Jump to content

Grants talk:APG/Proposals/2017-2018 round 2/Wikimedia Indonesia/Proposal form

Add topic
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Latest comment: 6 years ago by Biyanto Rebin in topic Questions from the FDC

Terima kasih dear Wikimedia Indonesia colleagues fro this proposal. We are looking forward to welcomeyou in this FDC-APG round. We will be looking at your proposal and asking any questions we might have on this talk page. Best, Delphine (WMF) (talk) 13:54, 3 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Questions from WMF[edit]

These questions are the preliminary questions that are asked just after a rapid look at the application. They are mostly on trying to clarify context, numbers and terms in the proposal in order to make sure that everyone reads it with the same amount of background. Note that unless we ask you explicitely to change the proposal page, you should answer here on the talk page.


In the overview and throughout the application, please make sure you use an itnernational date format such as 01 Jul 2018 rather than 07/01/19 which sometimes leads to confusion. You may correct the dates in the application for better readability. Thank you. Delphine (WMF) (talk) 08:35, 11 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Delphine (WMF): I've changed the date format. Thank you --Biyanto Rebin (WMID) (talk) 13:00, 15 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Financials: current year[edit]

  • Table 2 shows a difference between expenses and revenues of 420,428 USD (your revenue exceeds your expenses by that amount). At first glance, I could not find an explanation for this difference, although I am thinking that maybe you didn't include the Ford Foundation related expenses in the second line, or this reflects funds that you received but that are going to be used later. Can you please clarify here why you're running such a "benefit". Please give as much context as possible. Maybe a bit of a history of the Ford Foundation Grant might help put things in perspective. Thank you. Delphine (WMF) (talk) 08:35, 11 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
In the table 2, we include Ford Foundation grant. It is a two-year grant, the surplus amount at the end of the first year is planned to be used in the second year. Can I revise the table until the last table, so it can be linear? Thanks! - Biyanto Rebin (WMID) (talk) 04:41, 9 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
Hi Biyanto Rebin (WMID) please revise the table here (not on the main proposal) and then we can integrate it if needed. Thanks. Delphine (WMF) (talk) 10:27, 9 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
Dear Delphine, after I recheck again, I think we don't need to revise all of the tables, just want to add some notes. For table 2, the difference because the Ford Foundation grant is 2 year (since April 2017-March 2019). The total amount is USD 720,119; the first grant payment is on 17 October 2017 with USD 480,440; the second is on 28 February 2018 with USD 139,676; and the third payment should be on March/April, but we haven't received yet with USD 100,003. So, all the grant will be in our bank account before the June 2018, but because we're using the planned from July 2017-June 2018 and actual from July 2017-March 2018 not 2019, that's why we have a lot of "surplus". I'll recheck all of the tables again to make sure everything is in line. --Beeyan (talk) 13:43, 9 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Programs: upcoming year's annual plan[edit]

  • In the grantee defined metrics, you define "active collaborations" with the following: Active collaborations: the number of organisation or partners including individual which engage and actively collaborate during the program. This definition does not include people organizing activities, social media followers, donors, or others not participating directly.. It is not clear what "engage and actively collaborate" means, especially since you seem to be putting organizations and individuals on the same level. Can you try and make this clearer by maytbe giving an example? Thanks. Delphine (WMF) (talk) 08:35, 11 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
We see active collaborations as any significant contributions (either from individuals or organizations) without which the main program involved would not achieve its desired goal. - Biyanto Rebin (WMID) (talk) 04:42, 9 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
Biyanto Rebin (WMID) thank you for this, but it is still very unclear to me. Would you mind trying to give me an example of what an organization could give as "significant contribution" and the same for an individual? Maybe you have started measuring those so you can come with examples that you have measured? Thanks. Delphine (WMF) (talk) 10:29, 9 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
Dear Delphine, the example is when we have the first time collaboration with Dewantara Kirti Griya Museum in 2015, we've been helped by Indonesian and English Wikipedia contributors, Crisco 1492. His contribution was really amazing, and we regarded his significant contribution by helping to connect with the museum, planned, and excecuted the Javanese Books Digitalisation project, without his help the project wouldn't be successful. We've got 100 Javanese scanned books, several of them are free, so you can see the files in Commons and English Wikipedia, full report is in here. The metrics is also applied for Rapid grant projects, as most individual Wikipedian who'll apply for the grants. That's why we put this effort as the same "significant contribution". --Beeyan (talk) 13:12, 9 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Staff and contractors: upcoming year's annual plan[edit]

  • Table 4 shows a growth of +5.46 FTE. I think this might only mean that you are moving staff costs from the Ford Foundation grant to the APG grant, but it is not clear to me. Can you be more explicit as to what this growth really means? Are you adding a grant total of 5 people to your team? Or is there some other explanation? Thanks for clarifying this. Delphine (WMF) (talk) 08:35, 11 April 2018 (UTC)Reply
Note: a staff is a permanent staff; a contractor is project-based staff.
Revision: in table 4, we have calculated the wrong FTE number, in program column, it should be 4.56 FTE not 5.06 FTE with total 9.96 FTE.
Quick review: we’ve experienced to handle a lot of staff (both from FF, WMF or other grants), in 2014 we have 8.29 FTE, 2015 with 17.04 FTE, 2016 with 15.58 FTE, 2017 with 17.24 FTE.
This growth is not only the result of moving staff cost but also adding more hires to handle programs, as you can see we have an increase on the number of programs planned to be held in the coming year. Note that the staff cost previously funded by FF is only for 1.5 FTE in the Office Management, for Office Manager and Office Assistant.
We also added 1 FTE for a consultant in Communication Specialist. Previously, we have no communication specialist, any public outreach or communication either via press release or social media are done intermittently by volunteers. As the volunteer who handles communication differs from one project to the other and from one period to the other, we are lacking a grand strategy, resulting in a non-uniformed communication output. With the help of communication specialist, we are hoping to devise a more overarching strategy that are streamlined across all channels.
In addition, we also plan to design a public campaign that could increase the awareness of Wikipedia, its sister projects, and its mission (likely through social media).
As for the technical staff, we plan to have a dedicated staff to maintain our website for 0.5 FTE and serves as a technical bridging communication such as for Javanese OCR and Wikidata projects with our partners. - Biyanto Rebin (WMID) (talk) 04:44, 9 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Delphine (WMF): To add clarity, please refer to this spreadsheet for FTE details, and this presentations slides for the history of grant and donation received by Wikimedia Indonesia since 2010. Rachmat (WMID) (talk)
@Biyanto Rebin: you may correct the proposal with the right numbers BUT PLEASE use strike through (ie. strike through the wrong numbers like this 5.09, code <s>5.09</s>) and add the new corrected numbers. Thanks. Delphine (WMF) (talk) 10:21, 28 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Delphine (WMF): thank you! I've changed the number. Biyanto Rebin (WMID) (talk) 16:15, 28 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Financials:upcoming year[edit]


  • I am sorry that I could not answer your question about reserves before the deadline, as I was out of the office. I'll schedule a meeting so you can fill in Table 6.

That's all for now, Best, Delphine (WMF) (talk) 08:35, 11 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

In 2017, WMID has reserves around IDR 260,000,000,00 or USD18,200 and we don’t need the WMF reserves. This is a secured fund, in case we don’t get any grants or funding. It can cover more up to 4 months of some expense, including staff (tax accountant, office manager, and office clerk), office rent, and daily necessities. -Biyanto Rebin (WMID) (talk) 04:47, 9 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Dear Delphine, thank you for the question. We'll back to you as soon as possible and we'll reply your questions in line. --Biyanto Rebin (WMID) (talk) 13:07, 15 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata roles?[edit]

Hi, Delphine asked me to review the application, and in our conversation about it, identified something that confuses me about the Wikidata program. Here is what I see you proposing:

  • In the application you describe the data.go.id and other Wikidata projects as a fundamental way to bridge content and other gaps in the Indonesian context, and describe a few outcomes of the work to be training materials and other capacity for the program.
  • In the content creation program, you describe engaging with the technology stack, to do some type of work.
  • In the budget, you describe hiring a series of consultant teams for the Wikidata work.

What confuses me:

  • Why are there separate teams being hired to work with the Wikidata content? Shouldn't the goal be to train academics, volunteers and interns to work with Wikidata content? Wouldn't it make more sense, and create more continuity of the training materials and community to have one trainer that you hire and bridges those communities togehter? What kinds of community building is involved in that work?
    One of the team (Fariz Darari) in the Wikidata proposal is an Indonesian Wikidataist, a member of WMID, and a lecturer of Faculty of Computer Science, Universitas Indonesia, so he’s not coming from outside community. We also plan to have the 2 Wikidata tutorial (or workshop) session in Universitas Indonesia and it’s an open invitation event, the main idea is to train academics, volunteers, and university students to involve more in Wikidata. We also plan to have localized training materials for the Wikidata tutorial too.
    This project actually is a catalyst for the collaboration project between WMID and Universitas Indonesia, as well as Presidential Staff Office (which managing data.go.id). As we mention in the proposal “ Even though both Wikidata and data.go.id share a common goal of publishing data, there is still a wide gap in how data provided by both parties can be linked to each other. This interoperability issue hinders not only data consuming but also data publishing itself.”, so we are trying to make the data can easily be linked to each other by creating a framework for such imports, and implement imports as showcases and we will analyze what data in data.go.id can potentially be enriched by linking with Wikidata entities, create a framework for such semantic enrichment, and as showcases, implement the proposed semantic enrichment over data.go.id datasets and demonstrate its added value (e.g., through the use of API or SPARQL queries over data.go.id).
    You can read per the impact for this project: (i) Data publishing: data.go.id can be an excellent data import source for Wikidata, that is, increase the amount of (quality) data over Wikidata; and (ii) Data consuming: data.go.id may benefit from the interlinkedness of Wikidata for more fine-grained data search and discovery.
    We also had an initial meeting with Presidential Staff Office representative and they supported us to do this project. They also said that they’re very open about future collaboration with Wikimedia projects, especially Wikidata, since they managed the Indonesian government official data portal.--Biyanto Rebin (WMID) (talk) 06:08, 15 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • Are you suggesting that you need to build new technology to do the Wikidata work? What is it? Right now that is suggested in the Tech Stack area but I am not seeing budget or energy explicitly devoted to this. The proposal about the OCR is much more clear as to the "what" of the build.
    It's not building new technology to do the Wikidata work, but it’s simply to bridging the open data content from data.go.id, so it can be linked into Wikidata by building the framework to integrating the data from data.go.id into Wikidata. So, Wikidata benefits from importing the official, quality data from data.go.id, as currently, information about Indonesia is lacking on Wikidata (for example, currently there is only data about 6000 Indonesia-people vs. 360000 US-people). The importing itself is not a trivial process, as we would like to have high-quality data. Hence, the institutional support.
    On the other hand, Presidential Staff Office (data.go.id) would benefit from Wikidata too, since the background knowledge from Wikidata may enrich the semantics of semi-structured data in data.go.id.--Biyanto Rebin (WMID) (talk) 06:08, 15 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Generally, I think its a really good idea to invest in institutional Wikidata support, but I want to make sure that it's clear to the FDC committee what they are investing in, and how it's being mapped/matched to the expected impact of the program. Astinson (WMF) (talk) 16:38, 9 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Dear @Astinson (WMF): sorry for the late reply, the answers are inline.--Biyanto Rebin (WMID) (talk) 06:08, 15 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Biyanto Rebin:Thank you for clarifying on the data infrastructure. I am still unclear as to who is doing what, in terms of funded work, on the Wikidata project though: can you clarify what people are being funded and why? 19:36, 15 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
Dear @Astinson (WMF): I've replied this question in your first question. Could you please read that line? Or is it still unclear? Thanks --Biyanto Rebin (WMID) (talk) 09:54, 16 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
Dear @Astinson (WMF): per our conversation via Google Hangouts, we would to explain more about your last question. The Wikidata project is initiated when I met up with Fariz, as we meet virtually via Twitter and he's also Wikidataist. We've talked about the possibility about on how to improve Wikidata contents with data.go.id. As we knew, there's a lot of useful data in that website. After Fariz became our organisation member, we've talked about the possibility of collaboration among Wikimedia Indonesia and his university (Fariz is a lecturer in Faculty of Computer Science, University of Indonesia). During January and February, WMID invited Fariz and one of his colleagues, Adila (who's also open data ethusiast and semantic web and ontologies expert), to discuss about the collaboration, so we built and concept together the project. On February, WMID was also invited by the Faculty of Computer Science, Universitas Indonesia to talk about the collaboration among institution and we planed to have more concret collaboration by doing this project together. And finally, on March, we visited the Presidential Staff Office (who manage data.go.id) to explain to them about our plan, and they support us and would like to see the result. -- Biyanto Rebin (WMID) (talk) 10:08, 18 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Questions from the FDC[edit]


Hello Wikimedia Indonesia, @Biyanto Rebin: - thank you for your interesting proposal! Having read it more than once, I am still having some questions. Primarly:

  1. Bridging the Semantic Gap between Wikidata and data.go.id and Javanese Character Recognition for Preserving Historical Manuscripts - these are pretty valid and interesting, yet novel projects. Could you provide some time-bound goals / time estimates here? Do you feel you have all the resources needed and how are you planning to work with the experts/developers from the academia - what is the role of WMID and the volunteers here? I think a good description and reports may be very helpful and inspiring for other chapters as well.
Dear Aegis, both of Javanese OCR and Wikidata timeline are below.
SAPG Wikidata Timeline
SAPG Javanese OCR Timeline
The Wikidata project is initiated when I met up with Fariz, as we meet virtually via Twitter and he's also Wikidataist. Fariz is an Indonesian Wikidataist, a member of WMID, and a lecturer of Faculty of Computer Science, Universitas Indonesia. We've talked about the possibility about on how to improve Wikidata contents with data.go.id. As we knew, there's a lot of useful data on that website. After Fariz became our organisation member, we've talked about the possibility of collaboration between Wikimedia Indonesia and his university (Fariz is a lecturer in Faculty of Computer Science, University of Indonesia). During January and February 2018, WMID invited Fariz and one of his colleagues, Adila (who's also open data enthusiast and semantic web and ontologies expert), to discuss the collaboration, so we built and concept together with the project. On February 2018, WMID was also invited by the Faculty of Computer Science, Universitas Indonesia to talk about the collaboration among institution and we planned to have more concrete collaboration by doing this project together. And finally, on March 2018, we visited the Presidential Staff Office (who manage data.go.id) to explain to them about our plan, and they support us and would like to see the result. So, based on our explanation, we believe that we have enough resources to do this projects. WMID is the bridging organisation for the collaboration between Faculty of Computer Science and Presidential Staff Office to improve Wikidata with Indonesian contents. On the other hand, we plan to have 2 Wikidata tutorial (or workshop) sessions for brainstorming and result dissemination (to be aligned with WikiLatih, a project by Wikimedia Indonesia to provide training of Wikimedia products) with the expected number of participants of around 40 participants/session, which should create or improve around 100 Wikidata statements or items. The trainers are Fariz and several Indonesian Wikidataist, including me.
The Javanese OCR projects is Javanese community and WMID’s dream. Back in 2015, we’ve started to digitize a lot of Javanese books. We put them in Commons and distributed the content to the various channel, especially social media. We realized that when we plan to have a Wikisource workshop, we didn’t have any Javanese characters OCR available on the Wikisource, and the volunteers need to take more time than proofread the Latin text documents. When some of the lecturers of Informatics Department, Duta Wacana Christian University visited Wikimedia Indonesia on October 2017, we’ve presented about our projects, after hearing about our Javanese Books Digitazion Projects and they mentioned that they're planninng the Javanese OCR projects too. The discussion continues for several months and finally, WMID officially visited the university on February 2018, and we decided to build the proposal together. Like the Wikidata projects, we also plan to have several pieces of training for Javanese community to give them the opportunity to try the Javanese OCR for Wikisource. -- Biyanto Rebin (WMID) (talk) 14:11, 31 May 2018 (UTC)Reply
  1. Your staff and chapter structure. If I understand correctly, the top position in staff seems to be the Program Manager. OTOH, for WMID your presentation mentions: Board of Trustees, Board of Executive and Executive Committees. As I am looking at different models and chapters with or without ED etc., could you elaborate more on the role of the Program Manager and the structure, governance and staff management in WMID? E.g. executive committees - are these volunteer bodies, staffed bodies or mixed?
Board of Trustees are volunteers only. Board of Executive is like a group of ED, they can be volunteers or as a staff in another projects under WMID. Right now, 5 of 6 of BoE members are staffs in different projects, 1 is a volunteer. Our model is we can be a volunteer in the organisation, but we can be a staff in the projects. Executive committees are project staffs and also several volunteers who help us during holding the events.
In our recent structures, Program Director is the highest position in every grant projects, they manage several Program Managers or Project Managers. The Program or Project Managers title is depending on how much projects under the program. They will manage the executive committees. The Program Director will report to the Chair of BoE and, the Chair will report to BoT and AGM.-- Biyanto Rebin (WMID) (talk) 14:11, 31 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Best regards, and sorry for this last minute reach. aegis maelstrom δ 04:54, 30 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Dear @Aegis Maelstrom: the answer is inline. I hope my explanation clear enough, should you have more questions feel free to ping me. Thank you and nice to know you! -- Biyanto Rebin (WMID) (talk) 14:11, 31 May 2018 (UTC)Reply