Grants talk:PEG/WM AT/Annual Program Plan 2012/Report Q4

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Questions and comments about this report[edit]

Thank you for the report! Apologies for the delayed review.

We have a few questions and comments:

  1. We have noted that you have spent significantly more than planned on Wiki Loves Monuments and have mentioned your successful activities several times in these reports. Would you please provide here a brief statement of what you think the impact of that project was? What has it done to increase reach, quality, or participation, or otherwise influence your editing community (or broader community) in a positive way? Thank you, Winifred Olliff (Grants Administrator) talk 21:40, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    The major impact of Wiki Loves Monuments on our local broader community was, that the awareness of the possibility to upload and find free accessable images at the Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons has significantly increased. This applies especially for those participants of WLM 2012, which were only passively involved in Wikimedia projects (as readers) before. Over all there have been 292 Accounts uploading photos in WLM 2012. Of these, 228 have never been editing in the monuments-lists at de.wiki before. The major part of those 228, exactly 201, have been editing for the first time in a Wikimedia project at WLM 2012. Please find the exact statistics at the portal-site of the WikiProject „Österreichische Denkmallisten“ (german language). Please also check the section on WLM in our annual report: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_chapters/Reports/Wikimedia_Oesterreich/2012-annual-report#Wiki_Loves_Monuments --CDG (talk) 16:58, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Book grants: this program isn't mentioned in the activity reports but may have been completed. Would you share some of the results with us here if it has been completed? Thanks, Winifred Olliff (Grants Administrator) talk 21:40, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    This is an ongoing program. We can't follow up on each single book and on which articles it was used. But we plan to ask volunteers who benefitted from the program earlier to give us a little overview of the work based on the sponsored literature. Of course we will share the results at given time --CDG (talk) 09:46, 12 May 2013 (UTC).[reply]
  3. You say in the November report that "WMAT will start a photo contest in March 2012 in order to promote more uploads [of public art] on Commons," but March 2012 had already passed when the report for November was written. Do you mean the contest was scheduled for March 2013? If so, has it taken place as planned? Thanks, Winifred Olliff (Grants Administrator) talk 21:40, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    The photo contest "Wiki Loves Public Art" is on at the moment (since May 1). It is an international project (http://wikilovespublicart.org/) that was postponed by the international organizing team (lead by the Swedish chapter) for several month, this was not a decision of WMAT. Nevertheless, we are quite satisfied with the first results: We already got some press coverage in Austrian Media and also quite a few pictures http://stats.wlpa.at/. The contest will end on May 31, after that a thorough evaluation will be conducted. --CDG (talk) 22:14, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the update. We look forward to hearing more about that in the Q2 report. Winifred Olliff (Grants Administrator) talk 00:48, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  4. You mention that "A workshop in February 2013 with respresentatives of WMAT and the Austrian Academy of Scienes, Academia and the National Museum of Natural History to elaborate the ideas will be the next step" in the development of the Wiki Loves Plants project. Did this workshop occur and what were the results? Would you link to some more information about this project if it's available? Thanks, Winifred Olliff (Grants Administrator) talk 21:40, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    In the subsequent meetings with the the Austrian Academy of Scienes and our volunteers it become apparent, that the original ideas, aims and scope of the project have to be reconsidered in order to ensure satisfactory outcomes for both parties. We are still working on refining the ideas and we will probably start on a smaller scale in oder to get to know each other better and to get a better idea of common goals. We think it is important to be aware of the cultural differences between academia and Wikipedians / Wikimedians and not to rush into a cooperation without making sure that there is a sound basis to start from. --CDG (talk) 22:35, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    A useful lesson; thanks for sharing. Winifred Olliff (Grants Administrator) talk 00:48, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Would you share any concrete results or learnings from the meeting about WikiData? Have plans developed since this meeting for the participation of volunteers from Austria? Is this documented anywhere on a public Wiki? How do you plan to follow up with these volunteers? Thanks, Winifred Olliff (Grants Administrator) talk 21:40, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    WikiData has only started in spring, so it needs certainly more time in order to get an idea how the projects develops and how precisely the Austrian community can contrubute. However, members of the Austrian community are involved in and support the implementation process and regulary inform the rest of the community on the progress over our mailing list. --CDG (talk) 22:43, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the update; we'll look forward to hearing about this as it develops. Winifred Olliff (Grants Administrator) talk 00:48, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Thanks for sharing your learning around participation in LinuxDay: it's good to recognize when you may have outgrown an event or outreach activity even if it has been very useful in the past!

Questions about planned vs. executed activities[edit]

  1. There are a few items mentioned in your plan that appear not to have been executed this year. Would you please review the following items and provide brief explanations about why they were not executed as planned, or let us know if they were? Thank you, Winifred Olliff (Grants Administrator) talk 21:40, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  2. The Austrian Photography Project is mentioned prominently in your Q1 report and related projects are mentioned frequently in subsequent reports. We notice that there was already a very large unplanned expenditure on photographic equipment of more than EUR 17,000 listed in your expenditures until 31 August (from your Annual Report). Was this part of the Austrian Photography Project? We notice a few purchases were mentioned in May, June, and July. Would you please provide some details about why this expenditure was required, what this equipment is being used for, who is using the equipment, and where the equipment is being stored and tracked. Thanks, Winifred Olliff (Grants Administrator) talk 21:40, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    The Austrian community has many enthusiastic, productive and successful photographers (see for example WMAT's amount and quality of contributions to WLM or the additional 12 000 pictures uploaded to Commons in 2012). WMAT supports these activities and considers this program as one of our core competencies. Therefore, investing in this equipment is a strategic decision, as we think the equipment and our experiences will also be beneficial for the international movement. The addtional spending (in comparison with the originally planned amount) was drawn from our open "Community Budget" which is used on project ideas from the volunteers. For example the idea that the "Landtagsprojekte" (portraits of politicians in federal parliaments), which are already successfully conducted in Germany should also be implemented in Austria. This required professional photo flash equipment for portrait photography, one of the major purchases, that were not forseeable when planning our budget. The equipment insured and stored in a locker in the WMAT office in Vienna, unless it is used for projects / events by volunteers. For planning and coordination we have a list on our Wiki showing the availaablitiy and whereabouts. We further support the programm with photo workshops in order to enable our volunteers to make best possible use of the equipment and organizing accreditation for sporting or cultural events and the like. --CDG (talk) 11:07, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  3. It also appears you may have spent significantly more on the WikiConvention than anticipated. Could you provide a brief explanation of that variance here? Thanks, Winifred Olliff (Grants Administrator) talk 21:40, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Explained here: Grants:WM_AT/Annual_Program_Plan_2012/Report (It was not planned in 2011 that WMAT will perform this conference, our sponsorship was 10.000 EUR + sponsorships from WMDE, WMCH and WMF. After the grant report and return of unused funds several bills were booked for board and staff travel expenses that were not part of the project planning.)--CDG (talk) 22:44, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    WikiCon is a community-organised event. WMAT gave in 2010 and 2011 a small sponsorship to this event which was organised in Germany by german Wikipedians and provided some travel scholarships for austrian participants. This was not used very much but it has been put into the budget to do the same for a WikiCon 2012 which was not planned at the time the budget was created.
    Late 2011 an international group of Wikipedians decided to have WikiCon 2012 in Austria and demanded a big sponsorship from WMAT. On the other hand WMDE, who was the main sponsor in 2010 and 2011 could reduce their sponsoring. WMAT also had much more travel costs for WikiCon 2012 as the number of austrian participants was almost 20 times higher than in the other years. This was obviously not planned in the budget but WMAT decided to re-allocate the funds to support that important and successful event. As can be seen the total budget was still within the planned total amount. The conference in Austria also gave opportunities for meetings and discussions which would otherwise have been conducted seperately, leading to higher costs in those projects' accounts. (Photographic Project, WLM...) --Manuel Schneider(bla) (+/-) 09:22, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    the financial report states it correctly:
    "It was not planned in 2011 that WMAT will perform this conference, our sponsorship was 10.000 EUR + sponsorships from WMDE, WMCH and WMF. After the grant report and return of unused funds several bills were booked for board and staff travel expenses that were not part of the project planning." --Manuel Schneider(bla) (+/-) 09:43, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Additional request[edit]

Would you please move a copy of the annual plan this grant is based on to Meta? We are trying to ensure that we have a copy of all grant requests published directly on Meta.

You can find a copy of our annual plan now here on Meta. --Thomas Planinger (talk) 11:42, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your attention and for your answers to our questions. We're looking to reading your final financial report once it's ready. It's ready: Grants:WM_AT/Annual_Program_Plan_2012/Report!

Cheers, Winifred Olliff (Grants Administrator) talk 21:40, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for publishing it here on Meta! Winifred Olliff (Grants Administrator) talk 17:37, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Report accepted[edit]

Thank you for your helpful responses to all of our questions. The report is accepted. Best, Winifred Olliff (Grants Administrator) talk 17:43, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants_talk:PEG/WM_AT/Annual_Program_Plan_2012/Report_Q4&oldid=6696110"