Talk:Wiki Project Med/Application

Should Wiki Med apply?[edit]

Wiki Med struggles with reporting right now. Reporting requirements for thematic organizations is higher than for a user group.

The major advantage which I see for becoming a thematic organization is ease in making a grant application to the Wikimedia Foundation. Applying for grants is possible and not so difficult even as a user group. To justify the development of the bureaucracy, I recommend having a plan to do some grant funding. A potential starting points for grants are requesting a few small grants up to $2000 through the rapid grants process. While program grants can go higher than that and are an option, another option which I think fits better could be to apply for a simple annual plan grant for a few below $2000 projects and a part-time staff person or people, perhaps totaling 0.25 FTE for 6-12 months. When an organization can actually manage a little staff it amplifies a lot of other activities. Wiki Med might need staff to start documenting the many unreported outreach programs coming from members of this group, or to do community outreach to an underserved demographic as part of a strategic plan, or to do a research project.

I do not recommend that Wiki Med become a thematic organization without a reason for doing so. It is not logical or helpful, but the current state of the wiki community is that there are a lot of bureaucratic expectations of every registered organization and an unreasonable expectation that good volunteer wiki editors will also love doing administrative documentation. I caution against making a commitment to increase the bureaucracy without a plan to acquire the labor and leverage it to amplify the impact of other projects.

Harassment and criticism go way up for any project which publicly requests Wikimedia Foundation funds. Comparable medical nonprofit organizations operating in similar spaces go through staggering sums of money, accomplish relatively little, and no one in the public notices. Anyone doing anything with wiki gets the strictest public scrutiny and the expectation that they will have the most documented projects with the highest impact with unquestionable quality done with nearly no budget. Anticipate time to address ridiculously misplaced public expectations from the peanut gallery.

I wholly recommend Wiki Project Med requesting some small sums from the WMF and applying them to any of the many worthy project options, just to get the experience now and sooner about having internal conversations about project management, reporting, and finance. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:15, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. I believe that process you suggest is the wrong-way-round. The main reason for applying for TO status is not to gain access to increased funding, but to give us parity of esteem with Chapters. The lines of communication and support between the WMF and Chapters and amongst Chapters are far better established and productive than those between the WMF and User Groups. We are looking for a "seat at the table", the right to be considered on a par with them, and to be consulted in the same way that Chapters are, both formally and informally.

There are currently 37 Chapters and one Thematic Organisation. By no means all of them have staff and yet they still function.

We should not be seeking income until we have a proven need for expenditure. Staff should be considered only when it is apparent that there are jobs which volunteers can not or will not do. I see no evidence of a need for expenditure right now, nor evidence of any jobs that are being done by anyone other than volunteers. We already meet or exceed the reporting requirements for TOs - we have accounts filed for several years; an annual plan; monthly meetings; and regular reports on projects we are involved in - and will continue to do so without any need for further bureaucracy until such time as we may decide to apply for an annual program grant.

If worthy projects arise that need funding, then naturally we should consider applying for relevant grants as they arise. However I don't think that grant application to test out the process is best use of volunteers' time or of movement funds. --RexxS (talk) 16:46, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@RexxS: Okay, I am having second thoughts. There are other benefits to getting chapter status besides funding. I remain anxious about the increased reporting requirements for registering as a thematic organization / chapter. Yes, among the 38 of these groups, Wiki Med probably ranks within the top #15 for member engagement and impact. Yes, Wiki Med has been meeting reporting requirements, even though I am anxious that I feel the reports probably do not capture and report more than 20% of what Wiki Med members actually do with the support of the organization. It is not necessary to report everything or perfectly. Probably the incomplete reporting which already happens as a user group is more than sufficient to fulfill thematic organization reporting requirements.

Probably transitioning in name to a thematic organization, even if the group did not have immediate plans to change its current administration, is more than sufficient for the group to present itself as peer to any Wikimedia chapter. I have no doubt that Wiki Med is equal to any chapter. I only have small doubts that Wiki Med should increase its bureaucratic commitments in preference to other priorities. I agree that the registration comes with benefits and probably no other wiki group has come to Wiki Med's high level of maturity without getting this chapter status. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:47, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts are that this is more to get recognition for the work we do. With respect to funding, we would need a clear reason for further funds before requesting them. The Internet-in-a-Box efforts are more or less funding themselves. The NIH has offered to cover travel and accommodations for those who engage with them. I am happy to continue on with managing banking and fundraising. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:23, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Significance of the Movement Strategy Process for this application[edit]

If recognised, Wiki Project Med would become the second-ever thematic organisation – with Amical being the only other such movement organisation (and historically an 'edge case'). In phase 2 of the ongoing Movement Strategy process, the 'roles and responsibilities' working group will be tasked with rethinking the current setup of movement organisations (among other things). Reading this application, I therefore asked myself how it fits into possible outcomes of the Movement Strategy Process concerning the organisational structure of the Wikimedia Movement. Kind regards, --Gnom (talk) Let's make Wikipedia green! 15:26, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm not sure why so much energy is invested in this application when it's unclear as to what the affiliates landscape or categorisation will look like in a year's time. Braveheart (talk) 12:43, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because the affiliates landscape will be shaped as much by efforts from the grass roots as by any centralised decision-making. One of our aims at WPMEDF is to convince the movement that organising by theme is just as valuable to the project as organising geographically. We believe our record justifies that conviction. --RexxS (talk) 16:13, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There's no one you need to convince ;-) Braveheart (talk) 09:07, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pinged some chapters by email[edit]

I wrote to

at their general contact email addresses asking them to consider this application and to sign their support as chapters. Here is the text I sent -

Extended content

Hello Wiki Bangladesh board,

I am writing as a member of Wiki Project Med to request that you as a chapter support this medicine group's application for thematic organization status. To give support your board would review the linked application then have any representative sign support in the chapter's name on this application at the bottom.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Project_Med/Application#Supporting_organizations

My own view is that Wiki Project Med is organized as well as any other chapter on its budget, which has been ~$0. There is no identified controversy or opposition for this application.

In Wiki organization a "thematic organization" has standing equivalent to a chapter, except that it covers a topic instead of a region. In the past ~3-4 years the WMF Affiliations Committee has recognized no new chapter or thematic organizations.

Having thematic organization standing requires extra reporting and confers extra benefits. In my opinion the most desirable benefits of this standing are the reputation of the status, which indicates a history of stability, recognition as orthodox, and community participation; and also the ability to vote in the "chapters election" to seat 2 of 10 WMF board members every 3 years. The next election is in 2019.

Wiki Project Med has its nonprofit registration in New York state and also that its by-laws are a copy of Wiki NYC's by-laws.

The organization would like consideration by the end of October 2018. Sooner is better if you can show support.

Support from established chapters helps the Affiliations Committee make a decision to approve the application.

Anyone else who wishes to do so can invite other Wikimedia chapters, user groups, or other communities to comment on this proposal. Use the above text, adapt it, or write your own to solicit support on the application, comments here, or any evidence of any response. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:10, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Discott: It was nice to chat with you. Here is Wiki Project Med's application to transition from user group to chapter. I would appreciate if you can convey this request to Wiki South Africa. The transition process depends in part on peer-to-peer evaluation in which existing chapters comment on whether new applicants can have this status. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:31, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Bluerasberry: it was great catching up with you today as well. Thank you for making to the time to meetup with me. I will ask the Wikimedia ZA chapter to endorse the Wiki Project Med application. I think it is important. We are also currently supporting Wikimedia Tunisia's bid for chapter status as well.--Discott (talk) 22:53, 26 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Posted more[edit]

I posted on the AffCom discussion page and the Wikimedia Thematic organization page.

Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:10, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is this still ongoing?[edit]

I was just wondering whether this plan was ongoing and how it was progressing?

It makes so much sense and will have a proper real world impact. Nosebagbear (talk) 15:06, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Nosebagbear: In the last month there has been a development. The Affiliations Committee sort of gave credentials for this group to change its affiliation status from user group to thematic organization, but it sort of also asked for this organization to write its own credentials regarding whatever this means and how the transition should happen. I think the part about seeking recognition and permission is over, and now anyone can consider what the change in status should mean. In the case of this organization there is not an obvious change in what anyone plans to do, and the status change is more about image.

Also the organization is in the process of changing its name to Wikimedia Medicine.

I am relaying this information as a long time active participant. The organization does have leadership, and I sometimes take the role of explaining various aspects of it, but my read on the organization is that everyone still wants it to be top up with many Wikimedia community members organize their own projects in medicine and health rather than any change to have leadership organize projects from the top down. Anyone who contributes medical information can join and act as a Wikimedia Medicine member if they also sign up as members on the main page. There is still no staff and organization is in aggregate on wiki. Ask on the main page if you have questions. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:39, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]