Grants talk:APG/Proposals/2012-2013 round1/Wikimedia Nederland/Progress report form/Q1

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

Link to staff summary[edit]

We have published a staff summary of all 2012-2013 Round 1 Q1 reports here: FDC portal/Proposals/2012-2013 round1/Staff summary/Progress report form/Q1. We ask each entity to also review our general comments there. All the best, KLove (WMF) (talk) 00:08, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Appreciation[edit]

Thank you for composing this report. We are excited about your accomplishments this quarter:

  • First, many thanks for your work organizing the Hackathon this year!
  • Congratulations on placing Wikipedians-in-Residence at the National Archives and National Library. We look forward to learning more about their contributions and your relationships with those institutions.
  • Congratulations, too, on your impressive achievement of finishing your audited financial statements by March.
  • Congratulations also on recruiting two new board members and 23 new members!
  • Thank you for your clearly organized financial update; it was easy for us to read (though we would appreciate if you could separate staff costs from travel).

Best regards, KLove (WMF) (talk) 00:08, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

We would like to learn more[edit]

  • Evaluation weekend of Wiki Loves Monuments international 2012: we’re really eager to learn about the results of this evaluation weekend so that we might better understand the outcomes of this project. Are you able to share the results now?
  • Can you kindly separate out the travel costs from your staffing costs? This will help us better understand financial progress.

Many thanks, KLove (WMF) (talk) 00:08, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi Katie,
Ad asked me to reply here shortly with some more information about the Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 evaluation weekend. You can find more information about the outcomes of that weekend on Wikimedia Commons, where we collect all (or most) of our documentation: Commons:Commons:Wiki_Loves_Monuments_2012/Evaluation. Most of this was in one swift move implemented in the organization of the 2013 contest, which was one of the primary objectives. This report of course does not include the intangible outcomes (team building for 2013, increased understanding, transfer of knowledge).
More evaluation is always ongoing though. For example, further analysis is being done on the 2011 and 2012 participant surveys, and we're looking into participant retention together with Erik Zachte. But as these are not directly outcomes of the weekend itself, that is probably not what you were referring to. Effeietsanders (talk) 22:03, 11 June 2013 (UTC) (member of the international WLM organizing team)
This is really good to see, Effeietsanders! This is quite interesting to see and learn about! Thanks so much for sharing this, and for so doing so quickly. KLove (WMF) (talk) 22:11, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Suggestions for future reports[edit]

Thank you for the effort you put into producing the first progress report. We have a few suggestions to consider when creating future reports. Thank you in advance for your time and attention, KLove (WMF) (talk) 00:08, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

  • We hope you’ll be able to include metrics around the number of participants turned active volunteers and the number of edits and reports in future quarters. We’re interested in the results of the Community program.
  • We realize you’re still analyzing the results of the survey, but we look forward to learning more about how the results are informing WMNL’s strategy in future reports.
  • Thanks for sharing the successful results of opening your office on Saturdays. Please do share more information about the activities the volunteers are using the office for when writing future reports.
  • In future reports, we’d like to see more links to activities and materials produced. Many were included, but other activities that we would suppose would have a page or other content associated with them were not.
  • In future reports, please do be sure to also share your learning on _what didn’t work_ in executing programs. We’re happy to learn that everything is going so well for WMNL, but we also hope that you have lessons to share with the movement as you learn and grow and that you are able to use lessons learned to influence your strategies and approaches to your activities.
  • Congratulations on reaching your objectives regarding GLAM partnerships. We look forward to more metrics around this program in future reports as these partnerships develop.

Clarifications[edit]

Clarification on Five-Year Targets vs. Strategic priorities[edit]

You are correct that we have adjusted the reporting template to focus solely on the movement’s Strategic priorities rather than mentioning both Five-Year Targets and Strategic Priorities. Of course, we know entities will focus on areas relevant to their contexts and evaluate their work against their own goals and you are welcome to continue to do so.

Clarification on Terms of Use[edit]

There seem to be some misunderstandings around our Terms of Use and also around the phrase WIKI-FOCUS, which is used in the reporting form.

The Terms of Use clarify that a chapter is not responsible for operating the websites, meaning that they do not maintain the servers or infrastructure that the sites are built on. This provision is for the Chapter's protection, so they are not responsible for third-party content that is hosted on Wikipedia. For example, encouraging more users to participate in Wikimedia Projects and measuring the activity of our online communities is not a conflict with the Terms of Use.

When we use the term WIKI-FOCUS, we are referring to the Wikimedia Projects where each entity expects to have impact or achieve outcomes. For example, promoting contributions or readership on the Dutch Wikipedia or promoting contributions to Wikimedia Commons through WMNL’s program activities.

Please let us know if we may clarify further. Best, KLove (WMF) (talk) 00:08, 11 June 2013 (UTC)