes individuals leading digital transformation and technology integration within nonprofits, public institutions, research bodies, cultural organisations, and community networks. They are exploring how collaborative platforms, open data systems, and knowledge-sharing technologies can be responsibly and effectively integrated into their work. They contribute institutional perspectives on how different user communities interact with open knowledge platforms and what drives adoption or resistance. They bring powerful narratives about social impact in education, cultural preservation, public service, and community empowerment through open knowledge. They showcase innovative integration projects and emerging use cases for wiki and open knowledge systems in diverse contexts, and are central to critical discussions about technology ethics in institutional settings, balancing innovation with equity, accessibility, and community values. The conference offers them exposure to open models, peer learning, and partnerships that can support institutional and community-level change.
10. Please provide the link to the event's page if you already have one.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Technology_Summit

The following questions (11-14) will refer to the Community Engagement Survey which is required in order to submit a proposal. Here is the survey form that you can copy and use (if the link does not work): https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1ieEI8EFf2vxjD9wN_h8-srYeRCp4fhSp7_1_wiR2jh8/edit. This survey is required to access a Conference grant.

11. How many people did you send the community engagement survey to?

220

11.1. When did you conduct the survey, and for how long?

For three weeks from 10 January 2026 to 31 January 2026

12. How many people responded to the survey?

46

13. What are the main objectives of the event?

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 1: Strengthen Community Sustainability and Demonstrate Impact

What: We will systematically examine contributor retention patterns and amplify measurable social impact to build evidence-based strategies for sustainable Wikimedia community growth.

Why: Our survey identified contributor retention as the #1 challenge (60% prioritised capacity building), with particular urgency around the "1-3 year danger zone" where contributors drop off. Simultaneously, communities need compelling impact narratives to justify public investment and inspire participation. Addressing retention without demonstrating value is incomplete; demonstrating value without sustainable contributors is unsustainable.

How: Through prep event analysis, structured mentorship programs, social impact documentation, and comparative case studies across community types, we will:

  • Document specific technical and social barriers causing contributor drop-off
  • Establish structured mentorship networks pairing experienced contributors with emerging developers
  • Create measurable impact case studies across education, cultural preservation, linguistic diversity
  • Compare retention patterns across Wikimedia projects and adjacent open knowledge ecosystems
  • Develop evidence-based interventions for the retention crisis

SMART Outcomes (Conference + 6 months):

  • Document 6-10 evidence-based retention strategies with comparative effectiveness data across community types in the Wikimedia and the broader Open Knowledge movements
  • Create 10-15 documented social impact case studies with quantifiable outcomes from the current Wikimedia programs (X manuscripts preserved, Y language speakers served, Z students engaged)
  • Target 10-15 new movement ambassadors and contributors recruited from previously underrepresented domains
  • Publish comprehensive retention and impact report within 3 months post-conference for movement-wide use for Wikimedia communities

Wikimedia Movement Context: Critical for Wikimedia's long-term viability as contributor retention directly impacts the movement's capacity to maintain and grow knowledge across languages and projects. Evidence-based retention strategies provide actionable interventions for the #1 challenge facing communities, while compelling impact narratives demonstrate the social value that justifies continued public investment and institutional partnerships. Documenting impact in underrepresented language communities directly supports knowledge equity and demonstrates Wikimedia's value beyond well-resourced languages.


STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 2: Navigate Responsible Technology Integration and Ethical Innovation

What: We will critically examine emerging technology innovations (particularly AI integration) while interrogating the power dynamics, ethical frameworks, and transition zone pressures that determine whether technological advancement strengthens or undermines community agency in Wikimedia projects.

Why: Survey respondents extensively discussed AI with deep ambivalence - seeing it as both opportunity and threat. Communities experiment in isolation with AI tools, OCR automation, and mobile workflows while simultaneously facing pressure from Big Tech investment that shapes what "openness" means. The critical question isn't just "what technologies work?" but "under what conditions do communities adopt innovation while maintaining agency versus becoming captured by corporate interests?" This is time-sensitive: decisions about AI integration and institutional partnerships made now shape Wikimedia's technological sovereignty for decades.

How: Through project showcases, critical dialogues with thought leaders and tech contributors, transition zone interrogations, and working groups developing ethical frameworks, we will:

  • Showcase and evaluate 4-5 technology innovations (AI integration, mobile workflows, OCR automation, accessibility tools)
  • Host critical sessions examining power dynamics in corporate "partnerships" and what happens when communities navigate from grassroots to institutionalised models
  • Develop ethical frameworks for responsible AI integration that protect community agency
  • Question Big Tech investment in "open source education" and examine capture mechanisms
  • Establish principles for "growing up without selling out" - accepting resources while maintaining authentic openness
  • Document lived experiences of transformation, resistance, and compromise in the transition zone

SMART Outcomes (Conference + 6 months):

  • Showcase 4-5 technology innovations; measure adoption rate of these technologies by the communities and report actual adoption/piloting at 6-month follow-up
  • Develop and publish ethical framework document for AI integration in Wikimedia projects including assessment criteria for genuine openness vs. "open-washing"
  • Produce 2-3 concrete policy recommendations on reciprocity mechanisms requiring corporate contribution to knowledge commons projects like Wikimedia
  • Document 3-5 detailed case studies of communities (within and outside Wikimedia movement) navigating transition zone (successes, captures, resistances)

Wikimedia Movement Context: Essential for ensuring Wikimedia communities to adopt beneficial technologies while maintaining the community agency and open principles that make Wikipedia trustworthy and distinct from commercial platforms. Addresses the growing tension between proprietary AI systems extracting massive value from Wikimedia content (Wikipedia training data for ChatGPT, Gemini, etc.) and communities' need for sustainable technological advancement. Provides frameworks for "growing up without selling out", achieving operational maturity and technological sophistication while preserving the grassroots values and community governance that make Wikimedia valuable to society.

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE 3: Build Movement Intelligence Through Research Synthesis and Strategic Learning

What: We will systematically engage with peer-reviewed research on platform governance, contributor behavior, AI impacts, and open source sustainability to connect isolated practitioner observations into coherent understanding of systemic patterns shaping Wikimedia's future.

Why: Wikimedia practitioners focus on immediate challenges without examining how individual observations connect to reveal systemic dynamics. Research on contributor retention, platform governance, algorithmic mediation, and knowledge commons sustainability offers insights, but remains in academic journals inaccessible to communities. By distilling research findings into practitioner discussions, we move from reactive problem-solving to evidence-informed strategic understanding of where the movement is heading.

How: OKI team will review peer-reviewed research and facilitate sessions synthesising findings to identify: Convergent patterns across multiple studies about contributor behavior and retention

  • Systemic dynamics showing how retention, AI disruption, youth engagement, and sustainability are interconnected
  • Evidence-based insights about what actually predicts contributor retention versus anecdotal assumptions
  • Research gaps where practitioner experience suggests investigation is needed
  • Geographic and demographic patterns in how challenges manifest differently

SMART Outcomes (Conference + 6 months):

  • Synthesise 5-10 peer-reviewed research findings into practitioner-accessible format
  • Publish movement learning report (40-60 pages) synthesising findings across all conference sessions within 3 months
  • Identify 5 critical research-practice gaps and establish 2 researcher-practitioner collaboration commitments

Wikimedia Movement Context: Creates a shared evidence base that enables informed movement-wide conversations grounded in research rather than competing anecdotal interpretations. Bridges academic research and practitioner communities to strengthen Wikimedia's capacity for strategic rather than reactive decision-making. Effective movement coordination requires shared understanding of what's actually happening, understanding grounded in empirical evidence about contributor behavior, platform dynamics, and ecosystem evolution. Builds intelligence capacity that enables Wikimedia to learn from research what predicts success versus failure, what drives retention versus drop-off, and how challenges interconnect into systemic patterns requiring coordinated responses.

14. Based on survey responses, what are the most important things your community should do at the conference to achieve these objectives?
  • Establish structured mentorship networks. Survey respondents identified retention as the #1 challenge. The conference must pair experienced contributors with emerging developers through "buddy systems" and create accountability structures, survey suggests "strong mentorship turns one-time participants into regulars."
  • Facilitate intensive community-developer dialogue sessions. These bridge power dynamics and surface user patterns, directly supporting both pattern understanding and ethical engagement objectives. Developers learn real needs; users influence platform direction.
  • Showcase innovative projects through presentations and working groups. Communities experimenting with AI integration, OCR automation, and language-specific tools need space to share what works, what fails, and why while accelerating innovation adoption across communities.
  • Document and amplify social impact narratives. The survey explicitly requested discussions about "visibility for underprivileged communities" and "using open knowledge for social good." The conference must create compelling case studies demonstrating real-world outcomes in education, linguistic diversity, and cultural preservation.
  • Host critical dialogues on ethics of emerging technologies. The survey extensively discussed AI as both an opportunity and threat. Thought leaders and tech contributors must collaboratively establish ethical frameworks for responsible innovation and reimagine what "community" means in algorithmically-mediated collaboration.
  • Synthesise research into actionable insights. Distill peer-reviewed findings on contributor patterns, platform governance, AI impacts into practitioner discussions connecting isolated observations to systemic trends.
  • Discuss the transition zone dynamics. Critical sessions examining lived experiences navigating grassroots-to-institutional transitions: power shifts, capture mechanisms, resistance practices, Big Tech investment impacts, "growing up without selling out" possibilities.
15. Please state if your proposal aims to work to bridge any of the identified CONTENT knowledge gaps (Knowledge Inequity)? Select up to THREE that most apply to your work.

Not applicable

15.1. In a few sentences, explain how your work is specifically addressing this content gap (or Knowledge inequity) to ensure a greater representation of knowledge. (optional recommended).

Providing explaination for the below question Q16

  • Education: Educational institutions represent our largest pipeline for sustainable tech contributor growth and critical intervention point for the 18-24 demographic. The conference prioritises education because it enables systematic study of contributor patterns (Objective 1) in structured environments, demonstrates measurable impact (Objective 2) through student outcomes and institutional partnerships, showcases innovative educational integration projects (Objective 3), and shapes ethical frameworks (Objective 4) before students internalize corporate practices. Survey data shows strong representation from younger contributors and explicit mentions of "educational institutions" and "students from colleges and universities" as partners. Responding to the Wikimedia Foundation's "catch them young" strategy, which addresses the 18-24 demographic's declining Wikipedia awareness and their preference for consuming knowledge through short-form video and social platforms rather than traditional websites. We'll engage educational institutions to bridge this consumption gap and make open knowledge creation relevant through contemporary technological touchpoints. IIIT-Hyderabad's IndicWiki program demonstrates this model in practice: enhancing Wikipedia content in Indian languages through academic-community partnership, using institutional technical resources to serve community needs while maintaining constant engagement with language communities. The IndicWiki-led Wikimedia Technology Summit successfully convened government and tech stakeholders, establishing institutional pathways for supporting small language communities. We'll document such successful partnership models, create replicable frameworks that meet young people where they are technologically, and build faculty champion networks. Investment here builds long-term sustainability by adapting to how the next generation consumes and creates knowledge, rather than expecting them to adopt traditional platform behaviors.
  • Public Policy: Wikipedia and Wikidata's Digital Public Goods recognition creates opportunities to influence DPG frameworks, Global Development Compact negotiations, and public interest tech alliances. The conference prioritises policy because it reveals institutional user patterns (Objective 1), demonstrates social impact at scale (Objective 2), inspires projects at the policy frontier (Objective 3), and raises critical questions about extractive AI and community governance (Objective 4). We'll examine how proprietary systems benefit from knowledge commons without reciprocity, develop advocacy frameworks for open infrastructure funding, showcase government partnerships, and build coalitions with tech-for-good movements. This is time-sensitive: policy frameworks being established now will shape knowledge infrastructure for decades. Survey evidence shows community concern about "AI intervention" and sustainability which policy engagement addresses these systemically. The previous iterations of Wikimedia technology Summit has demonstrated capacity to engage policy stakeholders: IndicWiki successfully attracted attention from India's MeitY, DST, and FICCI, establishing pathways for government-academic-community collaboration around knowledge commons.
  • Open technology:

Proprietary AI extracts massive value from knowledge commons while contributing minimally back, threatening volunteer-built infrastructure sustainability. The conference prioritises open technology to examine this extractive flow and build technological sovereignty. This urgency is amplified by India and the Global Majority's growing FOSS/FLOSS ecosystem which is evidenced by FOSS India events, Hasgeek developer communities, and numerous Open Source clubs, alongside Big Tech investments grooming young technologists through Microsoft-GitHub programs, Meta-MeitY partnerships, and Amazon’s Excellence Centres. This creates a critical paradox; the same companies extracting value from knowledge commons through proprietary AI are shaping what emerging technologists learn "open" means, creating a transition zone where communities navigate between grassroots idealism and corporate capture. Focus includes understanding AI-mediated patterns (Obj 1), demonstrating impact through accessible tools for low-resource communities (Obj 2), showcasing AI integration and mobile workflow innovations (Obj 3), critically examining technology ethics (Obj 4), synthesising research on open source sustainability (Obj 5), and questioning transition zone dynamics as communities navigate corporate partnerships while preserving authentic openness (Obj 6). Survey respondents extensively discussed AI with deep ambivalence. We'll analyse genuine openness versus "open-washing," develop reciprocity mechanisms requiring corporate contribution, address technological colonialism where Global North solutions are imposed despite local FOSS capacity, examine how Big Tech investment shapes the next generation's understanding of openness, and establish ethical frameworks before widespread AI deployment. This convergence of grassroots FOSS enthusiasm, corporate investment, and extractive AI relationships makes this a time-sensitive discussion on decisions about AI integration, data governance, and institutional partnerships made now will either strengthen community technological sovereignty or entrench corporate extraction for decades.

16. Please state if your proposal includes any of these areas or THEMATIC focus. Select up to THREE that most apply to your work and explain the rationale for identifying these themes.

Education, Public Policy, Open Technology

17. Will your work focus on involving participants from any underrepresented communities?

Geographic , Linguistic / Language, Digital Access

18. Do you intend to invite or engage with non-Wikimedian individuals or organizations? If so – can you explain your intention for this outreach?

Yes, we intend to invite and engage students and faculty from educational institutions, open source developers and tech evangelists from communities like Creative Commons, FOSS United, FOSS Asia, and Mozilla, policy advocates working on Digital Public Goods and open data frameworks, AI ethics researchers and responsible technology practitioners, civic tech and open data communities addressing transparency and accountability, GLAM institutions focused on digital preservation and cultural heritage, and representatives from technology companies to critically examine extractive relationships with knowledge commons. These engagements will enable cross-pollination of ideas, expand our contributor base, strengthen policy advocacy, and ensure the conference addresses open knowledge challenges from diverse perspectives beyond the Wikimedia ecosystem.

19. What will you do to make sure participants continue to engage in your activities after the event?
  • WikiTech Club - Technical Community Hub: We will establish WikiTech Club as an ongoing virtual community space for technical contributors, early-career developers, and students from the conference. The club will host monthly skill-building sessions, technology showcases, and peer mentorship matching participants with experienced technical contributors.
  • Structured Mentorship Buddy System (Community Mentor space): Following the "mentor buddy" model from our survey feedback, we will pair emerging contributors with experienced community members for 6-month accountability partnerships with monthly check-ins.
  • Collaborative Project Incubation: Working groups from the conference will receive post-event support to develop their projects (ethical frameworks, technology pilots, policy recommendations) with dedicated facilitation and documentation.
  • Digital Knowledge Hub: We will maintain an online platform sharing session recordings, documentation, resources, and enabling asynchronous collaboration through forums and shared workspaces.
  • South Asia Open Community Calls (Community Showcase space): Leveraging existing infrastructure, conference participants will be invited to South Asia Community calls featuring project updates, skill-sharing, and continued learning.
20. In what ways do you think your proposal most contributes to the Movement Strategy 2030 recommendations. Select a maximum of THREE options that most apply.

Increase the Sustainability of Our Movement, Coordinate Across Stakeholders, Innovate in Free Knowledge

Logistical Aspects

[edit]
21. Do you have any proposed venue for the event?

IIIT-Hyderabad as conference venue and Hotels within 1-2 km range for accommodation

22. Is the event venue and hotel accessible for people with physical disabilities?

Yes

23. How many scholarships would you like to offer?

We will offer 53 scholarships prioritising Wikimedians:

  • 27 scholarships (50.9%) for active Wikimedia contributors and affiliates (5-7 Intl., 20-22 India)
  • 18 scholarships (34.0%) for allied open knowledge practitioners (3-5 Intl., 13-15 India)
  • 8 scholarships (15.1%) for invited speakers with specific expertise (3 Intl., 5 India)
  • 10 organising team, making it 63

Additionally, we will also have self-funded speakers and a few professors participating at the conference for a few planned sessions.

24. What expenses will the scholarship cover?

The scholarship will cover travel, accommodation, food, and other expenses like medical insurance and visa expenses (for international attendees) incurred during travel in attending the event.

25. How will scholarship recipients be selected?

We will establish scholarship committee composed of experienced Wikimedians & open knowledge practitioners familiar with community evaluation processes who will manage review, selection, allocation & ensure diverse representation across geographies, languages, gender identities, & contribution levels Evaluation criteria will primarily focus on 3 dimensions

  • Participation in open knowledge projects
  • Roles in knowledge-producing orgs
  • Leadership in allied movement orgs

For detailed information on scholarship criteria and framework: https://docs.google.com/document/d/13X8Ac8LnQ_jO1nkylUiAZ1EeiPpSswTJMCR3e1caOzM/edit?usp=sharing

26. In which ways can Wikimedia Foundation staff support your event onsite?

We would like the support from Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) staff in multiple capacities to strengthen the conference's impact. Given the conference's focus on education, public policy, & open technology, we specifically seek engagement from the Partnerships, Advocacy and Legal, Enterprise Wiki & Content Enablement teams. Staff members based in India or South Asia can play a crucial role in pre-conference prep, drawing on their regional experience to guide planning, identify key partners, and shape session design around local contexts.

  • Partnerships Team:
    • Engaging educational institutions to build sustainable contributor pipelines
    • Facilitating introductions between communities and institutional partners (GLAM, government, academia)
    • Amplifying the conference within Digital Public Goods and public interest technology networks
    • Leading sessions on institutional partnership models and collaboration frameworks
  • Advocacy and Legal Team:
    • Leading policy sessions on DPG frameworks, Global Development Compact, and AI governance
    • Providing legal guidance for institutional partnerships and enterprise engagements
    • Facilitating critical dialogues about extractive AI and knowledge commons sustainability
    • Ensuring Universal Code of Conduct and Friendly Space Policy implementation
    • Connecting local advocacy efforts to global policy conversations
  • Enterprise Wiki Team:
    • Facilitating dialogues with technology companies about reciprocity mechanisms
    • Sharing insights on enterprise implementations and institutional adoption patterns
    • Leading discussions on technological sovereignty and platform governance
    • Exploring corporate engagement models that respect community values
  • Content Enablement:
    • Leading sessions on knowledge equity and facilitating discussions on ethical frameworks for emerging technologies
    • Mentoring on community organising, retention strategies, and sustainability planning
    • Supporting documentation and knowledge transfer for movement-wide learning
26.2. Do you intend to invite any WMF staff members to your event? (please note that all WMF staff travel and accommodation costs will be covered by the foundation). Please indicate what is the limit number of WMF staff members you would like to welcome at your event.

Yes, we intend to invite Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) staff members to participate in the Open Knowledge Conference. We welcome staff residing in India and South Asia, as their regional knowledge and experience will be valuable in supporting community growth, strengthening educational partnerships, and aligning conference outcomes with movement priorities. We propose inviting up to 10 WMF staff members across different teams, with the following suggested representation:

  • Partnerships (2 members): To facilitate engagement with educational institutions, support government and GLAM partnership development, and connect communities to Digital Public Goods networks and institutional collaboration opportunities.
  • Communications (2 members): To support storytelling, documentation, and amplification of conference insights before, during, and after the event; to help communities communicate social impact narratives; and to connect local innovations to global movement communications.
  • Policy (2 members, including Advocacy and Legal): To lead sessions on DPG frameworks, Global Development Compact opportunities, and AI governance; to provide guidance on institutional partnership agreements; to facilitate critical dialogues about extractive AI and knowledge commons sustainability; and to connect local advocacy efforts to global policy conversations.
  • Content Enablement (2 members): To support capacity-building for Wikisource digitization, Wikidata structured knowledge work, and cross-project integration; to provide expertise on education program design and student contributor pathways; to mentor communities on content quality, retention strategies, and inclusive participation models.
  • Product & Technology (2 members): To engage communities on technical tools, mobile-first workflows, AI integration frameworks, and platform accessibility; to facilitate dialogues about technological sovereignty and open technology ethics; to support discussions on community technical wishlist priorities and enterprise wiki implementations.
27. Please outline the roles and responsibilities of the organizing team for the conference.

Pavan Santhosh S - Program Design Tanveer Hasan - Program Design Nivas - Logistics/Operations and Program Design Support Kasyap - Logistics/Operations Ankit - Communications and Outreach Nitesh - Scholarships and Event Safety Medini - Finance Management

28. Do you have plans to co-organize the event with other Wikimedia communities, groups or affiliates?

Yes

28.1. If yes, can you please explain how you are going to co-organize the event and what responsibilities each partner will have.
  • Open Knowledge Initiative (OKI) at IIIT-Hyderabad serves as both the intellectual driver and operational lead for the conference. OKI is responsible for:
    • Defining core objectives and designing thematic framework (education, public policy, open technology)
    • Conceptualising critical dialogues on AI ethics, extractive technology, and reimagining communities
    • Overall operational coordination: budget, logistics, registration, WMF compliance
    • Curating and synthesising partner contributions into coherent program
  • Thought Partners like Wikimedia Brasil and ESEAP (movement strategists, critical technologists, researchers) provide advisory support to boost and refine OKI's intellectual framework through feedback, additional insights, and expertise which they support with our vision.
  • Global Open Knowledge Community Partners like ESEAP and Wikimedia Brasil (Wikimedia affiliates, open knowledge organizations worldwide) surface local trends by identifying regional contributors, sharing comparative insights on patterns and approaches, and facilitating cross-geographic learning. OKI synthesises these contributions.
  • Open Source Ecosystem Partners (Creative Commons, FOSS United, FOSS Asia, Mozilla, Software Freedom Conservancy, FSF India) co-organise sessions examining the state of open source in the open knowledge field. OKI designs the critical framework (examining extractive AI, technological sovereignty, authentic openness), while partners bring specialized FOSS expertise.
29. What kind of risks do you anticipate and how would you mitigate these?

For detailed list of considerations, list of possible scenarios along with mitigation strategies, please visit the Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/13X8Ac8LnQ_jO1nkylUiAZ1EeiPpSswTJMCR3e1caOzM/edit?usp=sharing

For Risk Assessment Analysis, please visit the Google Sheet workbook: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1VCD3pzR-jvGsgi60YMt5Y-Z3ms0FoFXksNATUCbbpsg/edit?gid=0#gid=0

30. Friendly space policy - Please add the link to the friendly space policy that your community will be using for this event.

We will be adopting the Wikimedia Foundation’s Universal Code of Conduct (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct) for the conference and aligned activities/projects around the conference.

Learning, Sharing, and Evaluation

[edit]
31. What do you hope to learn from your work organising this conference?

By organising the Open Knowledge Conference, we aim to generate actionable insights that inform movement strategy, partnership development, and technological decision-making. Our learning questions are designed to be answered through participant surveys, session documentation, project showcases, and follow-up assessments. The five critical questions we would like to learn from organising this conference is:

  • What are the major trends in contributor stability and engagement across open knowledge projects globally?
  • Which thematic areas show growth versus decline in open knowledge participation, and what factors explain these trajectories?
  • Which technologies are communities adopting to address current challenges, and how effective are these interventions?
  • What emerging technologies and approaches could enable transformative growth for open knowledge projects, and what ethical frameworks should govern their adoption?
  • What insights from ongoing and published research can offer unique insights into the next-phases of our growth as a movement, and how can we systematically incorporate research into practice?
  • What actually happens to communities and values as they navigate the transition from grassroots to Institutionalised/Resourced Models?
32. Main open metrics
Main Open Metrics Data
Main Open Metrics Description Target
Contributor Retention Strategies Identified and Implementation This metric tracks the number of evidence-based retention strategies identified through the sessions of this event (mentorship models, community structures, educational partnerships) and measures the percentage of participants who commit to implementing these strategies in their communities within 6 months post-conference.

Target: 6-10 Retention Strategies

6
Participant Diversity Profile and Post-Event Network Engagement This metric captures demographic diversity of participants and tracks sustained engagement after the event measuring whether connections formed lead to ongoing collaboration.

Target: New contributors from previously unexplored domains. 10-15 movement ambassadors and contributors to our projects.

10
Technology Innovations Identified and Adoption Intentions This metric tracks the number and types of technology innovations presented at the conference (AI tools, mobile workflows, OCR automation, accessibility solutions, etc.), documents participant assessments of their effectiveness and ethical implications, and measures adoption intentions.

Target: 4-5 technology innovations showcased across sessions and working groups

4
Ethical Frameworks and Critical Dialogue Outcomes for Emerging Technologies and Reimagining Community Models This qualitative metric captures outcomes from critical dialogue sessions examining ethics of new technologies, extractive AI relationships, technological sovereignty, and reimagining what "community" means in hybrid human-AI collaboration.

Target: 2-3 concrete policy recommendations on reciprocity mechanisms requiring corporate contribution to knowledge commons and reuse on Wikimedia platforms

3
Movement Learning Report and Application along with Critical Interrogation of Transition Zone Dynamics Comprehensive documentation of all conference learnings through a movement learning report (synthesising findings across all 5 learning questions) and tracking how many participants apply conference learnings in their actual work. Measured through post-event survey and 6-month follow-up. This qualitative metric captures the lived experiences, power dynamics, and transformation mechanisms communities encounter navigating between grassroots idealism and institutional/corporate engagement. Rather than measuring positions on a spectrum, it documents the PROCESS of transition from what happens to communities, values, governance, and their relationships as they engage with resources, institutions, and corporate partnerships.

Target: 3-5 case studies published and One qualitative report on "What Happens in the Transition Zone: Power, Compromise, and Resistance in Open Source and Open Knowledge Communities"

3

Financial Proposal

[edit]
33. What is the amount you are requesting from Wikimedia Foundation? Please provide this amount in your local currency.

7748213.55

34. Select your local currency.

INR

Requested amount in USD
87554.81 USD [note 1]
  1. ↑ a b The following amount in US dollars was calculated by Wikimedia Foundation staff using the fixed currency rates. This amount is approximate and may not reflect the actual currency exchange rates on the day of submission or distribution. If the application is funded, the funding will be sent in the recipient’s local currency.
35. Please upload your budget for this proposal or indicate the link to it.

Link to the proposed budget for the conference in INR and USD (as of 2 March 2026) - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1RGohnDhnniA7d76L02fm0mRECgWf8YwQaoh3hSvHzug/edit?usp=sharing

36. Do you expect to receive funding for this conference from other organizations to support your work?

No

36.1. If yes, what kind of resources are you expecting to get?


We/I have read the Application Privacy Statement, WMF Friendly Space Policy and Universal Code of Conduct.

Yes

Please use this optional space to upload any documents that you feel are important for further understanding your proposal.
Other public document(s): Additional Information - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cEmOyuUWNt-Sfe3_FYX3MHP53spwBnhNd5KwhKGa3YU/edit?usp=sharing

Endorsements and Feedback

[edit]

Please add endorsements and feedback to the grant discussion page only. Endorsements added here will be removed automatically.

Community members are invited to share meaningful feedback on the proposal and include reasons why they endorse the proposal. Consider the following:

  • Stating why the proposal is important for the communities involved and why they think the strategies chosen will achieve the results that are expected.
  • Highlighting any aspects they think are particularly well developed: for instance, the strategies and activities proposed, the levels of community engagement, outreach to underrepresented groups, addressing knowledge gaps, partnerships, the overall budget and learning and evaluation section of the proposal, etc.
  • Highlighting if the proposal focuses on any interesting research, learning or innovation, etc. Also if it builds on learning from past proposals developed by the individual or organization, or other Wikimedia communities.
  • Analyzing if the proposal is going to contribute in any way to important developments around specific Wikimedia projects or Movement Strategy.
  • Analysing if the proposal is coherent in terms of the objectives, strategies, budget, and expected results (metrics).

Endorse

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants:Programs/Wikimedia_Community_Fund/Conference_Fund/Open_Knowledge_Conference&oldid=30159562"