Grants talk:APG/Proposals/2014-2015 round1/Wikimedia Deutschland e.V./Proposal form
Community review has ended. You are still welcome to comment on these proposals, but the FDC and the applicants may not be able to respond to your feedback or consider it during the deliberations.
Please do not edit this proposal form directly. If changes are needed, applicants can request them on the proposal form's discussion page. Thank you!
- 1 Logic models institution
- 2 Request to FDC staff to add missing categories
- 3 Reserves
- 4 Subject-matter expert input
- 5 Questions from FDC staff
- 6 About some expences
- 7 Subject-matter expert feedback regarding software development programs
- 8 Questions from Risker about participant metrics
- 9 Extension for Submission of 2015 Audited Financial Statements
Logic models institution
- I would, actually :) Thing is, you'll find that the other three logic model thumbnails are taken from the PDFs on Commons. The one that you refer to has fallen victim to the old "PDF preview contorted thumb thing" bug, meaning that the PDF is just fine but the thumb is strangely stretched. I don't have the original file, so I just quickly made a png file and inserted that one instead. So, if you delete and/or replace it with the pdf, it will look contorted. Best, --Michael Jahn WMDE (talk) 08:02, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Request to FDC staff to add missing categories
User:Wolliff_(WMF), in the proposal we unintentionally forgot to add the categories. I would like to request your approval to insert the following categories after the submission deadline:
- Annual plan grants and proposals by Wikimedia Deutschland
- Annual plan grants and proposals for 2014-2015 Round 1
- Annual plan grants or proposals by Wikimedia Deutschland for 2014-2015 Round 1
- Annual plan grant proposal forms for 2014-2015 Round 1
- Hi, Nicole! We fixed this by adding the proposal form template back to this page. It adds the categories, but we also need the template here in order to make global changes to the pages (such as adding or removing community review templates or making other updates across all proposals. Is it OK if we keep it there? If there's a particular reason why you don't want it, I might be able to work it out by using a special exception for your proposal form within the code of the template itself. Cheers, Winifred Olliff (FDC Support Team) talk 00:43, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
I want to congratulate you on this commendable proposal. I like your focus on your stengths and most important/succesful activities like Wikidata and community support. And even more that your request for FDC funding actually is 7,5% less then you recieved last year. WMDE is very important and should act as a role model. In the same time the resources from FDC that has gone to WMDE has been very high, almost double as the next biggest receipicent. I am then vey happy to see WMDE getting more aligned with the rest of the chapters (in resouces required) and leaving opportunites for funding increases for other samller chaptes, being in a more early part of their lifecycles. I have two questions 1. you still plan to expand with 4-5 persons, did you consider a 100% freeze on recrutiment? 2.A year ago we one of our (many) concerna with the 2013/2014 proposal was related to the fat thta you did not use up funding receved and that you used fundings to fill up your reserves (already a bit almost too high). Could you comment on these issue related to the 2014 operations.Anders Wennersten (talk) 15:22, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
- @Anders Thanks for your questions!
- ad 1) Yes, we did indeed consider a recruitment freeze, amongst other options, but dissmissed it. The main reason is that it would take away the amount of flexibility we need in the process. Across the board cuts do send out the wrong signal, because they don’t allow for strategic adjustments, and assume that all programs can be treated with the same ‘hedgetrimmer’. Instead, shifting FTEs around allows us to focus on our strengths (i.e. software development), increase efficiency where feasible, and add capacity where reasonable as we go through this crucial consolidation phase. Please note also that in the proposal the 2015 FTE numbers are represented in relation to the numbers from October 1, 2014. At this time of year we have already reduced some of our staff (e.g. an employee left, another became the Interim ED etc.) which made the number of planned 2015 hires appear higher in relation to the overall year 2014.
- ad 2) WMDE never planned to carry over any APG funds or to put them into reserves for FY 2014. This is confirmed by the annual budget revision, conducted in September 2014. According to the revised 2014 budget we will have expended all APG funds at the end of 2014. You can find details in the upcoming Q3 report. A clarification in regards to the 2013 issues you mentioned: The carry over from 2013 was not put into reserves either (we do not have any reserves at the moment, nor did we have any in the past) but was used/carried over as one of the revenue sources for the 2014 annual plan. During the discussion phase of last year’s proposal there was some confusion regarding the terminology (which was clarified later between FDC staff/WMDE). We erroneously described the carry over as operating reserve back then - hence the confusion.
- Just to clarify: Note that due to our status as payment processor we were not obliged to separately track the APG funds spent during 2013 (we now do this, as of 2014). Since APG funds constituted less than half of WMDE’s 2013 revenue, it is incorrect to say that the carry over consisted entirely of unspent FDC funds (see our explanation and calculation here for details: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Proposals/2012-2013_round1/Wikimedia_Deutschland_e.V./Impact_report_form#Financial_information). Best wishes, Jan Engelmann (WMDE) (talk) 14:26, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
Subject-matter expert input
As part of the annual plan proposal assessment and evaluation process, WMDE has requested the input of Erik Moeller in his role as Deputy Director and VP of Product & Strategy at Wikimedia Foundation. As outlined in the FDC process Erik was asked to base his input on the following template . --Kasia Odrozek (WMDE) (talk) 13:02, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Questions from FDC staff
Thank you for submitting this proposal for an Annual Plan Grant to the FDC! As the FDC staff, we have enjoyed reviewing it and learning more about the work you’ve done to date, and the plans you have for 2015. At this time, we’d like to know a bit more. Some questions have come up as part of our review, and we have a few requests for clarifications. Please let us know if any of this is unclear.
Confirming your financial information
Based on your budgeted spend for 2014 your proposed growth rate is -11.86% and based on your projected spend for 2014 your growth rate is -0.43% because you expect to spend 88.51% of the total budgeted. WMDE is requesting a 7.41% decrease in WM grant funding. This analysis is based on the following numbers:
- Budgeted spend 2014: €5,310,000 (reported in Q2)
- Projected spend 2014: €4,700,000
- FDC funds granted 2014: €1,296,000
- Proposed budget 2015: €4,680,000
- FDC funds requested 2015: €1,200,000
In addition we understand WMDE retained a €500,000 carry over from the previous year and €50,000 in reserves during 2014.
Would you please report here the amount you intend to retain from your PEG to support the Wikimedia Conference?
In your Q2 report, you state 5,310,000 as your budgeted expenses for 2014, but in your year-to-date financials in this proposal form you state 4,870,000 and also include a note indicating that you have revised your budget recently (in Q3). Would you please provide a copy of the revised budget, so we can understand the changes?
- Budgeted spend 2014: €5,310,000 (reported in Q2)
This number includes the expenses of the fundraising department (€440.000) which are part of the Wikimedia Fördergesellschaft budget and which we reported for transparency reasons. The original 2014 budget of Wikimedia Deutschland amounted to €4.870.000. This number is found in the revenues section of Q2 (“budgeted”). Original numbers: 4.870.000 (WMDE) + 440.000 (Fundraising costs of WMFG) = 5.310.000 Revised numbers: 4.700.000 (WMDE) + 440.000 (Fundraising costs of WMFG) = 5.140.000
- Projected spend 2014: €4,700,000
This is correct for Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. budget (without fundraising costs which are part of the Wikimedia Fördergesellschaft budget and are projected to arise to €440,000) FDC funds granted 2014: €1,296,000 This is correct.
- Proposed budget 2015: €4,680,000
This is correct for Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. budget.
- FDC funds requested 2015: €1,200,000
This is correct. We will provide the copy of the revised budget 2014 with a respective commentary as soon as it is translated (2-3 days from now). Until then it is available in German on the WMDE Forum (requires a login): https://forum.wikimedia.de/wiki/Nachtragshaushalt_2014
It is correct that we retained the unspent €500.000 from 2013 and we “carried it over” as a revenue source for 2014. However, it is incorrect that we retained an additional €50.000 in reserves. The €50.000 we indicated as operational reserve in our proposal 2012/13 were part of the 500.000 “carry over”. We adjusted our approach towards reserves in 2013 towards not setting aside any reserve. (As stated in this year’s proposal: Currently, WMDE does not hold an operating reserve. WMDE leadership is aware of the associated risks. One of the tasks of new leadership In 2015 will be to develop fund diversification strategies for 2016 and beyond. These will include a policy for building operating reserves, looking into the possibility of endowment funds, and exploring other innovative fiscal strategies to sustain our programs and organization.)
Regarding the Wikimedia Conference: We did not receive any grant funds prior to the conference. We advanced the expenses for the Wikimedia Conference from our budget and received a full reimbursement from WMF after the event in Q3. You can find the full amount of €52.313 referenced in our quarterly reports. The amount is reflected both in the revenues (line item “Other”) and in the spending (line item: International affairs) parts. Therefore, WMDE will not retain any funds from the PEG.
- Thanks, Nicola! These clarifications are indeed very helpful, and we will update our records accordingly. Would you also be able to provide the an estimate for the planned budget for Wikimedia Fördergesellschaft in 2015? Thank you, Winifred Olliff (FDC Support Team) talk 01:51, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Winifred, we have published the planned budget for Wikimedia Fördergesellschaft (both the revenues and expenditures) as part of the annual plan 2015, you can find it here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Deutschland/2015_annual_plan/en/Finance. Let me know if you have any more questions. --Kasia Odrozek (WMDE) (talk) 09:37, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
- We note that the number of new media items that you hope to add to Commons in 2014 will be 60K (current total is 46K). What is your target for 2015?
- We note you plan to track the number of articles created or read, but we did not see any numbers in what you hope to achieve, or what your baseline is. What are your targets in these areas?
- We note your focus on diversity as you work to increase participation in Wikimedia projects. What outcomes do you hope to see from your Women Edit project?
- How will the nearly five new FTEs in your software development program allow you to achieve your goals? Do you have targets for this program?
- Under “Institutions,” you note that one goal is to solidify and scale up collaboration between institutions and the movement to create new content. What role will volunteers and the communities you work with have in this program, as distinct from staff? What is your target for content contributed?
- We recognize that it is difficult to set targets and measure work around policy advocacy. However, can you tell us more about the goal you have to strengthen relationships with non-movement net policy groups? What kind of achievements do you hope to see by the end of 2015? What kind of advocacy tools do you want to provide to volunteers? How will you mobilize them to action?
- We would like to know a bit more about the new positions being created at the executive level. What will the role be of the policy advisor and the international affairs advisor?
- As outlined in target 1.3.1 of Program 1 we plan to have at least the same amount of new media items added to Wikimedia Commons in 2015 as we will have at the end of 2014 → approx. 60k new media items added to Wikimedia Commons in 2015 which are supported by WMDE’s small project support activities.
- So far we only partially track the number of articles edited/ created by volunteers who are directly supported by our small project support services (e.g. literature stipends) or edited/ created through supported activities (edit-a-thons etc.). Therefore our baseline for 2014 will unfortunately be rather incomplete. Our main target for 2015 is to establish a valid and more complete system to monitor the overall number of articles created/ edited in the context of this part of the volunteer support program. With regard to this, by 09/2015 we will be able to provide a more meaningful baseline as a start for future targets.
- Diversity - The Women Edit project has been a major focus in 2014. But it is not ‘our’ project - rather it is a volunteer-driven effort. The goal of WMDE in 2014 was to assist with kick-starting supportive networks and face to face social supports for women editors all across Germany. WMDE did this by contracting with a facilitator who helped start these systems up. The support networks have been designed to sustain, perpetuate and multiply themselves in 2015 and beyond. The outcome our women edit volunteers are hoping to see is an increase in women contributing to Wikimedia projects, and enriching online content with topics important to women. In line with WMDE’s philosophy of enabling and empowering volunteers, rather than doing work for them, staff of our volunteer support program will be available in 2015 to provide any supports necessary for projects, edit-a-thons and monthly meetings.
- FTEs - Note that our programs do not align 1:1 with departments, but that programs are coordinated across departments. Especially supporting communities is explicitly not limited to one department, but is considered a task of all departments and staff. In regards to the FTEs allocated for the Software Development Department: The confusion was possibly caused by the fact that these additional FTEs support objectives under Program 1, Supporting Volunteers. Following is a specific breakdown of the FTE and which objectives they relate to: Tech Liaison 0,75 (Program 1, Objective 1.4), Community Project Team (new) 2,0 (Program 1, Objective 1.3 and Program 2, Objective 3.1), Wikidata 1,0 (Program 2, Objective 1.1 - 2.4). Additionally, 1 FTE will be the new assistant to the Head of Software development. Targets for Program 2, Software Development, are outlined in the target tables under each goal/objectives.
- Institutions - In line with our philosophy of empowering and enabling volunteers, rather than doing work for them, WMDE staff creates the environment, or the framework that enables volunteers to represent the Wikimedia projects with institutions and affect the release of content. After the kick-off effect provided by the GLAM on Tour event (supported by staff), communities and volunteers will play a crucial role in deepening and expanding their collaboration with institutions. Institutions in turn will be assisted by volunteers and staff expertise in changing their work flows to facilitate the addition of more open content. Our proposal does not include a target for content contributed, because we currently do not have a rationale or system for quantifying and measuring this. The types of content contributed by collaboration among volunteers and institutions varies wildly. There are also wide variations in how and to what degree content is re-used in Wikimedia projects. In 2015 the Team Partnerships and Development (which includes evaluation) will work with program staff to categorize open content data sets, and understand better how they are re-used, so we can better track and report on content contributed under this program.
- Advocacy - Non-movement net policy groups the FKAGEU intends to collaborate with are those who share our positions on the policy issues that affect the movement. This includes for example associations such as EDRi, Creative Commons, and regional net activist associations in countries with no Wikimedia Chapters. These relationships will be characterized by shared vision and goals, joint, mutually supportive activities, coordinated statements, continuous communication, and collaboratively organized events. Events, such as workshops, policy development meetings, advocacy trainings, and social gatherings will be designed to increase the number of volunteers engaged in advocacy, and develop their advocacy skills. They will also potentially connect volunteers across ‘movements’ and create new synergies. The tools and opportunities we intend to provide to activate aspiring hacktivists include a contact database (with MEPs), support for the MEP Mailing campaign, practicum opportunities supported by stipends (Wikimedian in Brussels), Brussels desk sharing opportunity (Liquid Lobbying), and jointly developed policy issue brochures in 4-6 different languages. A proposal has been submitted to the ‘EU for Citizens’ program, which if funded, will help fund travel expenses of volunteers attending events in Brussels as well as regional trainings. Additional grant proposals are currently being developed.
- Advisors - The International Affairs Unit (aka Nicole Ebber) will become an independent office reporting directly to the Executive Director. This position will advise the Executive Director and Supervisory Board on international relations and strategic positioning. Among the priorities will be to maintain effective lines of communication, to strengthen ties with WMF and other Wikimedia organizations, and support shared learning with the movement. The Advisor International Relations will bring her expertise and experience to international decision-making processes and will help develop solutions for global Wikimedia challenges. In regards to the new position of the Policy Advisor (0,5 FTE): Our goal is to create a favorable policy environment for free knowledge. WMDE’s advocacy work has shifted onto the international stage with the set-up of the Free Knowledge Advocacy Group in 2013, a policy consortium of volunteers and Wikimedia chapters in Brussels which is in constant exchange with the WMF legal team. In order to be effective at the EU level, WMDE needs a continued presence at the national policy level as well – especially since the leading commissioner for the Digital Agenda is a high-ranking politician from Germany. Developments related to Internet policy and copyright deserve our attention at both EU and national levels. We will contribute to these processes, by taking part in consultations, launching parliamentary initiatives and monitoring the new federal Digital Agenda Committee. The WMDE Policy Advisor will directly consult with the Executive Director and the WMDE Board on these issues that are strategically crucial to the movement, the Wikimedia projects and the WMDE programs. You can find the rationale for hiring the Policy Advisor position in 2015 in the proposal itself, in the Program support services section.
- thanks for these great questions and the opportunity to elaborate! --Nicola Zeuner (WMDE) (talk) 15:43, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
About some expences
- There is 600.000,00 of Administration and HR(Appendix to table 8) . What is include to "Administration" expences?
- Hello Рулин. As outlined in our annual plan 2015 this item covers the entire infrastructure that goes into running our office. This includes among other: ongoing rent and associated rental expenses, operating costs (electricity, cleaning, IT, insurance, materials, legal advice related to HR etc.) and leasing. --Kasia Odrozek (WMDE) (talk) 17:31, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
- There is 500.000,00 of Supporting Volunteers. If my understand is right , this program is not new. What Targets were achieved in last year? What german part of Wikipedia taked, which can be pattern for other part of Wikipedia.
- There is Education, Science & Culture in Table 4 and "Working students and interns". It is not part of Education? --Рулин (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Рулин, thank you for your questions. We will answer the first two questions early next week. Regarding the "working students and interns": This is supporting staff for all departments, not only for the education department. Best , --Nicole Ebber (WMDE) (talk) 11:28, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Why does Wikipedia Deutschland ask for so much money? How can it justify that most money is coming from outside of Germany? Should the grant roughly be equal to the amount of money that is collected in Germany? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by EatingGlassIsBad (talk)
- The amount of money collected in germany for the movement is much higher. Should get up to 5.600.000 € in 2014. --Sargoth (talk) 21:03, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Subject-matter expert feedback regarding software development programs
Wikimedia Deutschland has requested subject-matter expert input on this proposal, specifically with an eye to the chapter's software engineering work, based on my leadership of product/engineering initiatives at the Wikimedia Foundation, and the working relationship between the Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia Deutschland on the Wikidata project. My focus is on the software development work that is part of this plan and should not be construed as a reflection on the remainder of the plan.
- What is your overall reaction to the plan as proposed? It is good to see clear recognition in the plan of Wikidata's strategic significance, and the need to continue to make investments in both the platform and new uses of the underlying technology, such as file metadata. My only concern is the high degree of specificity regarding software that will be developed.
- Do you believe Wikimedia DE is qualified to undertake this? Yes, without reservations.
- What are the major strengths of the plan, from your perspective? The plan is well-structured, data-driven, and defines clear measures of success for each initiative. With regard to the community development work, I was very impressed with the on-wiki technical survey that has informed prioritization of work, and have pointed to it to inform similar WMF pilots -- it's great that the chapter is allocating efforts to requests that are unambiguously and widely supported by community members, and I look forward to seeing (and making) more of this work happen.
- What are the major weaknesses of the plan, from your perspective? I would not include features of specificity like "The Wikidata feature 'Constraint Reports' is improved/ enhanced and made available for users of Wikidata by the end of 2015." at the level of an Annual Plan. Software engineering work is inherently fast-paced and priorities need to be informed by current needs, not needs that were (by, say, October 2015) articulated a year earlier. Wikidata in particular is a project where priorities can shift quickly as new applications are built.
- As an example, it has become apparent that a high performance query service that supports complex queries is one of the most urgent needs for anyone developing Wikidata applications. The Wikimedia Foundation and the Wikidata team are discussing how to best develop and support such a service. It is unlikely that a high performance service to perform complex queries will be "fully baked" by 2015, and it is an extremely important capability, yet the word "API" or "query" is not mentioned as a "feature" in the plan. In a flexible prioritization model, that would be fine, and the team would be empowered to make it a collective priority to work with the Wikimedia Foundation to improve a query service even at the cost of some of its other feature objectives slipping. This kind of dynamic prioritization of work should not be regarded as a failure of the team to plan ahead, but assumed to be a normal part of development work.
- Instead of including feature commitments at this level of detail, I would recommend focusing on high level success metrics for the Wikidata project as a whole (e.g. #/% Wikipedia articles that directly use information from Wikidata other than language links). Some milestones can help focus the team and the organization, but less is more in this case.
- If the plan were executed, what if any suggestions would you have for the Wikimedia DE, that you feel would increase their likelihood of success? At this point, none other than the above.
- If the plan were executed, do you think it would make a small, medium or large contribution to the goals of the Wikimedia movement, and to its ability to achieve global impact? Large, given the significant current and prospective impact of Wikidata as a platform for open data.
- Does the plan propose to break new ground in ways that could create important learnings for the global Wikimedia movement? In other words, if the plan is executed, will the Wikimedia movement have learned anything new and important that could be applied outside this plan, that would help it achieve its global goals? Would that learning be a small, medium or large contribution? Incredibly cool things are happening on and with Wikidata almost every day. In addition, Wikimedia Deutschland has developed a mature engineering department, which puts it in an excellent position to mentor other chapters which are looking to take on software development work. I believe there have been some first efforts in that direction, and I would love to see more of it over the course of the year.
- Do you believe the budget (for the area that you are particularly evaluating) is feasible? Yes, though I have not scrutinized it in detail.
Questions from Risker about participant metrics
I realise that the chapters and affiliates have not really been asked to produce consistent participant metrics to date, so it is understandable if you have to give estimates for some of these metrics. When responding, please identify if the data you are providing is verified (e.g., a maintained membership database) or estimated.
- How many members do you have? If you have different categories of membership, please give subtotals for each category.
- How many individuals volunteered for/participated in an activity sponsored by your organization so far this year, excluding special events like WMF-related conferences/Wikimania? (Please let me know what kinds of activities you're including.) Approximately what percentage of these volunteers are also chapter/affiliate members?
- What percentage of the individuals who have volunteered for or participated in your organization's activities in the past year are also active Wikimedians, or became active Wikimedians after participation? (Activity could include content contributions or administrative contributions on any project, developer contributions, committee membership, etc.)
- Hi Risker, thanks for raising these questions. I will answer #1 now, please allow us some time to put together numbers and answers to #2 and #3.
Responses to 2 and 3
Hi Risker, many thanks again for bringing up these questions and giving us the opportunity to elaborate a bit about participation and volunteer engagement at WMDE. For additional information please also see the community engagement section of our APG proposal.
@2&3: Activities that are supported through funds and/or technical assistance by WMDE are manifold - and so are the different ways of volunteer participation. We are very fortunate to have a lively and active volunteer community implementing Wikimedia projects and offline collaboration initiatives. WMDE’s philosophy is to empower and enable volunteers to conduct their activities and complete their projects as independently as possible. Some activities are initiated by volunteers, some by members of our chapter, some by WMDE staff, and many of the face-to-face events are hosted on our premises and involve volunteers as participants or supporters. In addition, we engage Wikimedians in advocacy and policy activities, as well as in partnerships with external stakeholders from the educational and GLAM sectors.
Please note: due to privacy data protection issues, which are very sensitive in Germany, we do not match our membership database with the names or user names of Wikimedians actively involved in our activities, nor do we track the follow-up activity of people who participated in a face-to-face event. Therefore we are unable to track how many participants become active volunteers.
Against this background, what follows is an overview of participation involved in our 2014 activities to date:
- Approx. 1580 volunteer Wikimedians (project organizers + participants, as per project documentations) participated in activities which were primarily initiated by community members and supported by WMDE through funds or non-monetary support. These are various events across Germany, such as GLAM-on-tour excursions, Wikimedia Commons photo excursions, Wikipedia meetups, Edit-a-thons, parliament photo projects, hackathons, open editing sessions and many, many more. Please note: this figure covers Wikimedia volunteers which have directly participated in sponsored/ supported activities. Due to the open network character of some of these events there may be more individuals who are not recorded in the project documentations.
- Approximately 210 Wikimedians participated in work meetings in Berlin and at our local community bases in Cologne and Hamburg. Purpose of these meetings was to coordinate the establishment of the bases, as well as the development of the WMDE community funding guidelines.
- Up to 300 participants (existing or new Wikimedia contributors) joined various community events initiated by WMDE staff (e.g. Women Edit workshops, Zedler Award for Wikipedia articles, WikiDialogue, FKAGEU meetups etc.).
- In October 2014, 227 active Wikimedians met at the annual German community convention WikiCon in Cologne. WikiCon is planned and organized by a volunteer committee with financial and organizational support by WMDE.
- In addition to our close and continuous interaction with the fast growing global Wikidata community (16600 editors in total, 5350 active editors, August 2014) WMDE also engages in various ways of volunteer participation in software development. So far in 2014 approx. 50 volunteers and Wikidata contributors took part in collaborative software development projects (e.g. technical wishlist, German teahouse project etc.) or were supported in their own tool development tasks for Wikidata. We work with further volunteers (partly Wikimedians, partly FOSS developers) through IRC office hours, mailing lists as well as direct communication on gatherings and hackathons and we support 10 students from international universities to work and develop on Wikidata as members of the community.
- To support our advocacy goals and to build new alliances, WMDE organized a number of conferences and GLAM/ science events (e.g. OER2014 conference, GLAM hackathon “Coding da Vinci”, “MS Wissenschaft” exhibition & events etc.), several workshops and meetups (e.g. Open GLAM) and three series of thematic events for networking and discussion (e.g. “Monsters of Law”) with a total of 1560 participants until October 2014. The proportion of active Wikimedians at these events usually ranges from 10 - 30% (estimate).
- Additionally, in the context of our “open spaces” office concept, we hosted over 110 events and meetups of like-minded organizations and groups (e.g. OK Lab Meetup, Open Data Day Hackathon, ODDC network meeting etc.) with a total of approx. 2700 participants to date.
Extension for Submission of 2015 Audited Financial Statements
WMDE external audit statements have been completed. However, the translation of the audit letter is still proceeding at the auditing firm. WMDE would therefore like to request an extension on submitting the translated audit letter until May 6, 2016.
Unfortunately, we still have not received the translation. Until it is completed, we'd be happy to share the German version. I'd like to ask for another extension for the audit letter until the end of May. Apologies! --Nicola Zeuner (WMDE) (talk) 08:44, 10 May 2016 (UTC)