Grants talk:APG/Proposals/2016-2017 round 1/Wikimedia Serbia/Proposal form

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Thank you for your application[edit]

Hello, WMRS team! Thank you for submitting your complete application on time. We look forward to reviewing it in the coming weeks, and will contact you if we have questions or need more information. Do you happen to have a copy of your budget in spreadsheet form? If you do, that would help us speed up our analysis. You are welcome to send that to us by Email instead of linking it from your proposal document, if that's easier.

If any questions or concerns arise on your end, please do let us know so we can help. Best, Winifred Olliff (WMF Program Officer) talk 11:11, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Budget in spreadsheet is sent via email. --IvanaMadzarevic (talk) 07:17, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Thank you! Winifred Olliff (WMF Program Officer) talk 22:48, 3 October 2016 (UTC)


Questions from FDC[edit]

From Liam[edit]

  1. For your first grantee defined metric you indicate "Number of uploaded/released multimedia files on Wikimedia Commons". However, the third Standard/shared metric is "Content pages: A content page is an article on Wikipedia...[or]...a media file on Commons". I see you have also added a "file usage in %" aspect to your grantee-defined metric, but nevertheless this seems a repetition to me. Can you explain how they are sufficiently different to justify accounting these metrics separately? Wittylama (talk) 04:18, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
  2. Some of your targets appear to be very high, as a result I feel like I am understanding a different definition for the item. For example: "50 media releases" for a 2 day program for WikiLive; and 50 events relating to Wiktionary. Is it really possible for an organisation of WM-RS' size to create 50 press releases about one event, or run 50 events about one topic? Wittylama (talk) 04:18, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
  3. This is not so much a real question, just a note that I think it's fantastically ironic that you have the president of the World Mime Organisation is involved in a project for recording spoken Wikipedia. I love it. Wittylama (talk) 04:18, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Liam for you thoughts and comments. We appreciate them. Here're the answers:

  1. When we say Content pages, what we actually mean is number of written and/or improved articles. Wikimedia Serbia has a number of projects aimed to generate free content in the form of photo materials which is why we have selected Number of uploaded/released multimedia files on Wikimedia Commons as a separate metric. Of course, we're paying attention on file usage beside its number. Usage is primarily related to illustration of Wikipedia articles, but in addition, materials can be used in the media and in educational institutions as a material for presentations. The second one will be harder to track, but it is important because of the visibility of Wiki projects in general. --IvanaMadzarevic (talk) 11:24, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
  2. Fifty media releases implied not just releases that will be launched by Wikimedia Serbia, but also all the announced posts by different media. These should include shared press releases and blog posts, media appearances of Communication Manager and Program and Community Manager in order to promote events, as well as summing up the impressions and media coverage of events. This metric is set by taking into account the results of previous years. As for the 50 events in the Wiktionary program, those include several types of events: lectures, workshops, promotions of Wiktionary or activities that are strengthening team spirit. We're planning on involving several departments of Faculty of Philology and therefore activating several language projects on Wiktionary, so number of 50 events seems real. --IvanaMadzarevic (talk) 11:24, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
  3. Yes, it’s very interesting. However, the president of the World Mime Organization is very versatile. He doesn’t only deal with mime, but also he’s a well-known actor in Serbia and has been involved in many similar projects. For these reasons we believe that he would be the ideal person for establishing various cooperation with other organizations and actors. --IvanaMadzarevic (talk) 11:24, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

From Chandice[edit]

Thanks for your submission! I have only one simple financial question about your current cashflow:

  1. There exists a positive difference between the current revenues and the current expenses of about USD 20.000. Are you planning to build reserves with this difference? --Chandice (talk) 24 October 2016
    Hi Chandice. No, we don't plan on making reserves. As usual, what we don't spend, we'll return to WMF (or rather, it will get deducted from the second installment). --FiliP ██ 09:53, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

From Mike Peel[edit]

Hello. Thanks for your proposal! Please forgive me for the late questions.

  1. It looks like you have an underspend this year of around €18,000. Can I ask what happened that led to that underspend, please, and how will you be ensuring that it doesn't happen again this coming year?
  2. Your approach to reserves looks a bit odd - it's more of a contingency budget rather than reserves (the difference mostly being that contingency is for the current year, reserves for the next year). This is more a remark than a question, though.
  3. You have a lot of projects going on! Do you find you have the time to give them all the effort that they need, or might it be worth thinking about narrowing focus/doing some as grants rather than in-house projects?

Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:51, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Mike for your comments and questions. Here are our answers and explanation.
  1. Based on this year’s spending, we projected that €18,000 won’t be spent until the end of the 2016. Spending dynamic is different in the first and the second half of the year. This largely depends on the current projects. Also, when designing budget for the next year, we take into account all the costs that may appear within project activities. However, in cooperation with partners, we often come to agreements and in-kind donations. In that way, partners provide us venues for different types of events (conference, exhibits, workshops…) internet, promo materials, equipment and such. This is how a lot of resources are being saved bearing in mind that the price of renting venues and equipment are really high, especially in Belgrade. We decided to invest part of the money that we saved in 2016 in infrastructure and for an engagement of a graphic designer in order to increase capacity and improve the visual identity of Wikimedia Serbia. --IvanaMadzarevic (talk) 12:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
  2. Thank you for your remark. You are right when you say that this amount is more like a contingency budget. We use it as a “reserve” for this year’s unexpected costs so this is kind of a terminology problem. For example, this year we have used “reserves” for unexpected office moving costs. We do not plan to build our own reserves from the grant money so the rest will be returned to the WMF. Next year we will think more about this problem and the right usage of the term “reserves”. --IvanaMadzarevic (talk) 12:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
  3. Yes, we have a lot of projects, but a large number of them will be lead by volunteers (project leaders) while the Program and Community Manager will be doing the supervision and controlling of the volunteers’ work to provide a good realization of these activities. Some of these projects (such as those within Free content or Grants program) are small ones, but they are very important regarding decentralization of VMRS activities in various cities of Serbia. In these cities we are trying to motivate existing volunteers and to educate newcomers to be able to join our organization. In addition, the dynamics of project realization is different in different parts of the year. Thus, the Education Program depends on the school year, while it’s less active during the summer. The situation is similar with Wiktionary. Wiki Loves Earth is the most active in May when the competition is on and after that when the media campaign and exhibits starts. So these projects are allocated by different time in the year, so not all of the projects are active all the time so it’s manageable. --IvanaMadzarevic (talk) 12:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Questions from RightCowLeftCoast[edit]

Why this amount? What is the minimum amount that the grant submitter believes is needed to accomplish these goals? Can the grant submitter accomplish the goals stated in your proposal, without funding? If the grant submitter can't, why not? If the grant submitters grant request is not approved, what alternative sources of funding are you seeking? If only one grant is approved during this round of grant approvals, why should this grant be approved rather than all the other grant proposals--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 17:10, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi RightCowLeftCoast, thank you for your questions. Wikimedia Serbia is working on increasing capacities which is in line with our strategic goals. All mentioned and planned expenses are explained in detailed budget that has been linked in APG. Their reduction would lead to a decrease of the expected results. If there were not enough resources for grant submitters, FDC or Wikimedia would be free to prioritize what activities would be planned and financed, and to what extent. --IvanaMadzarevic (talk) 13:10, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Support[edit]

Hello - I support the proposal of Serbia wikipedia--Elekes Andor (talk) 17:34, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

I second the support for the Serbian proposal. Thank you for letting non-voters have input. --MorrisIV (talk) 01:21, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Revised annual plan[edit]

Our revised annual plan, taking into account the lower budget, is here. --FiliP ██ 01:11, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Also, Serbian version of our revised plan can be found here. --IvanaMadzarevic (talk) 13:17, 24 January 2017 (UTC)