Grants talk:APG/Proposals/2012-2013 round1/Wikimedia UK/Progress report form/Q3

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Report received[edit]

Thank you for submitting a complete report for Q3 on time. We look forward to reading more about your activities. Due to the timing of the FDC funding cycle, it will take staff a little longer than usual to offer feedback about this report and post clarifying questions. We appreciate your patience with this process, and welcome any urgent questions or concerns that you may want to address before our comments are ready. Thank you for your attention to the reporting process during this busy time and best regards, Winifred Olliff (Grants Administrator) talk 22:30, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciation, questions, and suggestions from FDC staff[edit]

Thank you for completing this third quarter report. We enjoyed learning about your work and your progress to date! KLove (WMF) (talk) 06:15, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Financial summary[edit]

  • There appear to be two inconsistencies in the cumulative column of the table showing WMUK’s expenses. The cumulative numbers for Development and Digitisation do not total the sum of expenses in each quarter for these programs, or the total listed in the US dollars column.
  1. Thank you for pointing this out. For the cumulative/Development box, the figure should read ‘£17209.23’. For the cumulative/Digitastion box, the figure should read ‘£2500.00’. These are mistakes that have crept in while editing the template! Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 10:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • We are reading the actual cumulative expenses in GBP as 464,175.47 GBP, or 62% of WMUK’s budget of 743,613 GBP. Overall spending across Q1, Q2 and Q3 has remained consistent at about 20% of the total budget in each quarter. WMUK continues to spend less than 60% against its budget across many line items, including programs, while expenses for staff and travel, office equipment and rent, insurance, legal and accounting fees, merchandise and equipment are each cumulatively spent at over 60% of the planned budget.

Appreciation[edit]

  • Thanks to WMUK for including an image in this report. We encourage WMUK and other entities to make their reporting richer in content by adding images and videos, as possible.
  • Congratulations to WMUK on its increase in program activity as well as WMUK’s progress on governance! The progress in governance issues was shown by the audit report conducted in Q3 that indicates it is on track for meeting its targets in this area. We also appreciate the clear report on staff time spent in different areas.
  • Measuring editor engagement one month after an activity may be a good indicator of the success of some programs, and so we appreciate that this information will be reported on for initiatives like Wiki Loves Monuments and gender gap activities. We hope to see more in the future.

We would like to learn more[edit]

  1. Please offer some details about the unplanned revenue received from conferences, as reported in the revenues table.
    The revenue was not unplanned - we expected to receive it, but didn’t budget for it. This income is from two sources: the GLAM Conference, and the EDU-WIKI conference. The income is from a few different sources: some as cash, some as cheques or bank transfers, and the majority via PayPal. Wikimedians receive a discounted rate of £30 at these conferences, and those from outside the movement are charged a fee of circa £40. This helps subsidise the conference, but ultimately it still runs at a loss. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 10:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  2. WMUK included “en.wp” in the section on Wiki Focus but did not provide an update. Please update the report to include that information.
    Sorry about that, I've now updated the report with a brief summary of focus on en.wp. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 10:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  3. In some cases, WMUK has reported that content has been contributed to the projects through its activities. For Wiki Loves Monuments, or for other programs, has WMUK measured the quality of the content contributed?
    Yes, we have, although it is difficult to track in some cases. The obvious measure of quality available for content contributed such as media files uploaded to Wikimedia Commons through program such as Wiki Loves Monuments are highlighted content status available on the project. This relies on the content being nominated for such status which mean we will inevitably undercount on the actual quality. For WLM UK 2013, there are currently 6 Featured Pictures, 44 quality images, and 7 valued images as of 14th January 2014. A report is being drafted on WLM but it is not a quick process and neither is assessing all the content. The 2,000 quality image from WLM 2012 was promoted 14 months after the end of the competition, so the numbers given above for the UK contribution in 2013 can be expected to increase a bit. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 10:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  4. WMUK spent 15,000 GBP on sending 9 volunteers and 2 staff to Wikimania. What outcomes were achieved as a result of this participation? Did participating volunteers report back to WMUK about these outcomes or results?
    There are 9 reports already posted at https://wiki.wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Wikimania_2013_Report including from 7 of 9 volunteers. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 10:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Please provide some details about the insights related to the Training of Trainers program and how these insights will affect WMUK’s program planning in this area.
    We have published the report and the insights are there with a full list of recommendations that are being implemented. https://wiki.wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Train_the_Trainers_consultation Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 10:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  6. We are interested to know more about the kinds of outcomes or results WMUK is seeing in the Welsh Wikipedia project. For example, has editing activity on this project increased? What outcomes or results has WMUK measured that stem from these activities? How have the training materials created been used?
    New editors trained: 80
    New Trainers trained in wiki editing skills: 11
    New articles based on the Wales Coast Path created: c. 1,000 out of 2,000: English, Welsh.
    Another 2,000 in the pipeline.
    Other new articles as a direct result of releasing new open content:
    Books: 1,500 out of 5,000 done.
    Species with standardised Welsh names: 8,000
    1,800 images uploaded to commons. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 10:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Can you summarize the results of the Wikiconference and AGM evaluations?
    In general, the respondents were satisfied to very satisfied with WikiConference UK 2013. An area where a number of respondents were less satisfied with is the chosen location of the conference, with one respondent also highlighting that the conference clashed with a conference hosted by the Open Rights Group.

    A number of attendees would like to see longer talks, both for the main content and to allow more time for questions. Too technical are the main reason given for a talk to be found least useful or interesting. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 10:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  8. Please share some outcomes or results of the EduWiki conference here. What was achieved as a result of this conference?
    For context, here are some facts and (loose) statistics about the EduWiki 2013 delegates:
    • 80 people registered for this conference.
    • 68 registered delegates attended (51 male / 17 female)
    • 23 delegates work for educational institutions in the UK (have email addresses ending in ac.uk)
    • 17 students from the University of Cardiff registered to attend; 10 showed up on the first day only.
    • 12 delegates declared their Wiki*edia username at registration.
    • Non-UK delegates traveled from 8 countries: Australia, France, Germany, Israel, Norway, Spain, Switzerland, USA.
    For reflections and coverage see: https://wiki.wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/EduWiki_Conference_2013#Reflections_and_coverage

    WMUK volunteers and staff produced a video about EduWiki 2013 capturing some of the conference outcomes directly at the event. See https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:EduWiki_Conference_2013_video.webm

    Further videos of the keynotes and selected presentations are still in the process of being finalised for uploading.

    The following points reflect our attempts to build capacity for the UK Wikimedia community engaged in the Education sector:

    • A number of delegates led by an active WMUK member explored the Wikipedia Education Extension in the presence of Rod Dunican, pointing out a desire to use such a feature but highlighting the many shortcomings of the current version. This gives the Education Extension development team a prime group of Wikipedias in Education to work with outside North America.
    • The ten students who came to the conference have expressed an interest in setting up a Wikipedia Students’ Society at Cardiff University during the current academic year.
    • Two conference delegates, who are also active chapter members, have started mapping where and how Wikimedia projects are being used in Higher Education across the UK.
    • A conference delegate who is a PhD student at the University of Hull, has picked the work of three conference presenters to include as case studies on her doctoral research project.
    • Another conference delegate who is based at the University of Stirling in Scotland, is in the process of organising a symposium on open education at his university and has invited members of the WMUK education community to participate directly. Following EduWiki2013, he became a chapter member and has now also applied for a grant to support this work. See https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Macrogrants/Wiki-Themed_Symposium
    • The fact that the event took place in Wales provided a good opportunity for the second Cardiff wiki meetup to take place as a social event attached to the conference, providing a vibrant experience and opportunity for the local community to engage with other wikimedians from elsewhere.
    • WMUK’s Stevie Benton picked up on a presentation at EduWiki by WMCH’s Muriel Staub to start working on projects that can use Kiwix in furthering the aspiration of free knowledge for all - in schools in Africa and UK young offenders institutes.
    • EduWiki2013 also provided an opportunity for the Wikimania2014 organisers to raise awareness about the “Future of Education” theme for the movement’s major gathering, which will take place in London in August 2014. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 10:49, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions for future reports[edit]

  • In future financial tables, please simply include the amounts in US dollars in the Cumulative ($US) column, since the amounts in pounds are already included in the Cumulative column and this makes the table more difficult (for us) to read.
  • We would like to be able to understand WMUK’s progress against its objectives more clearly. Therefore, we ask WMUK to report on the outcomes or results it is achieving through its activities in addition to reporting on activities completed and funds spent.


Once again, thank you, colleagues at WMUK, for this report, and for your work on behalf of the entire Wikimedia movement! KLove (WMF) (talk) 06:12, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:APG/Proposals/2012-2013_round1/Wikimedia_UK/Progress_report_form/Q3&oldid=9136044"