- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it.
- Most likely, new comments will not be taken into account by the new three Working Group members in their work of developing the final Recommendations. You are free however to continue discussing in the spirit of "discussing about Wikipedia is a work in progress". :)
Work in progress
All of this is already happening, altough in different ways around the world. - Laurentius (talk) 21:16, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
I just made a comment on Recommendation 4 that applies here too. I support the idea as a sustainable way to do useful but non-core activities, but I wouldn't count on it as a way to raise funds that can be used for other activities. - Laurentius (talk) 21:16, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
Already implemented by some communities
This has been widely done by some affiliates and can be read in the Outreach website of Wikimedia. Nonetheless, once again, the recommendation is too short. Consulting services is a very sensitive topic and should be further explain to assess it is following the basic ethical principles. As a non-profit organisation, we should always provide this help to partnerships (according with the volunteer-driven community, capacity, and ability) and just use it as a revenue if the partnership has the economical means to pay for it -and if this income is going to be reinverted in expenses for GLAM projects. Xavi Dengra (MESSAGES) 08:31, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
A blanket endorsement of government grants?
Collaborations and partnerships with government organizations have provided much useful information and expertise for the encyclopedia, and will remain important.
However, wasn't part of the idea of Wikipedia to provide an independent source of information which the public can edit? How would you propose to maintain this independence if the organization's revenue is based on government grants? Oliveleaf4 (talk) 18:46, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
From Catalan Salon
Original text here.
We believe that we all should walk towards this recomendation, but we are not sure that all the members can carry it out because of their current situation (for example, ours).