Talk:Wikimedia Chapters Association/Research/Survey 1

Active discussions


Hello, in my experience wiki tables are quite unpleasant to fill in. Would it be possible to have this in a different way? Ziko (talk) 21:20, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ziko!
I would like to keep it as easy for the questioned orgs as possible, so I would be happy even with answers in a plain text. If there is such a need, I can take my time and make the same questions in a spreadsheet. Would a Libre Office file suit or needs or rather some Google Spreadsheet (however mind that both solutions are problematic out of different reasons)?
My first choice was wikicode and meta because of 1. transparency and visibility for community/WMF/future researchers 2. we are Wikimedians after all (altough I understand that e.g. hired contractors may feel uneasy with this form).
Summing up, obtaining the results is most important for me - tell me how you would like to deliver it and I will see if I can adjust.
Best, aegis maelstrom δ 16:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Within the FDC process, it seemed that using wiki code is very uncomfortable for tables and numbers, not only for people who have less experience with it. I am also afraid that someone might come up with templates... :-) It would be the best to have a form like a Google Spreadsheet that a chapter has to fill in once a year or four times a year. Then, the information goes automatically to a suitable place. It would be great if there was an easy to use system for small updates... Ziko (talk) 12:59, 18 July 2013 (UTC)


Hi, nice initiative, indeed. Seems like a perfect fit combined with the Chapters Dialogue. One collects the numbers and the other one the stories.

I think you ask the right questions. How about adding things like

  • Number of staff, plus probably the portfolio of the staff (like how many people working in fields like Education, GLAM, Community, Copyright etc)
  • Does the chapter have an ED (and if yes, what is their name?)?
  • Does the chapter have an office (to make sure the office page here on Meta is up to date?
  • Is the chapter FDC eligible?

What do you think? Best, --Nicole Ebber (WMDE) (talk) 17:02, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello Nicole!
Thanks for the feedback, I am happy with such questions, even when they are tough to answer. :)
Number of staff, their rotation and evolution of these numbers in time - this is something I have addressed in a "governance" section. Regarding their responsibilities - I had a problem with a proper wording of this question and not being too specific. For example, when I am thinking of my medium-sized and not-really-employing Chapter, sometimes it would be hard to answer - e.g. simply describe responsibilities of e.g. office running person, participating in outreach, GLAM, conference running and supporting our stipendists activities. On the other hand it would be good to know what Chapters are hiring for and if they are hiring for some specific jobs like GLAM / Wiki Loves Monuments / ... projects.
ED - you mean Executive Director? Probably I would need to describe this position in my question and I am not sure how. Here I am lacking a qualitative research. However, you are a Chapters Dialogue person, what is more from a more mature chapter - would you give me your ideas?
Office - I know the chapters are so-soish in filling forms on Meta so I am asking this question in the end of "Finances" section. :) I would even love to being more specific, like asking for more details in terms of expenses: how big the office is, what are travel expenses etc. etc. but I found it hard to find meaningful metrics being comfortable in aswering in the same time. Again, any ideas here? :)
I hope you like the answers. If you have any farther questions and ideas, shoot! :) ANd please remember: now I want to deliver a starting point; the topic is huge and it begs for follow-ups.
Kind Regards,
aegis maelstrom δ 17:11, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
P.S. Regarding the FDC - probably the FDC will be the best source regarding eligibility - and I don't want to make the first survey too long. It is not easy to engage everyone in responding anyway.
What is more, I have added a few simple questions regarding the governance and probably this is the final version of the first survey. Several questions could go deeper, several obvious ones are not even asked - but I did not want it to be too big (even now it is hard to say how many chapters will respond). A few things hopefully I will learn from existing sources, other things will need to wait for a next iteration. It should be more than enough for one presentation anyway.
However, I am still accepting the feedback - especially if we want to gather the data seriously, in a repeated process.
aegis maelstrom δ 11:33, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I am asking myself what exactly is a "conference". Does it have to be for the general public, or a minimum number of participants etc. Are barbecues included... Ziko (talk) 14:49, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Good question, especially for the authors of dictionaries. :) In my book it would be a structured gathering of at least a few people with let's say more than one person active: so it would be more than one lecture or at least a proper panel discussion (symposium?). Here I would not count informal meet-ups to chat, grill or drink beer, and after a thought I would not count informal/semiformal edit-a-thons as well.
Regarding a number of people: normally we think of a large event, however in history e.g. Yalta Conference had 3 very important actors. :) After a hesitation I guess that a working meeting with agenda, active actors etc. like we had in London in February could do as "a conference/symposium/..." - would you agree? aegis maelstrom δ 12:35, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Google SpreadsheetEdit

Per request I have created a possibility of answering via Google Spreadsheet.

I know it is not as convienient as a regular spreadsheet software, it is not free, it is an external solution, blocked in some network environments etc. However, for many people it is easier to edit than MediaWiki (even though most of us are veteran Wikimedians) and they feel more comfortable with.

Thus in this survey you can choose which way of responding is easier for you. In the future it would be great to have only one channel to response (far less work for me :) ) so you may give your feedback what you prefer. I don't know if we find a consensus but we can try. :) aegis maelstrom δ 10:12, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Return to "Wikimedia Chapters Association/Research/Survey 1" page.