I should have said this earlier: a big thank you to everyone who worked on
this funding round. From reading the Meta-Wiki pages, it's easy to see
that there is a lot of data to process and audit and it requires a decent
amount of work to issue these important recommendations each round.
Michael Peel wrote:
They are organisation-specific remarks. :-) The WMF did
not apply to the
FDC this round, hence why there are no amounts requested/allocated, or a
proposal to link to. The FDC felt it necessary to include recommendations
about the WMF anyway.
I may be showing my ignorance here, but I'm still confused. The Wikimedia
Foundation doesn't go through the Funds Dissemination Committee at all,
then? I see a note from the "2013-2014 round2" recommendations saying:
"For all future proposals, the FDC strongly emphasizes the need for a
complete proposal: the WMF should undergo similar procedures as other
entities in the movement."
Is it accurate to say that all large Wikimedia affiliates go through the
Funds Dissemination Committee except the Wikimedia Foundation? Or from a
different angle: how is the Wikimedia Foundation budget allocated? Does
the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees currently do its own direct
allocation, bypassing the FDC?
It's worth noting that there are two meanings to
the word 'project' here
- there are the Wikimedia projects, and then there are projects run by
the Wikimedia organisations (think of, e.g., GLAM or education projects).
It's particularly the latter case that is most relevant to the FDC's
work, and in this case Wikidata falls under both meanings.
Sure, there are many senses of the word project, but this doesn't seem to
answer the question asked. :-) Wikimedia Deutschland : Wikidata ::
Wikimedia Foundation : Wikipedia, right? If one organization is expected
to separate out costs for its largest technical project, shouldn't the
other be as well?
MZMcBride