Talk:Movement Strategy/Recommendations/Iteration 1/Revenue Streams/6

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". :)

Already taking place

All of this is already happening. As far as I know, the Wikimedia Foundation, while still mostly relying on banners directly or indirectly (e.g., using contacts from past campaigns), is increasingly developing other forms of fundraising (most visibly, with the major donors for the endowment); same for Wikimedia Germany. Nobody else has access to the banners, therefore almost everything else is already on this path (although of course quantitatively it's a minor part of the funds raised). - Laurentius (talk) 21:17, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Membership

Each year, WMDE succeed to drastically increase their number of members. If I'm correct, it's donors that become members.

• Chapters who are in charge of the fundraising banner are able to drastically increase their number of members by using the donor database. Of course there are certainly other factors that explain the rise: the very good reputation of WMDE, some cultural differences between countries, etc.
• This method could be a way to collect more money for the movement. This could be a good method to fidelize donors and to increase their contributions. I don't have the data, so I may be wrong but we should study this point.

Pyb (talk) 19:15, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

From Catalan Salon

Original text here.

We are concerned about the possible conflict of interests and ethical conflicts that may arise in this type of initiative. We are also concerned that the suggested models are difficult to apply depending on which contexts or territories.