Jump to content

Grants:APG/Proposals/2012-2013 round2/Wikimedia Norge/Progress report form/Q2

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki



Purpose of the report

[edit]

This form is for organizations receiving Annual Plan Grants to report on their results to date. For progress reports, the time period for this report will the first 6 months of each grant (e.g. 1 January - 30 June of the current year). For impact reports, the time period for this report will be the full 12 months of this grant, including the period already reported on in the progress report (e.g. 1 January - 31 December of the current year). This form includes four sections, addressing global metrics, program stories, financial information, and compliance. Please contact APG/FDC staff if you have questions about this form, or concerns submitting it by the deadline. After submitting the form, organizations will also meet with APG staff to discuss their progress.

Global metrics overview - all programs

[edit]

We are trying to understand the overall outcomes of the work being funded across our grantees' programs. Please use the table below to let us know how your programs contributed to the Global Metrics. We understand not all Global Metrics will be relevant for all programs, so feel free to put "0" where necessary. For each program include the following table and

  1. Next to each required metric, list the outcome achieved for all of your programs included in your proposal.
  2. Where necessary, explain the context behind your outcome.
  3. In addition to the Global Metrics as measures of success for your programs, there is another table format in which you may report on any OTHER relevant measures of your programs success

For more information and a sample, see Global Metrics.

Overall

[edit]
Metric Achieved outcome Explanation
1. # of active editors involved
2. # of new editors
3. # of individuals involved
4. # of new images/media added to Wikimedia articles/pages
5. # of articles added or improved on Wikimedia projects
6. Absolute value of bytes added to or deleted from Wikimedia projects


Telling your program stories - all programs

[edit]

Please tell the story of each of your programs included in your proposal. This is your chance to tell your story by using any additional metrics (beyond global metrics) that are relevant to your context, beyond the global metrics above. You should be reporting against the targets you set at the beginning of the year throughout the year. We have provided a template here below for you to report against your targets, but you are welcome to include this information in another way. Also, if you decided not to do a program that was included in your proposal or added a program not in the proposal, please explain this change. More resources for storytelling are at the end of this form. Here are some ways to tell your story.

  • We encourage you to share your successes and failures and what you are learning. Please also share why are these successes, failures, or learnings are important in your context. Reference learning patterns or other documentation.
  • Make clear connections between your offline activities and online results, as applicable. For example, explain how your education program activities is leading to quality content on Wikipedia.
  • We encourage you to tell your story in different ways by using videos, sound files, images (photos and infographics, e.g.), compelling quotes, and by linking directly to work you produce. You may highlight outcomes, learning, or metrics this way.
  • We encourage you to continue using dashboards, progress bars, and scorecards that you have used to illustrate your progress in the past, and to report consistently over time.
  • You are welcome to use the table below to report on any metrics or measures relevant to your program. These may or may not include the global metrics you put in the overview section above. You can also share your progress in another way if you do not find a table like this useful.
Target Last year (if applicable) Progress (at end of Q2) End of year (projected or actual) Comments
Example Example Example Example Example

Revenues received during this period (6 month for progress report, 12 months for impact report)

[edit]

Please use the exchange rate in your APG proposal.

Table 2 Please report all spending in the currency of your grant unless US$ is requested.

  • Please also include any in-kind contributions or resources that you have received in this revenues table. This might include donated office space, services, prizes, food, etc. If you are to provide a monetary equivalent (e.g. $500 for food from Organization X for service Y), please include it in this table. Otherwise, please highlight the contribution, as well as the name of the partner, in the notes section.
Revenue source Currency Anticipated Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Cumulative Anticipated ($US)* Cumulative ($US)* Explanation of variances from plan
A B C D E F G H I J K

* Provide estimates in US Dollars


Spending during this period (6 month for progress report, 12 months for impact report)

[edit]

Please use the exchange rate in your APG proposal.

Table 3 Please report all spending in the currency of your grant unless US$ is requested.

(The "budgeted" amount is the total planned for the year as submitted in your proposal form or your revised plan, and the "cumulative" column refers to the total spent to date this year. The "percentage spent to date" is the ratio of the cumulative amount spent over the budgeted amount.)
Expense Currency Budgeted Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Cumulative Budgeted ($US)* Cumulative ($US)* Percentage spent to date Explanation of variances from plan
A B C D E F G H I J J2 K
TOTAL B C D E F G H I J J2 N/A

* Provide estimates in US Dollars


Compliance

[edit]

Is your organization compliant with the terms outlined in the grant agreement?

[edit]

As required in the grant agreement, please report any deviations from your grant proposal here. Note that, among other things, any changes must be consistent with our WMF mission, must be for charitable purposes as defined in the grant agreement, and must otherwise comply with the grant agreement.

Are you in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations as outlined in the grant agreement? Please answer "Yes" or "No".

Are you in compliance with provisions of the United States Internal Revenue Code (“Code”), and with relevant tax laws and regulations restricting the use of the Grant funds as outlined in the grant agreement? Please answer "Yes" or "No".

Signature

[edit]
Once complete, please sign below with the usual four tildes.

Resources

[edit]

Resources to plan for measurement

[edit]

Resources for storytelling

[edit]


Basic entity information

[edit]

Table 1

Entity information Legal name of entity Wikimedia Norge
Entity's fiscal year (mm/dd–mm/dd) 12/31-12/31 AND 06/30 - 06/30
12 month timeframe of funds awarded (mm/dd/yy-mm/dd/yy) 07/01/13 - 07/01/14
Contact information (primary) Primary contact name Erlend Bjørtvedt
Primary contact position in entity Vice chairman
Primary contact username Bjoertvedt
Primary contact email erlend@wikimedia.no
Contact information (secondary) Secondary contact name Knut Hjelleset
Secondary contact position in entity Board member
Secondary contact username KnutHj
Secondary contact email knut.hj@gmail.com


Quarter highlights

[edit]

CHANGES:

  • Wikimedia Norge started Q2 (October) by completing the employment process, hiring up to three (part-time) staff to help realize the prioritized goals of the organization (see Progress report number 1). After the board of Wikimedia Norway chose to focus efforts on reaching out to the GLAM sector in Norway, and after the board concluding on the need for a more substantial drive to reach out to female editors, the employment committee (Bjørtvedt, Vines, Neteland) focused the recruitment process on GLAM and female campaigning skills. Towards the end of the quarter, with the arrival and firm establishment of three part/full-time employees, the board initiated a process to draft a half-year plan for H1, 2014, in order to achieve two outcomes:
    • Specify and operationalize milestone goals for the Strategy 2011-15, specifying which goals to concentrate on in 2014 with the given resources and staff.
    • Provide employees with a rather specific, operational plan for their employment period through June, giving each employee a set of responsibilities to reach objectives.
  • The Board gradually concluded during December to try initiate a new, Northern Saami project, provided it involves the externally funded recruitment of local staff on the ground. There are volunteers in Finland who work on the Northern Saami Wikipedia, and the two chapters have discussed initially a co-operation. The preparations and funding requests will be handled by the Board and not prioritized by the hired staff at this point.
  • The Board initiated and agreed with the other Nordic chapters (WMSE, WMFI) on December 15, to try expand and cooperate on four specific projects:
    • Extending Wiki Loves Monuments to reach out to Denmark, Faraoe Islands, Iceland, and Greenland, trying to get this funded by the Nordic Council (lead: WMNO).
    • Developing a Nordic professional / social arena for Wikipedians-in-Residence, starting with a WiR event in Sweden (lead: WMSE).
    • Explore how Wikimedia chapters in Norway and Finland can possibly co-develop a Northern Saami project (lead: WMNO).
    • All chapters contributing to the Wikimaps Nordic project, mobilizing local GLAM institutions (lead: WMFI).
  • At the Wikipedia Academy, it became more clear that the cooperation among wikipedians and the collegial spirit of admins and contributors at Bokmaal Wikipedia is under threat. Participation keeps falling, production stagnates, while participation and volume of discussion rooms grow. The Bokmaal versions has lost admins during the year reducing the total number from c. 75 to c. 55, through a process of natural lay-off that followed the introduction of confirmative elections (each admin is reelected every 2 years, inactive admins are thereby laid off). However, there was also a growing observation of a less cordial and co-operative spirit, and more conflict. Therefore, the Board resolved to include Cooperative culture as an overall strategic objective.
  • The Board of Directors, on January 7, concluded second quarter discussions by approving a Half Year Plan H1 2014 (now wikified, but not translated). The Half Year Plan is based on the 10 original goals of the Strategy 2011-2015, and concentrates this into four set of objectives: 1) Cooperative culture in the Wiki community, 2) Broad participation (including female mobilization), 3) Quality content (including academia), and 4) Northern Saami. The hired staff will develop objectives 1-3 with personally assigned responsibilities, whereas the Board in entirety will develop objective 4.

HIGHLIGHTS: What were 1–2 important highlights of the past quarter? (These may include successes, challenges, lessons learned.)

  • The hiring of three very able employees - Astrid Carlsen (full-time, December 1), Jorid Martinsen /20%, December 1), and Tor Arne Bjerke (40%, January 1). The hiring process was quite swift and smooth once underway, and it seems (after 7 weeks) that the three employees have good, complementary experience and work excellently together.
  • A very strong outreach to GLAM, with a large sector-staged Wikipedia seminar in November (150 attendees), a new Wikipedian-in-Residence at the National Archives, and a settled agreement to hire a Wikipedian-in-Residence at the National Library by February, 1.
  • The Wikipedia Academy raised much needed and fruitful debates on meeting the "decline of Wikipedia" and focusing on the (lack of) cooperative spirit and challenges in the local Wikipedia community. SInce the Academy, is has become more clear that some admins and patrollers are indeed scaring away new editors through tough patrolling and a lack of feedback to new editors. The feasibility of a "Tea Room" or a mentor institution for new editors is therefore raised, and prioritized by Board and staff. This is reflected in the revised objectives of the Half Year Plan 2014.

WIKI-FOCUS: What Wikimedia projects was your entity focused on (e.g., Wiki Commons, French Wiktionary) this quarter?

  • Wikipedia Bokmål, Wikipedia Nynorsk, Wikipedia Samegiella, Wikimedia Commons.

GROWTH: How did your entity grow over the past quarter vs. the previous quarter (e.g., Number of active editors reached/involved/added, number of articles created, number of events held, number of partipants reached through workshops)?

  • Workshops, training courses and safaris reached somewhat less than 100 people, while editing contest of the week on strategic topics reached out to approximately 40 contestants.
  • Number of new editors was extremely high in the same period 2012 (because of the editing courses then), this was not repeated this year.
  • Bokmaal: Number of editors is stably and slowly declining, with above 400 editing +5, and above 60 editing +100. December was disappointing with a reduction in new (68) and active editors (414, 58), which most probably derives from the fact that 2013 saw the first Christmas week in several years without an editing competition. Usually, December is a spike while in 2013, it was a low and at the level of summer editing. The total number of editors
  • Number of at-least-one-time editors (1 or more edit last month) went down from c. 1.700 per month, to c. 1500 per month in December, though higher than in summer this is not a satisfactory level.
  • Number of editors at Talk pages and in discussion rooms increased, reflecting more contributor activity in discussions. Some new editors are displaying a very high activity level on "village pump" sites, potentially distracting the productive work of editors.
  • Number of new articles, however, is not correspondingly declining. Actually, statistics seem to indicate (at least at the short-time. micro level) that there is a negative correlation between the number of editors, and the number of new articles produced every month.
  • Nynorsk: The number of active editors is improving, with a modest spike in December. However, the total number of editors is declining there, aswell, but less so than at the Bokmaal version. Talk page activity at Nynorsk has long-term decreased, short-term stagnated.
  • Northern saami: The number of editors and active editors is still comparably low, but increasing. October-December 2013 was a very good quarters with more editors at the project.
  • Female editors: The number among gender-registered users of female editors is stable at 8-11 % at Bokmaal, and 30-40 % at Nynorsk.
  • Page views: The total number of page views is now stable. After the WMF technical staff adjusted statistics for errors, Bokmaal is quite stable at 60 million, Nynorsk at 5-6 million, and Northern Saami at 0.5 million. With a traditional 45-50% use of the "Norwegian" language versions, this calls for a total page view from Norway of 140 million, including the main foreign versions of English, Polish, Swedish and German.

Financial summary

[edit]

The FDC requires information about how your entity received and spent money over the past year. The FDC distributes general funds, so your entity is not required to use funds exactly as outlined in the proposal. While line-item expenses will not be examined, the FDC and movement wants to understand why the entity spent money in the way it did. If variance in budgeted vs. actual is greater than 20%, please provide explanation in more detail. This helps the FDC understand the rationale behind any significant changes. Note that any changes from the Grant proposal, among other things, must be consistent with the WMF mission, must be for charitable purposes as defined in the grant agreement, must be reported to WMF, and must otherwise comply with the grant agreement. The WMF mission is "to empower and engage people around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally."

Provide exchange rate used:

  • NOK (USD = 6 NOK)
  • Refer:
  • Accounting principles: The accounting since 2013 is strictly adhering to the accrual principle and not the cash principle. All known, and running, liabilities and assets are activated in the balance sheet. FDC funds from the WMF are accounted as revenue only as they are spent, the reminder of the funds are kept in the balance sheet as "non-utilized FDC funds". Personnell are completely accounted as cost, including the liability of future transactions on taxes, social fees, insurance, etc. Thereby, the accounts give a correct picture of the activity level and the revenue and cost accrued, irrespective of the time of transaction.
  • Disclaimer: In the previous, Q1 report, several numbers were mistaken as they reflected calendric YTD numbers instead of Q1 numbers. This mistake was regrettable, but derived from the fact that accounting period has been changed and numbers were by default inserted from a calendric accounting report. Therefore, Q1 figures are also updated and double-checked here.

Revenues for this quarter

[edit]

Table 2 Please report all spending in the currency of your grant unless US$ is requested.

  • Please also include any in-kind contributions or resources that you have received in this revenues table. This might include donated office space, services, prizes, food, etc. If you are to provide a monetary equivalent (e.g. $500 for food from Organization X for service Y), please include it in this table. Otherwise, please highlight the contribution, as well as the name of the partner, in the notes section.
Revenue source Currency Anticipated Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Cumulative Anticipated ($US)* Cumulative ($US)* Explanation of variances from plan
Wikimedia Foundation FDC NOK 840.000 0,oo 145.656 F G 145.656 140.000 24.275 Grant not received until Q2.
Membership fees NOK 15.000 200 2.500 F G 2.700 2.500 450 Revenues are behind budget, membership is usually renewed in spring before the annual assembly.
Private gifts & other grants NOK 30.000 1.098 1.148 F G 2.246 5.000 375 Revenues are behind budget, no out-of-the-normal gifts after summer.
Participation fees NOK 15.000 0,oo 20.200 F G 20.200 2.500 3.670 Revenues are ahead of budget, we managed to attract a more substantial participation fee from Arts Council Norway in December.
Public Funds (Saami) NOK 200.000 0,oo 0,oo F G 0 33.333 0 The Board will venture to develop a new Saami project, until then there will be no funding for this item..
TOTAL NOK 1.100.000 1.298 169.504 F G 170.802 183.333 28.467 The dominating factor in underperformance on revenues, is the delay in hiring staff which means that FDC funds weren't properly activated until Q2.

* Provide estimates in US Dollars


Of a budgeted NOK 60.000 in non-project funding, we have received NOK 25.150 after two quarters. This is marginally behind expectation, and is clearly attributed to the fact that Board members have attatched most of their effort to the employment process, events, and revising a strategic plan for the new employees. Member recruitment, sales, and the attraction of gifts have been less prioritized during this period.

Spending during this quarter

[edit]

Table 3 Please report all spending in the currency of your grant unless US$ is requested.

(The "budgeted" amount is the total planned for the year as submitted in your proposal form or your revised plan, and the "cumulative" column refers to the total spent to date this year. The "percentage spent to date" is the ratio of the cumulative amount spent over the budgeted amount.)
Expense Currency Budgeted Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Cumulative Budgeted ($US)* Cumulative ($US)* Percentage spent to date Explanation of variances from plan
Salaries and personnel cost NOK 480.000 0,oo 49.305 F G 49.305 80.000 8.220 10,3 The first two employees started work on December 1, 2013. The third employee started when the second quarter ended.
Office costs NOK 100.000 0,oo 14.524 F G 14.524 16.666 2.420 14,5 Offices signed and utilized from December, but no payments will take place until February-March. Activation in the accounts will start from January. Costs are for furniture, etc.
Program 1 GLAM NOK 50.000 0,oo 0,oo F G 0,oo 8.333 0,oo 0 Costs related to all GLAM events were covered by GLAM partnering institutions. Some very minor costs are accounted as travelling, meeting costs, etc.
Program 3 W-I-R NOK 50.000 0,oo 0,oo F G 0,oo 8.333 0,oo 0 All activities, recruting and travel costs have been funded by W-i-R partners. Some very minor costs are accounted as travelling, meeting costs, etc. Further activities will commence in 2014.
Public projects (Saami) NOK 200.000 0,oo 0,oo F G 0,oo 33.333 0,oo 0 Project preliminarily postponed due to reduced FDC funding. Board considers upstart of project in 2014, possibly with Wikimedia Sweden/Finland.
Travelling costs, etc NOK 70.000 4.471 7.675 F G 12.146 11.666 2.025 17,4 Postponed recruitment has preliminarily reduced traveling costs. Costs will ensue at substantial level in spring (Berlin, Helsinki, Stockholm, etc).
Wikipedia Academy & other events NOK 75.000 0,oo 42.463 F G 42.463 12.500 7.075 56,6 Events that incur costs have been carried out first in the second program quarter (December).
Prizes, gifts NOK 15.000 2.660 13.240 F G 15.900 2.500 2.650 106,0 This costs include accumulated "Competition of the Week" prices, and the WLM 2013 prizes.
Nordic Activities NOK 20.000 0,oo 0,oo F G 0,oo 3.333 0,oo 0 Nordic activities just recently taken up again (Wikimaps Nordic), but no costs occurred yet. The marginal Nordic Chapter meeting costs on December 15, are reported under Wikipedia Academy (above).
All other costs NOK 30.000 2.049 1.050 F G 3.099 5.000 515 10,3 This item includes accounting, Chapters Association, memberships, IT, post, telephony, etc. Accounting still performed by board, Chapters Association apparently abandoned. Board also performs personnel administration, salary and tax reporting, etc.
TOTAL NOK 1.100.000 9.180 139.205 F G 148.384 183.333 24.730 13,5 N/A

* Provide estimates in US Dollars


Progress toward this year's goals/objectives

[edit]

This section addresses the impact of the programs / initiatives* and objectives your entity has implemented over the past quarter and the progress your entity is making toward meeting this year's goals. We understand that some metrics may not be applicable in this quarterly report, so please add metrics here if they are applicable.

*In the past, the FDC has used the term 'initiative', but we are using the term 'program.'

Program 1

[edit]
Wikipedia for the GLAM Sector
What are the objectives of this program? Please include metrics.
  • The objectives of the program is to enhance the outreach towards the GLAM sector in Norway, by
  • develop and offer GLAM institutions, curators and relevant employees throughout the country, a series of more (A) advanced editing training courses in Wikipedia editing, rules and regulations, licensing, and strategic use of Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons during fall, 2013 - and also in dedicated tutorial tracks at Wikipedia Academy 2013 and Wikipedia Academy 2014.
  • develop technical and information architectual solutions to integrate Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons content in the nationwide, travelling app trial project (B) Heritage Here (Kultur- og naturreise), in order to offer travellers in Norway Wikimedia textual and visual content throughout the trial areas in 2013, and (if realized) throughout the country in 2014.
  • support the two objectives above (A, B), by organizing a number of textual and visual production (C) competitions on GLAM themes, through an intensification of established editing competitions on the Wikipedia, and at least one targeted outreach sub-competition towards the sector during Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in September, 2013.
  • support the two objectives above (A, B), by bringing GLAM professionals and experienced wikipedians together in 4-5 social and tutorial evenings annually, starting in full from fall, 2013.
Progress against these objectives (include metrics and # of volunteers/staff involved)?
  • During Q1-Q2, Wikimedia Norge's co-operation with the GLAM sector resulted in the systematic linking of Wikipedia articles tailored to the item in question at the Digital Museum. This is the web interface for the public to view museum artifacts and photos of all the museums of Norway, and when visitors study images they get the corresponding Wikipedia article mirrored and linked in the bottom of each hit (example 1, example 2).
  • Advanced editing courses are planned to be offered during the winter of 2013-14, starting at the Wikipedia Academy 2013 in December. Some courses have started already together with single institutions, covering 7 events with some 50 participants. The Heritage Here progress was severely hampered in Q1 by the peril of abandonment of the project, but the project continues and will constitute a major effort throughout the coming program period. A number of 5 writing competitions with prizes have been conducted at Wikipedia Bokmål since July. However, a sector sub-campaign under WLM 2013 was not achieved as planned. Social meeting places between GLAM professionals and wikipedians have been partly achieved, since all workshops and courses for professionals have been announced at village pumps and open to participation from wikipedians, which materialized to some degree.
  • [A] Advanced editing courses have been set for spring, and is a main topic for the 2014 planning session with Arts Council Norway on February 4, 2014. Regional advanced trainings and workshops are intended to keep involved the most eager participants at the 2012-13 elementary training sessions. GLAM sector professionals took part in Wikipedia Academy in December, but all sessions were conducted in plenary and training has been followed up 1:1 throughout Q2 (see below).
  • [B] Cooperation with Heritage Here (Kultur- og naturreise) was resumed this fall, and Wikimedia Norge took part in a planning session in December to prepare a hackaton (hack4NO) which will take place on February 6-8, in Oslo, with 1,000 participants signed up, including at least 4 wikipedians. Wikimedia Norge (Lars Jynge Alvik, WiR at the Directorate of Cultural Heritage) participated in the planning process with technical inputs and data. In addition, in December we managed to get Heritage Here attached to the Wikimaps Nordic initiative as a national representative in that project.
Progress on extension and intensification of the project
  • Fall, 2013, has seen a veritable burst of new initiatives and co-operations in the GLAM field. Our full-time employee who manages this program in particular (Astrid Carlsen), is assisting the Board in assigning several new cooperation projects, and approaching ever more institutions.
  • In 2012, Wikimedia Norge focused on firmly establishing a Wikipedia project with Arts Council Norway as a model and top-down call for individual institutions to involve with the chapter. In Q1-Q2 (fall, 2013), the chapter has worked focused with the Directorate of Cultural Heritage (Riksantikvaren) by establishing 2 Wikipedian-in-Residence positions there, and by utilizing the joint Wikipedia project with the Directorate.
  • The 'technical' W-i-R prepared the WLM 2013 with updated heritage lists and maps, and ran the technical foundation for the competition. In Q2, he initiated a photo donation effort in which the Directorate established an interface and a bot which releases and uploads 4,750 photos continuously to Wikimedia Commons that were selected during fall as newly 'in the free'. The bot ('Riksbot') ran through January. The stream of uploaded images can be seen here. In addition, the W-i-R established linking templates in order to easily link cultural heritage topic articles to their respective ID number among the 130,000 or so numbers in the national registry. Furthermore, the Directorate installed a scholarship program with Wikimedia Norge, under the joint Cultural Heritage Project. The small scholarships were granted in a large number among several of the 35 participants, at which they received smaller grants to focus on filling in articles to the images that were taken during WLM 2013. The scholarship program is under evaluation but several hundred articles have resulted. During Q2, the WiR also organized one article editing contest (week 49) on the topic cultural heritage sites, at the Wikipedia (all three language versions take equal part).
  • The 'non-technical' WiR at the Directorate spent all of Q1 and Q2 with mobilizing internal resources in the cultural Heritage sector (national and regional offices and experts) in editing, and providing images for, cultural topics at the Wikipedia. His main effort included several workshops, training sessions and a hackaton at the Directorate, focusing on editing training and a major event on attaching (WLM) images to articles.
  • This year's project with the Directorate was finalized on November 26, with a seminar in Oslo, attracting 150 sector specialists, named Wikipedia - Cultural Heritage in free float. The seminar was opened by the National Antequarian (Mr Jørn Holme), the deputy of the Arts Council Norway, the National Archivarian (Mr Ivar Fonnes), and the vice chairman of Wikimedia Norway. The National Antequarian, Mr Holme, gave sector speicalists a very strong 'go' order, revealing that he is himself an ardent wikipedian after office hours. Lecturers included Axel Petterson (Wikimedia Sweden), W-i-R Knut Hjelleset (Wikimedia Norway), Sebastian ter Burg (Wikimedia Netherlands), and W-i-R Kjersti Lie at the NTNU university in Trondheim (Wikimedia Norway). All in all, the 150 attendees from the GLAM sector received a systematic, in-depth visualization of the possibilities of participating with text, data, and images to the Wikipedia.
  • During fall, the National Archives' (Riksarkivet) established a Wikipedian-in-Residence for 4 months, for the exploration of how the National Archive can contribute with its vast repository of data containing millions of images, invaluable first-hand sources, archives, and genealogical records. Wikipedian Eirik Fløan (board of Wikimedia Norge 2012-13) was their first WiR throughout fall. Apart from assisting their full-time Wikipedia officer with further strategy, he did editing courses, other trainings, and mobilization of textual editing within the archives sector.
  • Around Christmas, Wikimedia Norway had an extraordinary fruitful meeting with the National Library of Norway (Nasjonalbiblioteket). On the spot, we agreed to recruit a Wikipedian-in-Residence to the Library and that was successfully done within one day. The WiR (Lars Jynge Alvik) now spends 3 months on full-time, exploring the many possibilities of data collection and outreach that are inherent in the National Library's role as a repository of all published books, printed material, all Norwegian films, all Norwegian photographs, and an enormous collection of manuscripts, maps, etc. The National Library expressed an intention to enter into a more substantial project in 2014, including textual editing of the Wikipedia, work with metadata, linking sources to the film repository (live picture for Wikipedia / Commons), etc. This breakthrough was the result of long-term work from Wikimedia Norge, starting a year ago and substantially carried out by board member Harald Groven. He held a presentation at the National Library in November, which resulted in the institutions taking direct action to explore a major initiative for 2014.
  • Around New Year, contacts were similarly established with the Labour Movement Archives ('Arbeiderbevegelsens Arkiv'), a substantial institution holding millions of images and much invaluable archive material documenting the labour movement in Norway. The archive agrees to establish a firm co-operation in early 2014.
  • The year's many projects and cooperations were rounded off by the Christmas Table ('Julebord') in Oslo on December 15, where all the officers from Arts Council Norway, the Directorate, and museums, took part.
Activities conducted.
  • One major sector seminar on November 26, 150 participants. Five wikipedians on the one-day lecturer list.
  • Wikipedia Academy focusing on the development of Wikipedia, Wikimaps Nordic, and Heritage Here. Established a vital link between those two projects.
  • Editing workshops and training sessions at the Directorate for Cultural Heritage, the National Archives, and other institutions.
  • Scholarship recruitment outreach resulting in hundreds of new Wikipedia articles on cultural heritage sites, and WLM image attachments to articles.
  • 1 week of GLAM themes adding 68 new articles at the Competition of the Week at Wikipedia, namely in Week 49.
  • We estimate that we have reached 200 GLAM specialists directly through seminars and workshops, during Q2.
What worked and what did not?
  • What worked: Long-time effort is starting to yield substantial results, with a number of new, cournerstone institutions initiating projects of cooperation focusing on contributing data and sources to the Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons. This has continued in Q3 (institutions in addition to those listed here), insofar as we are now in a position where there appears a shortage of volunteers to enlists as WiR's or outreach mobilizers. We felt already in 2012 that the GLAM sector was maturing by way of realizing the potential of the Wikipedia, but during Q2 (Oct-Dec 2013) we have enjoyed a very receptive set of new institutions, probably much owing to the establishment of a central, top-down key project, and owing even to the personal effort of board members and WiRs.
    • The hiring of paid staff was efficient and smooth, quickly making us able to conduct project meetings, follow-ups and enlist new institutions.
    • Experienced volunteers who maybe have spent 6-9 years as wikipedians are getting a chance to take up challenging work at the inside of owners of vital data and soruce material. Several wikipedians find this quite rewarding, maybe retaining some veterans who would otherwise have to find new motivation in other ways.
    • Photo donations are starting to give results, with almost 5,000 photos actually uploaded from the Directorate and a few more thousand from the Norwegian Museum of Cultural History ('Norsk folkemuseum') in Q2.
    • A handful of GLAM experts (sector employees) are also starting to quite substantial Wikipedia editing. This is probably the activity which has the highest barrier, and the retention rates of first-time GLAM sector editors is probably not very high. But quite clearly, they number a high proportion og female editors.
    • Small editing scholarships were quite successful. There were so many applicants that the scholarship amounts had to be scaled down, and even though there is not an external evaluation yet it is evident that the initiative added several hundred new articles on important heritage sites.
    • The GLAM sector is starting to become 'self-propellant' as regards new initiatives, new projects and work to contribute to the Wikipedia and Commons. While the early projects (2011-2012) were mostly initiated by Wikimedia Norway, we now see (regional) institutions launching projects and initiatives in their own right. Many institutions have now hired dedicated staff in addition to the W-i-R's, and these staff typically conduct photo donations, attach links to archival sources or data, and sometimes write articles.
    • The Heritage Here project is fully on track again, after some initial issues with continued state project funding, and they are driving the maps agenda and efforts to link elements like map, image, cultural heritage ID, and Wikipedia text.
  • What did not work: The idea of focusing to much on editing training is under some revision, as there are doubts as to the retention rate of participants. The 35-50 sessions organized in September-November 2012 typically left a 3 months activity spike, at substantial effort. It seams that rather few GLAM employees write articles (those who do, write many!), so we have seen a gradual and non-intended shift towards focusing on getting data, sources, resources linking, and images, from institutions. There has certainly been an increase in the participation of GLAM experts in editing, but this has not offset a decline in the general participation and recruitment of editors. This raises the question as to whether GLAM topic initiatives are crowding out other topical issues, that Wikipedia production is getting 'glamified'. This is not necessarily a problem if GLAM topics have been under-represented or of poor quality at the Wikipedia.

Any additional details:


Program 3

[edit]
Wikipedians-in-Residence
What are the objectives of this program? Please include metrics.
  • The program should create an attractive platform for recruiting, developing and utilizing the resources of wikipedians-in-residence (W-I-R) in Norway, by doubling the number of W-I-R's from the present 2 to at least 4 residencees by the end of the program period. Further, experience merits that Wikimedia Norge should assist W-I-R's more closely in involving the total staff f their institutions more thoroughly. We believe the chapter should assist W-I-R's in broadening their reach and appeal to other staff of their instituon and their professional network, to increase participation and reach.
Progress against these objectives (include metrics and # of volunteers/staff involved)?
  • From Q1 to Q2, the number of W-i-R's n Norway increased from 5 to a total of 6. Among these, two have had temporary assignments only through 2013, while one new position is being opened and one being under discussion. Thereby, we will progress through Q3 with between 4 and 6 W-i-R's in Norway. The W-i-R's have conducted quite different tasks, falling into mainly 4 groups : (a) Strategy, (b) Mobilization & training, (c) Editing, and (d) Technical.

The following table gives an overview of the progress with Wikipedians in Residence in Norway:

  1. Oslo Museum - - - WiR period 2013, 2014 - WiR name Lars Roede - Tasks (b) Mobilization. (c) Editing. - Results Quality articles.
  2. Museum of Cultural History - - - WiR period 2013, 2014 - WiR name Jon Birger Østby - Tasks (a) Strategy. (c) Editing. - Results Quantity articles and category completeness (example). Photo donations (1,505 images uploaded manually). Strategic work to link different databases and repositories to Wikipedia.
  3. Directorate of Cultural Heritage - - - WiR period Aug-Dec 2013 - WiR name Knut Hjelleset - Tasks (b) Mobilization. - Results Editing courses, sector seminar in Oslo.
  4. Directorate of Cultural Heritage - - - WiR period Aug-Dec 2013 - WiR name Lars Jynge Alvik - Tasks (a) Strategy. (d) Technical. - Results WLM infrastructure, map solutions, list localizations, source programming, image uploading bot (4,750 images uploaded).
  5. National Archives - - - WiR period 2013-2014 - WiR name Eirik Fløan - Tasks (a) Strategy. (b) Mobilization. - Results Institutional strategy, editing courses, mobilization.
  6. University of Technology and Science (NTNU) - - - WiR period Oct-Dec 2013 - WiR name Kjersti Lie - Tasks (c) Editing. (d) Technical. - Results Cleaning up the category structure and articles related to the topics and heritage of the university.
  7. National Library - - - WiR period Feb-Apr 2014 - WiR name Lars Jynge Alvik - Tasks (a) Strategy. Later: (b), (d). - Results Will explore and conceptualize the potentials and possibilities inherent in the central role of the National Library. Phase 2 (after April) will opt to operationalize.


Activities conducted.
  • Activities have focused on recruiting more WiR's at more institutions, to get the institutions 'self-propellant' and multiply the inflow of resources, data, images, and textual content. We have got opened up a new position at the National Library and helped the National Archives in recruiting their WiR, who will continue his work well into 2014.
  • Entering into 2014, we are in discussions with two more institutions to try establish WiR positions.
  • In December, we initiated towards the Nordic chapters to share experience, arenas and motivate WiR's with a professional arena at the Nordic level. We believe this will enhance the motivation, professional self-esteem and the institutional devotion to the WiR institution. Wikimedia Sweden agreed to host a first event in 2014 which can bring WiR's together.
What worked and what did not?
  • What worked: The one really technical WiR (Lars Jynge Alvik) produced some highly sophisticated tools for WLM (Q1) and for cultural heritage image uploading and metadata retention (Q2). Other WiR's have been focused on mobilizing and training institution professionals, seemingly with success as regards the increase in activity at different levels. Especially, the Directorate for Cultural Heritage report that they are satisfied with results and are believed to continue their efforts into 2014. The establishment of an initiative with the National Library is very promising, too.
  • What did not work: As reported in Q1, there was little success in mobilizing more participants to the Wiki Loves Monuments 2013, but too little effort was put into it. This was before we had hired staff to assist, and the WiR in charge of the project was hired much too late to make a difference to preparations. We believe this should change in 2014 as we will have hired staff for the planning period. In addition, even though we have not evaluated in detail yet, projects does seem to have less success in mobilizing editors, than in mobilizing photo donations and projects that support existing editors (scholarships, competitions, etc).

Any additional details:


Program 4

[edit]
Professionalization of Wikimedia Norway
What are the objectives of this program? Please include metrics.
  • The program should clearly increase the ability of Wikimedia Norge to attract funding, plan and conduct projects, document progress, and communicate results.
Progress against these objectives (include metrics and # of volunteers/staff involved)?
  • Wikimedia Norge has had progress towards the objectives of this program.
  • The ability to attract funding is manifested in Q1 from the FDC period, and in January the hired staff started work extensively on applications for public and charitable funds. In early 2014, the Ministry of Culture is due to open it's main state funding process related to encyclopedias. There is a budgetary allocation of NOK 1 mio (USD 900,000) to be applied for, and the Board will orchestrate applications, The Board will also apply for a new Sammi public project funding.
  • The ability to plan and conduct projects has been enhanced by hiring staff, and approving a rigorous half-year plan to operationalize projects and set measurable, 'SMART' objectives for each project. Projects have been tailored to both contribute to strategic goals (2011-15), and at the same time correspond with hired staff expertise and resources.
  • The half-year planning and the corresponding (revolving) half-year budgeting gives a new tool of measuring results and progress. However, there is still work to be done on project design and tools.
  • The ability to communicate results has been strengthened by getting on track with communication towards members and wiki communities, and by re-establishing the Facebook, Blog, and Twitter channels. Hired staff participate actively in updating social media channels.
Activities

The main activities to enhance professionalization, include:

  • Hiring 3 employees, and establishing procedures of staff management within the Board, an employment manual, signing in insurance, and establishing tax reporting.
  • Hiring an office in central Oslo, on low cost together with other NGOs, with meeting facilities, cantina and conference rooms.
  • A substantial visibility in media during Q2, on issues spanning between 'The decline of Wikipedia', 'paid editing', 'mobilizing women', and the ensuing 'quest for public funds'.
  • The board has adopted a general Employment Agreement template, a specified IT Regulation for employees, an Employment Manual, and approved employee management responsibilities.
  • External outreach included:
  • Wikipedia Academy & WLM ceremony (14/12)
  • 5 wikipedian lecturers at the GLAM sector seminar (26/11)
  • 1 Wiki Workshop with the UN Foundation (FN-Sambandet)
  • 1 Wiki workshop (external) with the Directorate for Cultural heritage.
  • Newsletters to members
  • Several media stories (media archive)
What worked and what did not?
  • What worked: Recruitment and external outreach has worked well.
  • What did not work: Recruitment of m\new members has not been prioritized enough during Q2. Employment processes and office installations have consumed much time, but this is probably worth the effort. Membership however, has clearly declined and this needs to change within soon.

Any additional details:


Lessons learned

[edit]

Lessons from this quarter

[edit]

A key objective of the funding is to enable the movement as a whole to understand how to achieve shared goals better and faster. An important way of doing this is to identify lessons learned from entities who receive funds, and to share these lessons across the movement. The purpose of this section is to elicit some of these insights, which will be shared throughout the movement. Please answer the following questions in 1–2 paragraphs each.

What were your major accomplishments in the past quarter, and how did you help to achieve movement goals?

  • A smooth recruitment process, hiring in 3 able employees for full/part-time employment with targeted program management.
  • Wikipedia entries default at the Digital Museum, the national interface for museum artifacts and repositories in Norway. Long-term achievement.
  • Operationalized dialogue with the National Library of Norway, a cournerstone institution with a vast repository of data and materials.
  • A smooth and targeted half-year planning process, providing employees with SMART objectives and operational tasks.
  • A very positive attitude and sentiment towards Wikipedia in the GLAM sector, with a 'self-propelling' growth of initiatives.

What were your major setbacks in the past quarter (e.g., programs that were not successful)?

  • The major setback is the decline in editing participation at the Bokmaal Wikipedia, and the decline in the number of new editors.
  • Similarly, there seems to be some fatigue and deterioration in the motivation and communal spirit among many admins and project veterans.
  • Another setback (in Q1) was the modest mobilization of new photographers for the Wiki Loves Monuments, though there was limited real effort put into the planning.

What factors (organizational, environmental) enabled your success?

  • A very good relation with GLAM partners, pragmatic and flexible approach which has yielded pretty good results.
  • A long-term endurance and effort in that program, and social/professional arenas to follow up with GLAM sector staff and project leaders.
  • A close connection and affiliation between the WMNO and the local wiki communities.

What unanticipated challenges did you encounter and how did this affect what you were able to accomplish?

  • Apart from the Q1 delay in funds transfer and recruitment, there were few unanticipated challenges in Q2.

What changes might you make in executing your initiatives into the next quarter?

  • Continue along an altered strategic direction, focusing on 4 main programs that span the activities under this application, and the activities under the Strategy 2011-2015:
  1. Cooperative culture in the community - - - Stop decline in participation - - - Improve community motivation. Welcome new editors project. Social arenas to bring editors and admins together. Monthly events at for all volunteers.
  2. Broad participation objective - - - Enhance women mobilization - - - GLAM (incl female) participation. Women editing relay. Local institutions. Film projects. Recruitment films.
  3. Quality content objective - - - Best encyclopedia on all topics - - - Academia outreach effort. Targeted project / faculty project. GLAM / WiR output. Public data. Images.
  4. Northern Saami outreach - - - Separate measurable objectives - - - School outreach project to be developed. Hired staff funding.
  • While we have had much results with external partners (GLAM), we have come to realize that more needs to be done for the rank-and-file wikipedian, the admins corps, and for the retention of new editors. This will take substantial prominence and constitute a separate strategic objective in 2014.

Additional information

[edit]

Provide any other relevant information that may be helpful or relevant for the FDC (e.g., links to any media coverage, blog posts, more detailed reports, more detailed financial information).

Compliance

[edit]

Is your organization compliant with the terms outlined in the grant agreement?

[edit]

As required in the grant agreement, please report any deviations from your grant proposal here. Note that, among other things, any changes must be consistent with our WMF mission, must be for charitable purposes as defined in the grant agreement, and must otherwise comply with the grant agreement.

  • Deviations restricted to mainly abolish program 2, due to reduced funding.

Are you in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations as outlined in the grant agreement? Please answer "Yes" or "No".

  • Yes.

Are you in compliance with provisions of the United States Internal Revenue Code (“Code”), and with relevant tax laws and regulations restricting the use of the Grant funds as outlined in the grant agreement? Please answer "Yes" or "No".

  • Yes.

Signature

[edit]
Once complete, please sign below with the usual four tildes.


Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grants:APG/Proposals/2012-2013_round2/Wikimedia_Norge/Progress_report_form/Q2&oldid=15333504"