Regional Committee Recommendations[edit]

Dear Wiki in Africa,

Thank you for submitting your application. The Middle East and Africa Regional Committee has reviewed your application and they have comments and some follow up questions and requests:

Wiki in Africa continues to promote Wiki Loves Africa contest, Wiki Loves Women contest, supports school program in 9 Francophone African countries, also support the development of tools to help participation in wiki projects (ISA Tool for example) amongst other projects.
It is exciting to see you working on is the progression of program participants from beginner level to organizers to leaders of communities. There are programs to also equip users with the right skills to reach the leadership level.
We also observed the breakdown provided for staffing costs and wondered if there is a particular guideline that you used that would be useful to other communities in the region.
We were interested in learning more about the guideline used in setting costs related to interns, everyone else besides the coordinators. What is the basis used to decide on their compensation?
We recommend reviewing targets set for Wikicommons seeing that there is an aspect of cleaning up the theme videos and images that make wrongful space in the Wikimedia Commons repository.
We are interested in learning more about how you are ensuring healthy governance of the user group?
Lastly, we continue to encourage WIA to think about diversifying the representation of their leadership including in the board to include members from different parts of the continent seeing that their mission focuses on the region and beyond.

Please reach to the MEA regional program officer to support you in making the needed changes to your proposal which are due by the end of the day, 2nd of December 2021. Looking forward to hearing from you. On behalf of the Regional Committee. Ptinphusmia (talk) 14:22, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello user:Ptinphusmia and committee. We noted the questions and will work on answering them before the due deadline.

However, I must ask for clarification with regards to the question We recommend reviewing targets set for Wikicommons seeing that there is an aspect of cleaning up the theme videos and images that make wrongful space in the Wikimedia Commons repository.. I must confess I have no idea what is the issue you are seemingly referring too, hence am not sure how to revise the targets...

So at the moment... our target is 10000 photos collected during Wiki Loves Africa photo contest. You may see the number of images collected the past few years on this tool [1]. Biggest contribution was 18000 pictures two years ago. But we have big variations depending on the annual theme, and local teams choosing to participate every year. In 2022, we expect the situation to be once again difficult as in 2021 due to the pandemic. Hence rather conservative figure (I hope we will do better, but I’d rather be conservative because I prefer to favor quality over quantity, and increase of outreach and awareness over quantity). The primary goal of WLA is NOT to collect huge number of pictures. It is to be a tool of mobilization of local communities and a tool to raise awareness about Wikimedia projects and open knowledge in the countries. Still, we naturally hope for good quality and numerous pictures.

The above figures on the Wiki Loves tool are the « current » figures, which means the pictures who remained on Commons at the end of the contest. Every year, during and at the end of the contest, we spend quite a bit of time making sure that copyrighted pictures be deleted, or that poor quality pictures are deleted. I do not know exactly how many images are deleted (not sure how to actually track that...), perhaps 100 ? 200 ? 300 ? But this is a very usual practice on Commons and I believe we are doing it well and quite thoroughly. I am not aware of any significant complain around our practices on the matter, and not aware of any criticism from the Wikimedia Commons community about WLA images that would be in a « wrong space ».

So... I really do not see what this question refers about... could you please clarify ? Thanks a lot Anthere (talk) 22:50, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Regional Committee questions[edit]

Hello Ptinphusmia and the committee!

Thank you for contacting us and raising these issues. It always marks an exciting stage in the process - that you have read our proposal and want to know more. We are always excited to talk about our work, so here are our responses. A few days ago, Anthere asked for clarity about one of the issues you raised. As we have not heard from you up until now, we have answered the elements you have raised as best we can.

1. We also observed the breakdown provided for staffing costs and wondered if there is a particular guideline that you used that would be useful to other communities in the region.

In this section, we will only expand on the coordinator staff guidelines. The explanation towards the part-time interns (or, as we prefer to call them, coordinators or assistants) is covered in your next question.

For the last two APG applications, we have expressed the rationale behind the Wiki In Africa staffing plan. This year, there was no space to do so in the application form ;-). The Staffing Plan rationale for 2021 still stands with these notable differences:

All salary- or compensation-related line items are now under one person - not split up. The amount represented is considered as “Cost to Company”. In this way, Florence’s two line items have been added together to represent the two elements. Further, Florence’s time has been increased to more closely reflect the true amount of time that she spends on the projects (it is not close to the full-time she does spend, but it is definitely closer). The FTE amount has been maintained exactly equivalent to last year.
With the above in mind, Isla’s cost to the company did not reflect the tax situation in South Africa, and now it does.
In presenting the staffing this way - as the total cost to company and provide the dual yet symbiotic coordinators a form of parity in their remuneration given the geographic and cost of living differences.
It is to be noted, that discussed in the staffing plans for 2020 and 2021 APG applications, both salaries reflect the lower end of the scale for their respective countries, their levels of experience, and the amount of time they spend on the projects.

2. We were interested in learning more about the guideline used in setting costs related to interns, everyone else besides the coordinators. What is the basis used to decide on their compensation?

Thank you for asking. We took a long time considering how much to pay for this position. In some countries, internships are considered free labour that many organisations take advantage of.

We do not agree with this practice. If you are doing repetitive long-term scheduled tasks that benefit an organisation, and it is not part of a volunteer programme, then we believe you should be paid a living wage to do so. In isolating the figure we considered the following:

What are interns usually paid in the developing world:
What are interns usually paid (when they are paid) in the developed world:
How much does is needed for someone to live comfortably in their current situation.

The first consideration of intern costs was made when we crafted our APG request in 2020. Our first raw estimate of how much to propose (so that we could create the budget) was made by looking at what other amounts were paid by other organizations in the wiki world. For example, we collected practices by Whose Knowledge.

For the second consideration, we looked deeper into the intern models in France. This up-to-date explanation from Quora below sums up our findings in mid-2020:

Over 2 months, the minimum is around 510 euros per month. Over this minimum, companies start to pay social charges as for a classical employee’s salary (around 40% of the salary, which can be heavy for small companies, so a lot of companies stick to the 510€ floor).

The pay is usually related to the duration of the internship (the longer the better), the experience (1st internship, 2d, etc. the more the better), the market value of your studies ( last year interns from French “grande ecoles” or students invaluable University master or MBA can expect 1000 to 1500€ / month, sometimes more if their skills are scarce), and the internal policy of the company ( big companies have grids setting the intern “gratification”). By the way, with 510€/month, you won’t live, rather survive in French big cities (especially if you have to pay rent), so you’ll need to rely on another source of revenues.

For further reference, a typical student rent in a shared apartment or in a student dedicated location would be in the range 500-700 euros.

The third comparative element we considered is the situation for interns in South Africa. As you can see from this assessment on Indeed.com, the average salary for an intern is R 4 177 / USD 257 per month in South Africa (based on 575 salaries reported, updated on 20 November 2021).

Finally, when we published our call for candidates, we did not mention the amount of the allowance (WMF approved 500 USD in the APG process), and instead, we asked the prospective candidates to please come back to us with a figure that they thought was reasonable that

a) compensated them for their time at the skills set we discussed, and

b) covered their basic living costs (housing, bills, food, etc.). Please do keep in mind that our internships are half-time (50%).

The majority of responses we got were within the 400-600 dollars range. Only one major exception, a young candidate from Nigeria asked for less than 100 dollars. Otherwise, most Nigerians were asking for the higher range (500-600). Candidates from the other countries were asking in the lower range.

The final figure of USD500 proved to be almost four times the average intern salary in South Africa and around double the French example. But more importantly, we double-checked with the person being hired that it more than covered their base living expenses with a little bit extra.

In addition, Wiki In Africa has paid for a technical and connectivity upgrade to a faster, more secure line and continues to pay monthly data costs, plus any additional hub or other unexpected costs. This is done through ongoing communication between the core team and the interns.

3. We recommend reviewing targets set for Wikicommons seeing that there is an aspect of cleaning up the theme videos and images that make wrongful space in the Wikimedia Commons repository.

As you can see from Anthere's response above, you have us baffled with this question - we are not sure what you are referring to. We have three possible responses (excuse any repetition):

a) If this recommendation reflects a concern about the relevance or quality of the images that are in the entries pool … we spend an inordinate amount of time (with amazing volunteers on a team lead by Florence) making sure that the images are checked and that no copyvios, etc. make it through to the final selection. You can see the exhaustive process for 2021 documented here. The usability of the images is enhanced later in the year through an ISA campaign, and by having a special prize category for the categories WPWP drive. And in 2021, Florence is heading up a team to ensure that the best WLA images be considered as valued, quality, and featured images on Commons.

b) If your recommendation reflects the mistaken perception that the theme videos and images ‘pad’ out the final entry figures, they are entered into a different category altogether, so are not featured in the “final count”. You can find all communications- and theme-related materials here, and all the final ‘entries’ here. There is no cross-over.

c) If this recommendation shows that you think we should review the target number of images downwards (as reflected in the metrics section) then we would rather be hopeful, than negative. Over the years, entries have ranged from a low of 5,868 entries in the first year to a high of 17,874. This average across the 7 years is 10,339. So a target of 10,000 seemed a reasonable one to us. Anthere explained this in more detail above.

Which one is the right answer? 1, 2, or 3?

4. We are interested in learning more about how you are ensuring healthy governance of the user group?

Again, we are not sure what you are referring to specifically. We have independent audits of our accounts, and in 2022, the organisation has been officially operational for 5 years – although many of our projects started way before the official registration date. Each year’s respective financial statements can be supplied on request.

You can find all our official governance-related documents openly available here. This year we have also undertaken considerable effort to revisit our organisational goals and mission, to ensure that the projects and the collective work we do is on-message and still relevant given the changes from the 2030 process and other global indicators.

This has been integrated into the Wiki In Africa strategy page on Meta. On this page on the Wiki In Africa Website, you can also access the very latest 2022 strategy documents, such as the theory of change behind our work, Wiki In Africa’s strategic priorities, and its Annual Plan for 2022.

Additionally… we would like to point out that we are not an officially recognised Wikimedia usergroup, but rather an aligned organization, yet unrecognised usergroup. Time would be needed to explain you how this happened (we are open to that discussion). But to make a long story short, even though we are intimately involved at many levels of the core community, generally viewed by everyone as a usergroup, and acting in partnership with most (if not all) usergroups in Africa, we are not a UserGroup. Nor are we a membership based organization.

Please let us know if we have misunderstood the question, and we can supply anything else you require.

5. Lastly, we continue to encourage WIA to think about diversifying the representation of their leadership including in the board to include members from different parts of the continent seeing that their mission focuses on the region and beyond.

We are aware of this issue and have already been in discussion to approach additional board members. However, we are facing a specific issue.

Wiki In Africa is registered with the South Africa Department of Social Development. In accordance with this registration, there are significant restrictions that limit people from outside South Africa from holding office bearing positions on the board of any South African registered non-profit. This is for example why Florence and Iolanda (not South Africans) were not officially founding members as their nationality blocked the approval process.

That having been said, we have spent 2021 consulting other organisations and discussing among ourselves the possibility of bringing in more people from the global and continental Wikimedia movement and beyond onto an advisory community (similar to the Wiki Loves Women Advisory Committee). It was one of the key discussion points for the Wiki In Africa AGM in 2021. The resolution was to create a plan of action to implement in 2022.

The short answer to the point you raised is … we are with you on this! We are trying to find ways to navigate South Africa’s restrictive mandate. We have a plan and we are already working on it.

We hope we have managed to assuage your concerns and curiosity. We are more than happy to jump on a call or schedule a meeting if you wish to discuss any aspect further or anything else that arises. We would appreciate it if we could have primary feedback from you or a member of the committee prior to changing our proposal. It looks like the only element to update is the metrics related to Wiki Loves Africa. And as explained above, we are not sure we understand what the request for change exactly is about.

We look forward to hearing from you, and good luck with the rest of the reviewing process! Islahaddow (talk) 20:32, 28 November 2021 (UTC) and Anthere[reply]

Wikimedia Community Fund approved in the amount of 135,000 USD[edit]

Congratulations! Your grant is approved in the amount of 135,300 USD, with a grant term starting 1 January 2022 and ending 31 December 2022.

We continue to recognize the work Wiki in Africa does towards developing and nurturing collaborative spaces in the continent and beyond towards supporting the work of existing and new Wikimedia volunteer communities. The increase in organizational capacity has resulted in innovative programming that the community has found impactful and especially useful in developing pathways for newcomers and continuous engagement spaces for existing Wikimedians in the region. In addition, it was great learning about how you continue to ensure healthy governance while at the same time learning from other Wikimedia communities on best practices to ensure equitable hiring processes as you grow your team. We did also note that the community can learn from your staffing practices including the development of a staff plan and remain curious on how you can share this with the community.

We look forward to learning more about the change that unfolds from programs anchored on priority issues including ; representation gaps ,gender equity, youth activation through schools,access via technological solutions, volunteer development and community immersion and Wikimedia training with Heritage professionals.

We are also pleased to learn about your plan to diversity representation in the different levels of decision making including the board and look forward to seeing the outcome with time. We are aware of the statutory challenges surrounding these efforts, and believe you can explore other pathways to still achieve this important goal.

Thank you for your work and all you do for the community and Wikimedia movement.

Best regards from the MEA Regional Committee and Staff NANöR (talk) 20:56, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much MEA Regional Committee and Staff. We are grateful for the renewed support and words of appreciation ! Anthere (talk) 21:09, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]