*Summary: Cycle 2 has concluded, and we are sharing a revised plan for
Cycle 3 based on your feedback.*
Thank you to everyone that participated in Cycle 2! A quick overview of
- More than 50 Wikimedia groups, including:
-- Art+Feminism User Group
-- WikiDonne's User Group
-- Wikimedia Ghana User Group
-- Wikimedia Poland
- More than 1,000 individual participants
- Nearly 2,300 statements
In addition to the weekly summaries already available on Meta-Wiki, we
will also be posting a final report in the coming weeks.
Over the past few weeks I’ve heard from many of you with feedback,
concerns, and excitement regarding the movement strategy. Thank you, truly,
to everyone that has reached out to share your thoughts. They have been so
helpful in understanding your perspectives and needs.
Some things I’ve heard:
- Curiosity around how the findings from the different tracks will come
- Request from affiliates for more time to engage more deeply in these
- Passionate and divergent ideas from non-editors who support our vision
- A desire to get as many endorsements from around the movement on the
strategic direction as possible
I asked the strategy team for help in responding to this feedback, so we
could improve the process based on what you were telling us. After
discussions with the team and community advisors, we have decided to move
to a more flexible schedule, and change the timeline. This will provide
more time for discussions in your own communities. We also hope you will
use the time to deeply consider the research emerging from the New Voices
track, and incorporate it into the way you are thinking about our future.
Here is the new proposed timeline:
- July: Complete Cycle 3. Integrate insights from New Voices. Draft the
- August: Share the strategic direction. Wikimania! Finalize the direction.
- September: Sign on! Confirm support from around the movement.
As July approaches, we will share more information about opportunities to
participate in drafting the strategic direction and engage with New
Thank you for your patience as we worked through these improvements, and
again, thank you for the feedback!
*On a related note*
As you have hopefully noticed, Wikimania is a part of the strategy process
and it is coming up soon! (I’m so excited!) A draft program schedule has
been posted. The schedule includes five keynote sessions from great
speakers such as Esra'a Al Shafei  and Evan Prodromou, more than 100
community-submitted talks, and two days of hackathon and pre-conference
activities. Early bird pricing for registration ends on July 10 and the
deadline for booking accommodations in the hotel is June 30, so if you have
not done so already - please register today!
Bene habeas (Latin translation: “May it be well for you”)
PS. A version of this message is available for translation on Meta-Wiki.
149 New Montgomery Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
+1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6635
+1 (415) 712 4873
All emails from Wikimedia-l started to automatically drop into my Spam folder as of a few days ago. I use an "@live.com" email address (from Microsoft Outlook).
Anyone else facing this?
Thanks and regards,
I'm pleased to announce that the Wikimedia Foundation's Annual Plan is now
This year we are continuing to adhere to the three strategic priorities
laid out in the 2016-2018 interim strategic plan: reach, communities, and
Across the organization, we've introduced cross-departmental programs and
planning, with a holistic approach to program support that draws on our
community, technical, and other capacities. We feel that this new approach
creates stronger and better outcomes for programs, and is also clearer as
to what the Foundation is prioritizing. Some examples of these
cross-departmental programs include New Readers, Structured Data, and
Community Health, which have been discussed on this list and on wiki
throughout the past year.
Throughout the rest of the organization and department programs, we're
continuing to invest in the areas we identified through the 2016-2018
interim strategic plan, as well as core work such as operational
improvements, deepening diversity and inclusion, improving privacy and
security, and funding the Wikimedia endowment.
Thank you all for your support over the past year. Your participation in
the movement strategy process launched this year is deeply appreciated, and
it is remarkable to think that next year's plan will begin to incorporate
the directions we design together.
In the meanwhile, I'm looking forward to your feedback on this year's
proposed plan during this open comment period.
149 New Montgomery Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
+1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6635
+1 (415) 712 4873
Could an unpaid volunteer who is not a WMF employee, or contractor, or
consultant, please have a go at answering my polite request for links
to "monthly or quarterly financial reports" from a few days ago,
below? I don't think this needs any time from employees to confirm
whether published versions exist or don't exist, and I don't want to
be publicly shamed for asking a question.
I have searched through the WMF web pages with regard to the 2017
movement strategy, but have yet to find any references or evidence
that there are regular reports of when or how the budgeted $2.5
million is being spent. Considering the large size of this project,
and especially the significant sums of money going to consultants, I
am sure everyone can appreciate there is bound to be interest from the
wider community in the progress of the spend and any unplanned spend.
I would expect that the strategy project has regular monthly tracked
spending reports, certainly I would find it hard to believe that the
WMF CEO and CFO do not require that level of tracking and reporting.
If nothing is published, then that would be a jolly good thing for our
movement to push for improved /public/ governance of $1m+ projects,
especially those with large sums going to consultants chosen using
non-open bid procedures, to deliver better transparency in line with
our movement values. The cost of this improvement would be zero. There
can be no doubt that summary reports already exist and there is
unlikely to be any reason for secrecy that would convince the
community that when spending very large sums of donated money, we can
be ethically transparent and accountable, but be unable to answer
these simple questions publicly.
Should the WMF CEO feel that publishing monthly or quarterly reports
on $1m+ projects is a pointless burden, then perhaps the CEO and WMF
board could agree at what level of spend there should be better
transparency, perhaps any identifiable programme spending more than
Raising as a separate thread, as we have probably drifted away from
Pine's original question and intent.
Statement from Greg and Anna.
Strategy pages on Meta.
On 27 June 2017 at 12:31, Fæ <faewik(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 27 June 2017 at 04:33, Anna Stillwell <astillwell(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
>>> * How much is this timeline extension projected to cost, and from what
>>> source are the funds being drawn? (Note that this doesn't assume that the
>>> decision was a bad one, but I very much want to know the source of the
>>> funds and how much is likely to be drawn from it.)
>> We've got this covered, Pine. We are fiscally managing this process and all
>> of our contracts well. Thank you for your concern.
>>> * Could you also discuss what measures are being taken to control costs in
>>> the strategy process?
>> We have plenty of measures in place to monitor costs (e.g., we don't need
>> to control them because they are not out of control, we are within our
>> budget). Also, describing financial metrics at any lower level of detail
>> would be a waste of the strategy budget since we are within it.
>> Always good to hear from you,
> I'd love to examine the more detailed monthly or quarterly financial
> reports that demonstrate your assurance, and can be both examined and
> understood by volunteers like us. Could you provide a link to them
> please? No doubt the WMF wrote transparency and accountability right
> into the contracts, so that being transparent and accountable is not
> considered a "waste of the strategy budget" but instead is an activity
> absolutely critical to its success.
I like a tool for Wikidata that Hay created which is called VizQuery. More
information about it is below.
What's making you happy this week?
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Hay (Husky) <huskyr(a)gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 4:10 PM
Subject: [Wikidata] A visual way to query Wikidata
To: "Discussion list for the Wikidata project." <
i've made a tool that allows you to query Wikidata in a visual way
without using SPARQL. It's called VizQuery:
The possibilities of using Wikidata to do interesting queries are
endless, and the current query service allows for very powerful
queries indeed. However, i feel that for the general public,
especially those who are not that technical, it might be a bit
overwhelming and difficult for them to learn a complex language such
as SPARQL. To make people familiar with the concept of queries i
believe a somewhat less intimidating approach might be useful, hence
VizQuery is only capable of doing a subset of possible queries. It's
basically simple triples, variables (prefixed with '?') and literals
(between "quotes"). You can do pretty powerful queries with only those
things though. For example, here's a query with vegetarians who are
married to a vegetarian:
Under the hood VizQuery uses Ruben Verborgh's SPARQL.js library to
convert between JSON and SPARQL, so theoretically every SPARQL query
you could do in the regular query service can be done in VizQuery.
However, many queries won't work because the visual interface only
supports a subset of options: it's pretty hard to create user-friendly
GUI representations of many of the complex SPARQL features. :)
Anyway, i'd like to hear what you think. Bugs, feature request and
pull requests are also welcome on my Github page:
Wikidata mailing list
Today at 1 July the photo contest Wiki Loves Public Space started in
Belgium. This year is the first year in what we have during the full
of panorama <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_panorama> in Belgium (
info <https://be.wikimedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_panorama>), which means that
modern buildings and artworks in the public space can be photographed and
freely be published. For years it was not possible to illustrate articles
with photos of modern buildings and artworks in the public space due the
limitations of the Belgian copyright law. To celebrate this freedom and to
compensate the many years of not being allowed to upload photos of these
Belgian subjects (and thus bare articles), we organise this photo contest.
During the Summer months July and August 2017 you can participate by
uploading your photos from modern buildings, public artworks, heritage
monuments and memorials, present in the public space in Belgium. Also
photos you made earlier are welcome!
See for more information about how to participate at:
This photo contest is supported by Wikimedia Belgium
I'm very happy to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognized
the Wikipedia Library User Group  as a Wikimedia User Group. The
to combine and multiply collaboration with libraries and librarians, from
edit-a-thons hosted at libraries to the Wiki Loves Libraries outreach
campaign and the broader institutional and publisher outreach of the
Wikipedia Library, and to serve as a forum open to all Wikimedia community
members and any librarians interested in working with Wikipedia.
Please join me in congratulating the members of this new user group!
Chair, Affiliations Committee