Grants:Programs/Wikimedia Community Fund/General Support Fund/Wikimedia Nederland 2025-2026/Yearly Report (2025)
|
|
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.
Our activities in 2025 were guided by the WMNL Annual Plan 2025 and aligned with the Movement Strategy 2030. Overall, our programs and approaches contributed significantly to addressing the challenges outlined in our proposal. Most activities were successful and resulted in strong outcomes (see “metrics”), particularly in the following areas:
- Future-proofing and community support: Through FOKA/small-scale funding, writing contests, and volunteer meetings, we strengthened engagement and participation.
- Impact: Initiatives such as WikiGoesCaribbean (ongoing since 2018), Wikipedia op Aruba and our Gender Gap & LGBTI program continued to support new editors, guided by experienced contributors, in addressing content gaps.
- Visibility, events and community building: We successfully organized more than 90 events, including our WikiCon, held on 22 November in Leiden.
- Capacity building: The Knowledge Platform aims to improve partner self-reliance through accessible, beginner-friendly guidance. In 2025, 3,744 people visited it. In 2025 as part of our project Wikipedia op Aruba, the Wikimedian in residence translated a considerable part of the Platform in Papiamento. We also successfully delivered two editions of the “Share Your Data” masterclasses in collaboration with regional heritage partners: Erfgoed Zuid Holland.
- Communication and outreach: Ongoing communication efforts increased awareness of Wikimedia activities, helped recruit new editors and partners, and contributed to a rise in donations (over €20,000 higher than in 2024).
Obstacles encountered
[edit]At the same time, 2025 presented several unexpected challenges:
- Leadership transition: The recruitment process for a new director to succeed Sandra Rientjes took longer than anticipated. The initial recruitment round in early 2025 did not result in a successful hire, requiring a second process in Q3. Fortunately, this led to the successful appointment of a new director, although the delay required additional time and resources.
- Team capacity: One of our two project managers was on sick leave from August onwards, which impacted team capacity and continuity.
- Increased costs: Higher-than-budgeted expenses arose due to the extended recruitment process, staff replacement needs, and increased IT and office costs.
In response to these challenges, we adapted our plans and reprioritized activities. This led to several adjustments:
- Additional project funding: Due to limited capacity, fewer new funding applications were submitted. In 2025, we submitted two funding applications, which unfortunately were not approved. These were in response to an open call issued by the Dutch Embassy in Morocco as part of Dutch-Moroccan cultural cooperation. We had submitted a proposal in collaboration with the Wikimedia Morocco User Group. For the Faro Implementation Agenda Grant Scheme, we developed a proposal aimed at encouraging young people and platforms for youth culture to share images and data through the Wikimedia projects. On a positive note, regular smaller donations increased by more than €20,000 compared to 2024.
- Governance adjustments: The introduction of the Law on Management and Supervision of Legal Entities (effective 1 January 2025) requires compliance from all Dutch legal entities. Because of the aforementioned challenges, planned research into governance and organizational structure has been postponed to 2026.
- Planning adjustment: The deadline for reporting on Wikipedia on Aruba project subsidized by the Dutch Cultural Participation Fund was postponed from 31 December 2025 to 31 March 2026.
Key learnings
[edit]These challenges highlighted the importance of flexibility, realistic capacity planning, and maintaining focus on core priorities. We learned that recruitment processes, team disruptions, and external regulatory changes can significantly impact delivery, requiring adaptive planning and clear prioritization.
Achievements
[edit]Despite these challenges, we are particularly proud of several achievements especially on safety and inclusion and impact:
- We launched and completed a new edition of the Wikipedia Contributors Survey, providing in-depth insights into the community and forming the basis for actionable improvements.
- We supported the Dutch Wikipedia admin community by conducting a survey among (former) Arbitration Committee members to identify support needs, including mental health and wellbeing. The findings will be presented at a governance conference in 2026.
- We continued our work in the Caribbean with Wikipedia on Aruba, Aruba on Wikipedia based on the fundraising success in 2024 from the Cultural Participation Fund and additional grants from WMF and Dutch Culture. One Wikimedian in Residence and a project and marketing support coordinator have been working in Aruba for two years, while we are able to keep focussing on underrepresented groups, recruit more donors, and realise more income from donations.
- In 2025 we organised three successful meetings aimed at young editors: on June 28, September 27, and November 22 during WikiconNL. Additional support was provided through participation in the WikiYouthConference, the WMUK Train the Trainer program, and individual FOKA grant applications.
Additional highlights include:
- 102 activities organized, supported, or facilitated (including activities on Aruba)
- Collaboration with more than 30 partners
- Preparations for a Wikipedia 25th anniversary campaign, helping address content gaps (especially in Aruba)
- In 2025 we introduced a new facility for Wikimedia editors: two professional coach/counsellors can be consulted to discuss dilemma’s, problems or ambitions experienced while editing. The-coaching program was set up as a pilot for one year, to be evaluated in May 2026) and is focused on non-violent communication and positive community interaction.
- Support for the North-Western Hackathon in Arnhem (to be held in March 2026). WMNL in cooperation with WMF financed and supported its organisation. An extra positive note: two new volunteers joined the organising team bringing new energy and ambition and also building capacity for a follow-up later on (mini-hackathon in November 2026)
- Our Gender Gap project initiative began in 2015 and celebrated its 10th anniversary this year. Its sister project, Project LGBTI, began in 2020 and celebrated its 5th anniversary. The projects, writing challenges and workshops included in this initiative have reached 439 new and experienced contributors.
Conclusion
[edit]In 2025, our programs and strategies largely contributed to addressing the challenges identified in our proposal, although not always in the ways or timelines initially expected. The increasing demand for support from the editing community reflects a strong level of trust, which we highly value. At the same time, it highlights the limitations of our current capacity and resources.
Moving forward, balancing ambition, team capacity, and community needs will be a key priority. These insights will directly inform our planning for 2026 and the development of our new multi-year strategy.
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)
We are currently developing a new strategy which incorporates key successes and wil also determine new priorities and opportunities.
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).
We share our activities via a monthly newsletter (in Dutch): [1]
The annual report is currently being developed, we will be publishing it on our website (in Dutch): [2]
We share regularly updates on our activities on meta-wiki: [3]
For newsworthy milestones, relevant for the national press we published and shared five press releases: [4]
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, we are always happy to share with and learn from other affiliates and the wider community. We are particularly eager to share what we learned during our project Wikipedia on Aruba, we have in fact already submitted a proposal for a presentation during Wikimania.
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.
Editors user survey
Between May 28 and June 15, Wikipedia editors were invited to participate in a user survey. This triennial survey provides insight into the profile of editors and their views on issues affecting Wikipedia. This year, we asked about their experiences with moderators and the ArbCom, as well as their opinions on the use of AI. For instance, 85% appreciate the work moderators do, and 58% are generally (very) satisfied with how moderators perform their duties. Opinions on the use of AI are divided: 28% are positive, while 52% are negative about the use of AI in editing Wikipedia. One other key finding is that editors have experienced a more positive atmosphere on Wikipedia, in comparison to earlier surveys. In May, there were 1,219 active editors on the Dutch-language Wikipedia. A response of 225 results in a response rate of 18.46% among active editors. Read the summary of the results on the project page ([5]) or view the full report on Wikimedia Commons ([6]).
Arbitration Committee Survey
The Arbitration Committee (ArbCom) is the designated body on the Dutch-language Wikipedia for resolving long-standing conflicts between users. Membership on the ArbCom requires a long-term commitment. Unfortunately, it is often difficult to find enough Wikipedians willing to stand for election. To assess experiences with the ArbCom and gather suggestions for improvement, Wikimedia Netherlands, in consultation with the community, created a survey.
This survey was sent to everyone who has been a member of the Arbitration Committee on the Dutch-language Wikipedia between 2014 and 2024. Of the 36 (former) arbitrators, 25 completed the survey.
The results show that serving on the ArbCom is an intensive task, with most respondents spending between four and six hours per week on it. This often came at the expense of other work on Wikipedia. Despite negative experiences in specific cases or with the community in general, a majority of respondents look back on their membership with satisfaction or pride. The survey yielded suggestions for improvements to the ArbCom bylaws, the election procedure, and internal consultation. See the results here: [7]
Guest survey Wikicon
Shortly after the Wikicon, we sent out a simple feedback form, which amounted to a response slightly above 20%. However, the feedback form itself is not published. We did post an update and “review” on the website, which is the most GDPR-compliant option in this case.
===== [8]
=====
Various interviews with on-wiki organisers, reviews and blog posts following the completion of projects:
[edit]FOKA reports: [14]
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, LGBTQ+ groups, young people, indigenous groups , speakers of minority languages
- 6.2 Develop content about the following underrepresented topics or groups of people: women, LGBTQ+ groups, speakers of minority languages, indigenous groups
- 6.3 Support the retention of: Editors, Organizers, Partnerships, Wikimedians in Residence positions
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)
One approach that has been proven and tested is investing in longstanding, recurrent activities and supporting volunteers involved in these activities, for example wikivrijdag and wikizaterdag. These are small and medium edit-a-thons open to new editors who work on closing the gender gap (women, lhgbtq+) which are supported and guided by experienced volunteers.
What also works well is partnering with organisations that have a strong reputation in this field, for example IHLIA (Heritage organisation involved in collecting information about the LGBTIQ+ community and making it accessible [16]) and Atria (Institute on Gender Equality and Women's History [17])
For young content creators, a good approach is to get to know one another in person in an informal setting. Once connections have been established, moving on to online collaboration through an ongoing group chat leads to deepening and maintaining collaboration among younger editors.
Last but not least: sharing positive experiences and exposure in newspapers and in the news work as a motivator - as it creates a sense of community of being seen and appreciated.
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):
Permanent staff outreach, Partners proactive interest, Volunteers from our communities
Part 2: Metrics for Year 1
[edit]| Wikimedia Metrics | Target (Year 1) | Results (Year 1) | Comments and tools used |
|---|---|---|---|
| Number of all participants | N/A | 5642 | metrics sheet, outreach dashboard, petscan, xtools, quarry wmcloud, event registration tool |
| Number of all editors | N/A | 1049 | guctoolforge.nl |
| Number of new editors | N/A | 188 | |
| Number of retained editors | N/A | 79 | |
| Number of all organizers | N/A | 81 | manual |
| Number of new organizers | N/A | 3 |
| Wikimedia project | Target - Number of created pages (Year 1) | Target - Number of improved pages (Year 1) | Result - Number of created pages (Year 1) | Result - Number of improved pages (Year 1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wikipedia | 3300 | 3406 | 10490 | |
| Wikimedia Commons | 30000 | 9519 | 5786 | |
| Wikidata | 20000 | 23411 | ||
| Wiktionary | ||||
| Wikisource | ||||
| Wikimedia Incubator | ||||
| Translatewiki | ||||
| MediaWiki | ||||
| Wikiquote | ||||
| Wikivoyage | ||||
| Wikibooks | ||||
| Wikiversity | ||||
| Wikinews | ||||
| Wikispecies | ||||
| Wikifunctions or Abstract Wikipedia |
Tool used and comments (optional):
Tools: metrics sheet, petscan, glamourous
Please note: we have slightly changed the way we measure our results so that we can provide more precise and specialized findings. We have measured things in a more targeted way. For example, we have distinguished between the number of new Dutch-language Wikipedia pages and the number of edits on the Dutch-language Wikipedia. We also distinguished the number of images in a content donation from the number of edits on Commons, excluding the specific edits related to those content donations.
11. Did you set other quantitative and qualitative targets for your project (other metrics)? (required): Yes
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 | Description | Target | Results | Comments | Methodology |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| number of activities | Online of offline activities organised in the course of the year | 40 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| newly registered editors | Individuals that created an account and made their first edits during/as the result of an activitiy | 350 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| Editor retention | Number of newly registered editors that are still active on WIkimedia projects six months after registration. | 35 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| New partnerships | Insitutions/organisations participating in a WMNL activity for the first time | 5 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
| N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A |
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).
Last summer, Wikimedia UK organized an online course, Train the Trainer. Throughout August, participants took part in four weeks of intensive training, consisting of preparatory assignments and live online sessions. The course was designed for Wikimedians who wanted to strengthen their skills in training and mentoring new contributors during workshops and meetings. Participants were provided with practical tools and techniques and worked on building their confidence to facilitate Wikimedia events and workshops, both online and in person. Our colleagues in Aruba participated in this course as had one of our project leads.
Last fall, both our project leaders participated in Wikimedia Europe’s Masters of Grants Bootcamp, online. Participants delved into the entire lifecycle of grant projects, led by two experienced professionals from the European civil society sector. The bootcamp focused on strengthening fundraising skills, learning to better navigate the funding landscape, and effectively managing complex projects.
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)
For next year we want to focus on developing the in-house fundraising skills and on team building, giving and receiving feedback and fostering a culture of open communication.
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).
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 | Amount spent (EUR) |
|---|---|
| Personnel costs | 355000 |
| Operational costs | 55100 |
| Programmatic costs | 21200 |
| Total (Year 1) | 431268.88 |
| Other revenue | 140221 |
| Remaining funds (Year 1) | N/A |
15. Please state the total amount spent from this fund in your local currency. (required)
431268.88 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: 55100 EUR
- Programmatic costs: 21200 EUR
- Staff and contractor costs: 355000 EUR
17. Did you have any other revenue sources (e.g. other funding, membership contributions, donations)? (required): Yes
- 17.1. Provide the total amount received from other revenue sources in your local currency. (required): 140221 EUR
- 17.2. Provide the total amount spent from other revenue sources in your local currency. (required): 140221 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.
- Our financial report is due in June, we will be sure to send it asap
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)
Please note that the financial statement is currently being audited, which means the reported figures are subject to change. As soon as we have the final financial statement - due in June 2026 - we will be sure to share it.
19. Do you have any unspent funds from this funding?: No
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.