Talk:Wikimedia chapters/Plans 2011-2012

Thanks to WMHU and WMDE for adding links to their plans Melamrawy (WMF) 23:07, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Australia

The budget of Wikimedia Australia is not published on meta wiki, but is linked to a wiki where edit are not allowed. Weird way to allow the discussion :(
Could it be published on meta please ?

My main comment is that the plan only include... expenses (significant). There is no mention of where the money come from. Could we know more ? Anthere 22:51, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Non members can now edit our Wiki! ;-) To request an account, go to wmau:Special:RequestAccount. Mark Hurd, Angela and Andrew Owens are responsible for approving new accounts.

We have a large amount of the required money in the bank (wmau:File:Wikimedia Australia Financial Statement.pdf), so whatever happens we will be able to proceed with most of the items on our budget.

Over the last year we have not focused on developing other revenue streams as we were expecting the money to come from Australian donors during the 2011 fundraising agreement. Due to the WMF signalling their intention to withdraw from the 2011 fundraising agreement, and no chapters grant agreement yet, we have already decided that developing other reliable revenue streams must be a priority in the coming year. John Vandenberg 05:02, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Swiss

Ok, same problem with the swiss chapter. The program is not on meta but posted on a non editable wiki.

Similarly to Australie, I can note that there is only mention of the expenses. No mention of revenue sources. Can you tell us more about this ?

Two other points.

First is the one related to the Iolenda project. We were also contacted to join that grant request for this project. I thought that normally, a grant request made money come .... in. How come that you provisionned 10 000 CHF for it instead ? Would you get some income from that project or only expenses ?

Second is the kiwix project. I see you are planning to spend money on it. Just checking... are you sure that there is no overlap with what WMF and WM FR are planning to do ?

Anthere 23:03, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Sverige

I dropped my first question here (not sure whether it should be centralized here or not...)

Anthere 23:04, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Magyar

I dropped my first question here

Anthere 23:05, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Austria

Budget not published on meta but published on an non-editable wiki.

I found the budget and the layout of it really clear and straightforward. Great ! I loved it. Thank you for the effort at being clear and simple.

My only comment is that I would put "Project infrastructure + programming" in the management section (indirect expenses). I do not think it belong to the section it is currently under. Anthere 23:13, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Anthere,

yes, our budget is on our members wiki because that's where we have to publish things for our memebrs and where they can work on it. We might copy the current status over to Meta beginning 2012 but definitely not before our GA in December. The wiki is by the way not "non-editable" - everyone may sign up and edit the wiki after mail confirmation. You do not even need to be a member or get approval for your account.

Your comment on the project infrastructure will be forwarded to our board. --Manuel Schneider^(bla) (+/-) 05:39, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Design

+1 on the budget design. It looks so good, I want to copy it *lol* Siska.Doviana 04:15, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Wikimedia Philippines

There is no plan in this page. Anthere 19:46, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Florence. As you know, I'm in Poland. :P

Anyway, the chapter is having a meeting today. I started the page so I can receive further input on our plans for 2012 because apparently a requirement for us to earn NGO and donee institution status is something similar to your plans. I'm maintaining contact with the other members of the Board of Trustees so we can continue planning our projects for next year. (Yes, we're rushing requirements so we can file them by early next year, because any later would mean even more stringent requirements since we're over two years old.) --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 05:51, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Fundraising numbers

Hi. I'm a bit confused by the fundraising numbers, which don't always seem to tally with what's in the plans. For example, the WMUK plan is for £805,000 - which is closer to $1.2 million than $848,540. It might be a good idea to list the amounts in the local currency, the conversion ratio used, and then the total amount in USD? Thanks. Mike Peel 10:27, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the amounts should be in the currency that the chapters uses in its financial statements, and the percentage growth should be change year over year in that currency. If we want to normalise these amounts for comparison between chapters, we should use PPP. The USD amounts are less useful with the US economy the way it is. Of course the WMF wants to see USD, however this amount will need to be recalculated periodically, so I agree that we should include the conversion rate (with links like [1]?), and note when the USD amounts were last recalculated. John Vandenberg 05:22, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Apologies for the late reply. Let me check the exact conversion rates and add them to the table for better clarity. Thanks! Melamrawy (WMF) 23:12, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Moushira. Do you have an eta for when you can update the table with the conversion rates that were used? It would be good to get this sorted out prior to the start of the fundraiser... Thanks. Mike Peel 22:02, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

France

I am really starting to get confused by the table on this page as compared to the French programme plan (not sure the numbers are correct in the case of the others, either).

If the table on this page is correct France has raised around $700k in total in 2010, out of which $350k went to the WMF and WM Fr; this year WM Fr would like to keep $770k out of which the WMF would receive $200k; making the share of the two organizations: WM FR: $550k, WMF: $200k + anything they raise above the $770k?

Also, the programme plan page lists an €780k budget, which is higher than the $780k in the table in this page – can you somehow clarify either the table on this page or the income sources on the plans page to make up for the difference?

Thanks --Dami 19:49, 16 October 2011 (UTC)