Grants:Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund/General Support Fund/Wikimedia Cyprus User Group Annual Plan/Final Report
|
|
Part 1: Understanding your work
[edit]Per the recent update on the Wikimedia Foundation Affiliates Strategy process, Wikimedia Affiliates that are General Support Fund grantees will fulfill their affiliate reporting requirements through their final or yearly grantee report.
If you are a Wikimedia Affiliate, you will use this form for your affiliate reporting and to address the affiliate health criteria. You do not need to submit a separate report to AffCom. Follow the guidance in the green boxes to report on how you met the corresponding affiliate health criteria.
If you are not a Wikimedia Affiliate, aligning your responses with the affiliate criteria is optional and not required.
1. Please share to what extent your programs, approaches, and strategies contributed to addressing the challenges you shared in your proposal. If they did not contribute as you believed they would, please share what obstacles you faced and what, if anything, you learned from them? (required)
For affiliates, use this space (Question 1.) to address Affiliate Health Criterion 1.1 (Goal delivery). Describe how you actively delivered on mission goals, e.g. content creation.
The challenges identified in our original proposal were interconnected and structural. As outlined in our logical framework, our work in 2025 aimed to address: low awareness of Wikimedia and open knowledge in Cyprus; limited cross-community spaces for collaboration; the underrepresentation of certain groups, particularly women; and a persistent skills gap that makes sustained participation difficult in a small community context.
Through meet-ups, edit-a-thons, and thematic events such as WikiGap and Wiki Loves Monuments, we actively worked to create inclusive entry points to open knowledge and to connect Wikimedia values with broader human rights and equity discussions as well as cultural heritage. These activities contributed positively to awareness-building and community engagement, particularly by attracting participants who were previously unfamiliar with Wikimedia or hesitant to engage due to technical or social barriers.However, not all approaches contributed as strongly as anticipated. A key challenge was the difficulty of converting event participants into long-term editors. While participation numbers met in several activities, sustained editing engagement remained limited. This highlighted the ongoing need for more structured mentoring and follow-up mechanisms, as well as additional organisational capacity to support contributors beyond initial events.Participation was also affected by internal community challenges. Managing tensions created by specific individuals who positioned themselves as supporters while actively undermining collective efforts required significant time and emotional labour from the core team. This further constrained our ability to focus on contributor retention and technical capacity-building.This year demonstrated that building an inclusive Wikimedia community in Cyprus requires not only outreach and events, but also substantial organisational capacity to manage community dynamics, support contributors over time, and safeguard inclusive spaces.
2. Is there a plan to build on the key successes you had? If yes, please describe the plan and if no, please share the limitations to do so. For instance, did the activities lead to any new priorities, ideas for activities, or goals for the future? (required)
Yes, there is a clear intention to build on the key successes of 2025. One of the most encouraging outcomes was the fact that educational and other institutions (i.e. Goethe Institute, University of Limassol, Cyprus Computer Society, Embassy of Sweden) expressed interest in continued collaboration, confirming that our approach resonates beyond one-off activities.At the same time, 2025 clarified several strategic priorities. Most importantly, it became evident that the organisation cannot sustainably operate at this level without a dedicated full-time role. During 2025, one of our leadership members assumed a part-time paid role to stabilise operations, address accumulated organisational needs. This was a transitional measure rather than a long-term solution, and none of the three core members are in a position to take on this responsibility permanently.The year also revealed that remaining neutral and inclusive in a politically sensitive context such as Cyprus requires proactive effort and strong internal governance. Attempts to avoid political divisions were not always respected by certain members, resulting in behaviour that undermined collective work while increasing the workload of the core team.Future plans will therefore prioritise organisational sustainability, clearer governance structures, and adequate staffing capacity, alongside continued programmatic work.
3. Please provide a link to reports that detail the activities that took place in the last year. This can include an annual report, Meta pages, and websites. If there are no links available, briefly describe the implemented activities and programs below or upload any files. (required)
For affiliates, use this space (Question 3.) to address Affiliate Health Criteria 2.1 (Affiliate health & resilience), 4.1 (Internal engagement), 4.2 (Community connection), and 4.3 (Partnerships and collaboration):
- Describe your activities engaging new users, new members for your decision-making body(ies), and developing leaders and organizers (2.1).
- Describe your activities creating or hosting spaces to encourage greater collaboration and engagement among your members (4.1).
- Describe how you engage with the contributing community that you serve and/or support (4.2).
- Describe your partnerships with other affiliates or with non-Wikimedia entities (4.3).
The report can be found here: [1]
A more detailed version here: [2]
Additional Links:
MIND THE WIKI GAP
WIKI LOVES MONUMENTS 2025 CYPRUS
4. Are you interested in sharing what you achieved or learned this year with the wider community through different peer learning programs (e.g. Let's Connect program, Diff)? (optional)
YES
5. Did you collect feedback from your community or target groups on how the activities implemented impacted them? If yes, please attach/provide information on the results (e.g. community surveys, stories, impact booklets/reports, interviews with partner institutions, etc). Did you collect other impact-specific data? (required)
For affiliates, the response to Question 5. also partially addresses Affiliate Health Criteria 4.1 (Internal Engagement), 4.2 (Community Connection), or 4.3 (Partnerships & collaboration), where applicable.
NO
6. During the fund period, did your efforts do any of the following? (required):
For affiliates, the response to Question 6. also partially addresses Affiliate Health Criterion 2.2 (Diversity balance).
- 6.1 Bring in participants from the following groups: women, people with disabilities, LGBTQ+ groups, speakers of minority languages
- 6.2 Develop content about the following underrepresented topics or groups of people: women, speakers of minority languages
- 6.3 Support the retention of: Organizers, Partnerships
7. What, if any, effective tactics or approaches can you share that worked well when dealing with the programs under points 6.1-6.3 that you selected? (optional)
N/A
8. If you developed partnerships, which of the following factors most helped you to build partnerships? Please pick a MAXIMUM of the three most relevant factors (optional):
Volunteers from our communities, Staff hired through the fund
Part 2: Metrics
[edit]| Metrics name | Target | Result | Comments and tools used |
|---|---|---|---|
| Number of all participants | 100 | 174 | Participation was tracked primarily through registration forms where feasible, which are available upon request.
It is important to note that the reported figure does not include students who participated through activities at the Nareg School and Cultural Center. If these participants were included, the total number of participants would exceed the reported figure, further surpassing our initial target. |
| Number of all editors | 9 | 6 | The number of editors (new and retained) was recorded based on participant self-reporting during events and through follow-up communication after activities. Participants informed the organising team in person or via post-event follow-up that they had created accounts and/or contributed edits.
Students who participated through activities at the Nareg School and Cultural Center were not included in these figures. If these contributions were included, the number of new editors would exceed the original target. |
| Number of new editors | 4 | 4 | |
| Number of retained editors | 5 | 2 | |
| Number of all organizers | 4 | ||
| Number of new organizers | 1 |
| Wikimedia project | Target - Number of created pages | Target - Number of improved pages | Result - Number of created pages | Result - Number of improved pages |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wikipedia | 20 | 60 | 26 | 72 |
| Wikimedia Commons | 200 | 50 | 336 | 1 |
| Wikidata | ||||
| Wiktionary | ||||
| Wikisource | ||||
| Wikimedia Incubator | ||||
| Translatewiki | 20 | 50 | 0 | 0 |
| MediaWiki | ||||
| Wikiquote | ||||
| Wikivoyage | ||||
| Wikibooks | ||||
| Wikiversity | ||||
| Wikinews | ||||
| Wikispecies | ||||
| Wikifunctions or Abstract Wikipedia |
Tool used and comments (optional):
All the numbers were recorded through Montage during the event/campaign. Students who participated through activities at the Nareg School and Cultural Center were not included in these figures. If these contributions were included, the number would exceed the original target and we would had articles in translatewiki.
11. Did you set other quantitative and qualitative targets for your project (other metrics)? (required): No
11.1. Other Metrics.
In your application, you outlined some other open metrics that you would like to measure. Please fill out the achieved results for each of the open metrics you defined.
| Other Metrics name | Metrics Description | Target | Result | Tools and comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Part 3: Skill Development / Capacity Building
[edit]12. Reflecting on your programmatic (external) and organizational (internal) work, did your grant support you to undergo any skill development that made a difference to your success? If yes, what skill was developed, and how did it lead to success? (e.g. received coaching on public speaking, attended training on nonviolent communication, hosted professional development conversations on leadership, learned and used a new tool for project management, etc.)? Can you share any materials? (required)
For affiliates, use this space (Question 12.) to address Affiliate Health Criteria 2.2 (Diversity balance) and 3.1 (Diverse, Skilled, and Accountable Leadership):
- Describe actions taken to prioritize gender balance in affiliate leadership, as well as any areas of diversity relevant to your affiliate's context (2.2).
- Describe the management, financial, or other leadership skills of your affiliate leaders. If you have a succession plan, please include it here (3.1).
- Describe any training or skill development (as outlined in the question above) (3.1).
- Incorporate into the annual report a disclosure of conflict of interests (if any) from the leadership (3.1).
The grant supported targeted capacity-building that significantly strengthened both our internal organisational resilience and our ability to facilitate inclusive, constructive community spaces.
During the funding period, we implemented two dedicated capacity-building workshops focused on conflict management, negotiation, and communication skills, areas that proved critical given the complexity of community dynamics and the sensitive sociopolitical context in which Wikimedia Cyprus operates.
The first workshop focused on negotiation and constructive dialogue, covering four key areas:
- the Getting to Yes framework (distinguishing interests from positions, generating options, and using objective criteria),
- conflict style awareness,
- active listening and reframing skills, and
- BATNA (Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement) and negotiation planning.
This workshop strengthened participants’ ability to approach disagreements strategically rather than reactively, helping organisers and contributors navigate tensions more effectively while maintaining focus on shared goals.
The second workshop focused on conflict resolution and trust-building, structured around:
- setting a shared tone and expectations,
- developing awareness before reaction,
- navigating interpersonal and group clashes,
- rebuilding trust after conflict, and
- collective reflection and closure.
This training supported organisers in managing difficult situations, de-escalating tensions, and sustaining safer, more inclusive spaces for participation. The skills developed were directly applied in real community situations throughout the year, contributing to improved facilitation, clearer communication, and greater confidence in handling challenging interactions.
These skills were essential in sustaining activities, supporting collaboration across differences, and protecting the wellbeing of a very small core team managing a disproportionate workload. While they did not eliminate all challenges, they materially improved our capacity to respond constructively, continue programmatic work, and safeguard inclusive participation.
Materials from the first workshop can be found here: [10]
The second lesson was an interactive, skills-focused workshop where participants actively practiced techniques through exercises, role-play, and facilitated reflection rather than passive instruction.
These workshops were, regrettably, delivered towards the end of our funding period, following internal challenges that required us to adjust our priorities. Moving forward, we intend to integrate structured capacity-building training from the outset of future funding cycles, ensuring that it responds directly to the evolving needs of our team and community.
13. What is one capacity/skill area that you would like to focus on for the next year? And how do you plan to achieve this capacity? (required)
We would like to focus on strengthening our capacity around community governance, volunteer support, and sustainable group coordination. As a small, mostly volunteer-led team, we realized that running activities successfully is not only about programs, but also about having clearer internal processes, shared responsibilities, and healthier ways of collaborating.
In order to achieve that we plan to learn through peer exchange with other Wikimedia affiliates, participate in movement capacity-building opportunities, and introduce more structured internal reflection after activities. We will also prioritise practical learning such as facilitation, conflict awareness, and community care so that our group can grow in a way that remains inclusive, transparent, and sustainable for everyone involved.
14. If you have additional information or reflections that don’t fit into the above sections, please write them here. Use the space below to upload any additional documents that would be useful to understand your report.
For affiliates, also use this section (Question 14) to fulfill the Affiliate Health Criteria requirements.
- Describe and link to any public-facing documentation for affiliate governance, including affiliate leadership and membership with a breakdown of the demographics; how elections are conducted; how conflicts of interest are declared; and how decisions are made and communicated (2.2, 2.3, 3.1).
- Describe and link to any public-facing documentation for activities incorporating, promoting awareness about, or enforcing the Universal Code of Conduct in your affiliate's activities (3.3).
- Describe and link to any public-facing documentation for internal membership engagement, such as notes from your regular meetings and how you communicate to or involve your membership (4.1).
Our draft constitution: [11]
Our website: www.wikimedia.cy
Wiki Gap
Social Media Creatives: [12]
Event photos: [13]
WIKI LOVES MONUMENTS
MERCH:[15]
Part 4: Financial reporting
[edit]For affiliates, also use this section (Part 4: Financial reporting) to address Affiliate Health Criterion 3.2 (Financial & Legal Compliance).
| Description | Planned / received budget for this category (EUR) | Amount spent (EUR) |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel costs | 7200 | 7200 |
| Operational costs | 15200 | 8632 |
| Programmatic costs | 15600 | 8163 |
| Total General Support Fund | 32000 | 27295 |
| Other revenue | ||
| Remaining funds from General Support Fund | 0 |
15. Please state the total amount spent from this fund in your local currency. (required)
27295 EUR
16. Please provide an overview of the amount spent from this fund in the following budget categories in your local currency. (required)
- Operational costs: 8632 EUR
- Programmatic costs: 8163 EUR
- Staff and contractor costs: 7200 EUR
17. Did you have any other revenue sources (e.g. other funding, membership contributions, donations)? (required): No
- 17.1. Provide the total amount received from other revenue sources in your local currency. (required): EUR
- 17.2. Provide the total amount spent from other revenue sources in your local currency. (required): EUR
18. Provide a financial report document which will provide the details of funds received and spent in the currency of your fund. (required)
- Upload Documents, Templates, and Files.
- Report funds received and spent, if template not used.
18.2. If you have not already done so in your financial spending report, provide information on changes in the budget in relation to your original proposal. (optional)
N/A
19. Do you have any unspent funds from this funding?: Yes
- 19.1. Please list the amount of unspent funds in your local currency. (required)
- 0
- 19.2. Explain why you did not use the amount. (required)
- Note from fiscal sponsor: 30.59 USD overspend due to FOREX
- 19.3. What are you planning to do with the underspent funds?
- D. I have already sent them back to the WMF
- 19.4. Please provide details of hope to spend these funds.
- N/A
20. Final confirmations (required)
- 20.1. Are you in compliance with the terms outlined in the fund agreement? You must be in compliance with relevant tax laws and regulations restricting the use of the Funds as outlined in the grant agreement. In summary, this is to confirm that the funds were used in alignment with the Wikimedia Foundation mission and for charitable/nonprofit/educational purposes.
- Yes
- 20.2. Are you in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations as outlined in the grant agreement?
- Yes
- 20.3. Are you in compliance with provisions of the United States Internal Revenue Code (“Code”), and with relevant tax laws and regulations restricting the use of the Funds as outlined in the grant agreement? In summary, this is to confirm that the funds were used in alignment with the WMF mission and for charitable/nonprofit/educational purposes.
- Yes
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 report. 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.