Grants talk:Project/MSIG/Researching a North American Hub

Some background

The idea of more organized cooperation across North America, or just the U.S., has been proposed and discussed many times. It long predates the discussion of Hubs and Movement Strategy. This grant submission does not get into the history of it. Here are some of the earlier sources and commentaries:

• North American Wikimedians and Talk:North American Wikimedians (aka NARWHAL)
• Wikimedia United States Coalition (2007)
• WALRUS
• Future of North American Wikimedia affiliates (2022)

-- econterms (talk) 05:24, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

• It will be wise to compare broadly to the CEE research and pilot, and to the ESEAP one

Possible project: use copyright renewal information

A North American coalition could take on the effort of identifying and making usable on Commons the decades of US materials that are in the public domain because their copyrights were not renewed. Sometimes these are tricky to identify but there is a basic skill/task of marking them correctly on Commons, and a team could take that on. Likely partners for such an effort: https://rightsstatements.org/en/ and DPLA. Probably requires funding but maybe not all that much. Wikimedians in Philadelphia are the experts on this and can train others in the long run. -- econterms (talk) 18:28, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

So adding that one project, likely projects to consider handling together thru a combined US or North American federation would be

• Administrative support for chapters and user groups in North American region (e.g tax, audit, obtaining large grants and new funders)
• Make it easier to get funding to hold events in North America, for example in areas with no active local affiliate
• Sustain the annual conference, WikiConference North America and its web site and other ongoing resources
• Sponsor training, such as the recurring GLAM boot camps, which have been successful in the past
• Host a calendar of activities across the continent
• Support conferences, workshops, and interpretation/translation with shared software subscriptions and experienced users.
• Take on larger, long-term partnerships and projects, for example with the Smithsonian Institution, DPLA, OpenStreetMap, and Internet Archive
• Specifically support Wikimedia software development efforts useful to North Americans and around the world, e.g. through WikiCite and the MediaWiki Stakeholders group
• Specialize in mastery of specific copyright exceptions applying to North America materials (e.g. the many US periodicals of circa 1950-70 whose copyright was not renewed)

-- econterms (talk) 00:21, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

This is an important project and one that I hope to see get accomplished. But based on the application, it's irrelevant to the grant. - Kosboot (talk) 17:38, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Proposal Feedback

Overall Positive Feedback

The proposal put forth by WMDC is an excellent example of careful and deliberate planning, taking into account the emerging landscape of regional hub formation. Their approach of learning from strong precedents set in the CEE and MENA regions is commendable, as it shows a strong awareness of global movement trends and a sensible decision to not reinvent the wheel.

As a leader in coordinating this work, the project team has shown great foresight and vision in recognizing the potential of the region and the need for more mature organizational structures and support systems to help unlock its potential. Their efforts in reaching out to the community to gather support for this work is commendable.

Feedback for Improvements

• Has the team considered the fact that the current timelines might be ambitious, especially considering that this meant o be happening during the Northern hemisphere Summer.
• It will be important for the project team to provide more clarity regarding the setup of the Advisory Committee, which is key to the success and relevancy of the project. It will be great to see a current list or a plan for the committee selection that demonstrates a thoughtful and inclusive selection that will bring a diversity of perspectives.
• Please provide a more detailed breakdown of the budget to include the calculation of hours for each staff as it is currently unclear how many staff will be working directly on the project and how this time is accounted for.

YPam (WMF) (talk) 13:28, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Excellent! I consulted with others and I have in mind to reply in these ways. Am I on track? If so we'll update the grant proposal text directly.

(1) We will start later than suggested in the first draft just because time has passed, and we've heard your feedback that the time line is too tight. We are now thinking of an April 15-Dec 31 project period. We can then include feedback from some kind of meeting or survey at the North American conference in November (WCNA 2023).

(2) Pharos has in mind that North American affiliates would each be invited to select a delegate, and the resulting group will select more to achieve geographic and demographic diversity, and perhaps unaffiliated Wikimedians too from among presenters at our annual WikiConference, or active Wikimedians who aren't members of an affiliate, or others with special expertise. One of us will put that in the text.

(3) Regarding budget: WMDC has one employee, and in this period the project would take about half her time, 20 hours/week. We may hire help for translation/interpretation, but we don't anticipate other staff. With support and wisdom from volunteers, she'll develop semi-structured interview questions and perhaps survey instruments, and hold focus groups. We gather input from at least 60 people as noted in the grant, and summarize the information in a public report.

Does that sound good? We'll add it to the grant text tomorrow. -- econterms (talk) 00:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

@Econterms Thank you for the prompt response and the suggestions do make sense. The updated proposal will go through a final review and you will receive a decision shortly after. Thank you. YPam (WMF) (talk) 13:30, 3 April 2023 (UTC)