Grants:APG/Proposals/2013-2014 round2/Wikimedia Norge/Impact report form

Purpose of the report

FDC funds are allocated to improve the alignment between the Wikimedia movement's strategy and spending; support greater impact and progress towards achieving shared goals; and enable all parts of the movement to learn how to achieve shared goals better and faster.

Funding should lead to increased access to and quality of content on Wikimedia project sites – the two ultimate goals of the Wikimedia movement strategic priorities, individually and as a whole. Funded activities 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."

Each entity that receives FDC funding will need to complete this report, which seeks to determine how the funding received by the entity is leading towards these goals. The information you provide will help us to:

• Identify lessons learned, in terms of both what the entity learned that could benefit the broader movement, and how the entity used movement-wide best practices to accomplish its stated objectives.
• Assess the performance of the entity over the course of the funded period against the stated objectives in the entity's annual plan.
• Ensure accountability over how the money was spent. The FDC distributes "general funds", for both ongoing and programmatic expenses; these funds can be spent as the entity best sees fit to accomplish its stated goals. Therefore, although line-item expenses are not expected to be exactly as outlined in the entity's proposal, the FDC wants to ensure that money was spent in a way that led to movement goals.

For more information, please review FDC portal/Reporting requirements or reference your entity's grant agreement.

Basic entity information

Note you can copy this from your recent progress report if the information is the same.

Table 1

Entity information	Legal name of entity	Wikimedia Norge
	Entity's fiscal year (mm/dd–mm/dd)	01/01-12/31 and 07/01-06/30
	12 month timeframe of funds awarded (mm/dd/yy-mm/dd/yy)	07/01/14-06/30/15
Contact information (primary)	Primary contact name	Hogne Neteland
	Primary contact position in entity	Chairman
	Primary contact username	Hogne
	Primary contact email	hogne(a)wikimedia.no
Contact information (secondary)	Secondary contact name	Astrid Carlsen
	Secondary contact position in entity	Executive Director
	Secondary contact username	WMNOastrid
	Secondary contact email	astrid(a)wikimedia.no

Overview of the past year

The purpose of this section is to provide a brief overview of this report. Please use no more than 2–3 paragraphs to address the questions outlined below. You will have an opportunity to address these questions in detail elsewhere in this report. Also, we encourage you to share photographs, videos, and sound files in this report to make it more interactive, and include links to reports, blog posts, plans, etc as these will add context for the readers.

• HIGHLIGHTS: What were 2–3 important highlights of the past year? (These may include successes, challenges, lessons learned. Please note which you are describing)
• SWOT: Reflecting on the context outlined for your entity in the FDC proposal, what were some of the contextual elements that either enabled or inhibited the plan? Feel free to include factors unanticipated in the proposal.
  • Strengths: Organizational strengths that enabled the plan
  • Weaknesses: Organizational weaknesses that inhibited the plan
  • Opportunities: External opportunities that enabled the plan
  • Threats: Risks or threats that inhibited the plan
• WIKI-FOCUS: What Wikimedia projects was your entity focused on (e.g., Wiki Commons, French Wiktionary) this year?
• GROWTH: How did your entity grow over the past year (e.g., Number of active editors reached/involved/added, number of articles created, number of events held, number of partipants reached through workshops)? And what were the long term affects of this growth (e.g. relationships with new editors, more returned editors, higher quality articles, etc)?

Response:

• HIGHLIGHTS:

Illustration of bowl cut used on Bokmål, Spanish and French Wikipedia. One of the 84 illustrations by Oslo National Academy students made in the Wikipedia workshop.

• Success: Receiving funding from 3 different Norwegian foundations, enabling us to expand our effort to increase the number of female university students editing Wikipedia and buying much needed technical equipment. Total sum of funding was 306,000 NOK.
  
• Success: Collaboration with the Oslo National Academy of the Arts were we helped put together a 2 day workshop on making illustrations for Wikipedia. 84 illustrations were made by the students.
  
• Challenge: With organizational changes in Wikimedia Norge during 3 and 4 quarter it has been a challenge to find a balance between governance issues that needed to be addressed and our program work.
  
• Lessons learned: Division of tasks and responsibilities: To prevent burn out and secure good governance Wikimedia Norge has made several organizational changes this last year.

• SWOT:
  • Strengths: High value partners. Small organization that are highly responsive.
  • Weaknesses: Small organization that is not capable to fulfill all requirements. No links to the top management in the Norwegian academy.
  • Opportunities: Several public, academic and busyness partners wants our help to present their perspective in Wikipedia and want to do projects with WMNO. A lot of quality writers are potential Wikipedia contributers.
  • Threats: Decline in contributers and in reader statistic. Economic challenges.
• WIKI-FOCUS: Wikipedia (Bokmål), Wikipedia (Nynorsk), Wikipedia (Northern Saami) and Wikimedia Commons.
• GROWTH:

The number of wikipedians and edits per capita in Norway is still high, only comparable to countries like Israel, Estonia, and Iceland, and far above that of the large language communities. Every month, there are 1500 editors making changes to the Wikipedia in Norway, with 10-15 % of these wikipedians at the Nynorsk version and the rest at Bokmål. As of this writing (28. Sept. 2015) there are 1508 at Norwegian Bokmål, 176 at Norwegian Nynorsk, and 18 at the Sami Wikipedia which has virtually no edits anymore.

In 2015 The Wikipedia versions in Norway witnessed a continued slight drop and stagnation for some of the cohorts. For example in August 2015 there were 354 contributers with more than 5 edits at Norwegian Bokmål [1] and 36 contributors with the same amount of contributions at Norwegian Nynorsk. In August 2009 the number was 648 and 52, giving a decline in contribution by 45% and 31%.

Those numbers are somewhat scary, but looking closer it is clear that the situation is about to change. The provided graphs shows that the drop for contributors with more than 100 edits for both Norwegian Bokmål and Nynorsk has stopped and is about to settle at a new lower level. We think that the drop can be attributed to two major effects, one is people leaving the project but another is people that starts to contribute at Wikidata. At Norwegian Nynorsk it is clear that something happen when Wikidata went active, which may indicate that those people didn't leave Wikimedia but only started to contribute in another project.

There are indications that some of the drop at Norwegian Nynorsk Wikipdia is in fact IW-bots stopping their edits, but we have no hard facts on this. It could be interesting if WMF could produce some numbers on the impact of the IW-bots, and how that changed with Wikidata.

New users with edits drops more than the contributors with more than 5 edits, and this indicates that we are also hit by some other effect. We guess that one of the effects is an increased amount of contributions on social media like Facebook. That uses a considerable amount of peoples spare time, creating a ripple effect into Wikipedia. People in Norway use social media a lot, to a level where analysts starts to question if this has impact on the newspapers ad revenue.

If we reads the graphs a bit speculative it seems like the contributors with 5 edits or more is about to flatten the same way the graph for contributors with 100 edits or more did. That graph has an influx of contributors from the new ones, and as long as that falls the 5 edits will fall too, and for now it does not seem to slow down.

Wikipedia has also declined in the reader statistic. At Alexa Wikipeda number 8 in the list of most visited sites in Norway. The decline can be partly explained by the change Google did by presenting more of the Wikipedia article in the search page, partly by the increased time people are using on social media, and partly on efforts made by an alternate encyclopedia to take market shares. The change Google made has an overall effect on all projects, and the only way we may counteract that is to make our pages more attractive both when it comes to content and style. The effect from social media is hard to counteract, but perhaps we can interface better to route back some traffic. The local encyclopedia en:Store norske leksikon, which is really an old paper-based encyclopedia, has redesigned and focused their effort and is now becoming a real contender in the Norwegian market. Estimates shows that they have about or slightly more than 10% of the market Wikipedia had previously.

2003-2015: Edits on Nynorsk, Bokmål and Nordsamisk Wikipedia The following graphs shows the statistics, but processed and visualized to clarify the trends. The blue lines shows the numbers "as is" from from the stats. The red line shows the 12 month moving average, taken from the previous 12 months. The yellow line shows a 12 month difference over the 12 month moving average. Because we use a moving average taken from the previous 12 months, the effects seems to be delayed and smoothed. This is as expected, and can be interpreted as an increased confidence in the numbers.

• 
  Users with more than 5 edits, Nynorsk Wikipedia.
• 
  Users with more than 100 edits, Nynorsk Wikipedia.
• 
  Edits per article, Nynorsk Wikipedia.
• 
  Edits per day, Nynorsk Wikipedia.
• 
  New users with edits, Nynorsk Wikipedia.

Norwegian Nynorsk Wikipedia the smaller of the two Norwegian projects. Important thing to note is the drop for contributors with more than 100 edits that starts in the spring 2013. We think this can be attributed to Wikidata, and the IW-bots stopping maintenance of the IW-links.

• 
  Users with more than 5 edits, Bokmål Wikipedia.
• 
  Users with more than 100 edits, Bokmål Wikipedia.
• 
  Edits per article, Bokmål Wikipedia.
• 
  Edits per day, Bokmål Wikipedia.
• 
  New users with edits, Bokmål Wikipedia.

Norwegian Bokmål Wikipedia the larger of the two Norwegian projects. As this project is larger the effect of IW-bots leaving isn't that visible. At the same time there were courses held in Norway that created some contributions, and this smears the drop out over a longer time. Still the drop is very large. An important thing to note is that the drop seems to have stopped and the graph for contributors with 100 edits or more is about to settle on a new level.

• 
  Users with more than 5 edits, Nordsamisk Wikipedia.
• 
  Users with more than 100 edits, Nordsamisk Wikipedia.
• 
  Edits per article, Nordsamisk Wikipedia.
• 
  Edits per day, Nordsamisk Wikipedia.
• 
  New users with edits, Nordsamisk Wikipedia.

Northern Sami Wikipedia which is the smallest project within our area. As seen from the daily contributions the edits have died away the last two years. It is not obvious how this project can be revitalized.

Financial summary

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."

If you'd prefer to share a budget created in Google or another tool and import it to wiki, you can do so in the tables below instead of using wiki tables. You can link to an external document, but we ask that you do include a table in this form. We are testing this approach in this form.

Revenues

Provide exchange rate used:

• Originally: USD = 6 NOK
• Q2, Q3 and Q4: USD = 7 NOK

• Wikimedia Norge changed to a new accounting system during August and September 2015. Because of this some of the numbers reported here may change. Some numbers from expenses Q1-Q3 are missing. Our auditor will make the financial statement by October 28, when the financial statement is due, so any errors will be sorted by then.

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
Membership fees	NOK	20,000	100	0	2,450	7,668	10,218	3,333	1,460
Gifts from individuals	NOK	15,000	1,682	1,698	1,320	0	4,700	2,500	671	Only individuals
Event support and fees	NOK	55,000	0	1,800	400	0	2,200	9,166	315	See below
Sales revenues	NOK	10,000	0	0	0	0	0	1,666	0
FDC funds from WMF	NOK	1,400,000	213,025	373,510	313,296	500,169	1,400,000	215,000	200 000
Saami project funding	NOK	750,000	0	0	0	0	0	125,000	0	No program applied for.
State project funding	NOK	250,000	0	0	0	0	0	41,666	0	Main application (Summer) was rejected by the State
Charitable projects funding	NOK	0	0	0	175,000	0	175,000	0	25,000	Q3: Awarded 100,000 from "Fritt Ord" and 150,00 from "Finansmarkedsfondet" of which 75,000 will be paid out when the project end, Q3 2016.
Saami project funding	NOK	750,000	0	0	0	0	0	125,000	0	No program applied for.
Prizes	NOK		1,000	2,000	3,000	2,000	8,000		1,143	Prizes (editing contests) sponsored from our main partners
Food	NOK		2,000	2,000	2,000	1,000	7,000		1,000	Food from GLAM partners at events
Venues: wiki workshops and wiki meetups	NOK		7,000	5,000	4,000	10,000	26,000		3,714	Rent covered by partners
Video Screen from Frivillighetshuset	NOK	0				250,000	250,000		35,714	We received one video screen from Frivillighetshuset, where our office is.
Total Revenues	NOK	2,500,000	224,807	386,008	501,466	770,837	1,883,118	398,331	269,017	State funding was rejected. Charitable funding awarded.

* Provide estimates in US Dollars

Spending

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
Personnel cost	NOK	1,010,000	154,181	261,765	250,107	158,285	824,338	155,385	117,763	76 %	Costs were reduced due to one staff member on furlough June 2015 and one staff member left 31. May
Office costs	NOK	100,000	40,880	0	25,587	21,705	88,172	15,385	12,596	82 %	On budget
Wikipedia Academy	NOK	70,000	0	0	0	50,000	50,000	10,000	7,143	71 %	All costs accrue in Q4. Partners sponsored some of the arrangement.
Other rental and meeting costs	NOK	30,000	6,542	40,779	6,261	0	53,582	4,500	7,655	170 %	This post is slightly re-classified since Q2, to apply more correctly to actual cost items.
IT, postal, etc	NOK	5,000	907	1,092	134	6,115	8,248	800	1,178	147 %
Accounting, auditing	NOK	40,000	0	20,000	7,500	54,750	82,250	6,000	11,750	196 %	Outside accountant started May 2015. This was a requirement from FDC accepted by WMNO during the budget period.
Membership fees	NOK	2,000	0	0	0	0	0	325	0	0 %	May accrue later
Nordic activities	NOK	5,000	0	0	0	0	0	750	0	0 %	Wikimaps costs not accrued
Program activities	NOK	50,000	0	0	19,630	0	19,630	7,500	2,804	37 %	Film production + Regional outreach costs.
Travelling cost	NOK	75,000	10,315	18,783	12,235	13,267	54,600	11,500	7,800	68 %
Meals, HR costs, etc	NOK	5,000	0	7,679	1,160	6,075	14,914		2,131	n.a.	Q1-Q3 = Meetings among staff Q4=Staff and outside meetings
Competition prizes	NOK	30,000	0	24,427	1654	578	26,659	4,500	3,808	85 %	Editing contets' prizes and WLM 2014.
Saami Project	NOK	750,000	0	0	0	0	0	107,100	0	0.0 %	Not funded
State funded projects	NOK	25,000	0	0	0	0	0	3,850	0	0.0 %	Not funded
Bank fees and other costs	NOK	5,000	731	1,280	1,094	9,246	12,351	750	1,764	235 %	Bank fees for integration of the accountant.
TOTAL	NOK	2,467,000	213,556	375,805	325,362	320,021	1,234,744	379,500	176,392		See notes above

* Provide estimates in US Dollars

Progress against past year's goals/objectives

The FDC needs to understand the impact of the initiatives your entity has implemented over the past year. Because the FDC distributes general funds, entities are not required to implement the exact initiatives proposed in the FDC proposal; the FDC expects each entity to spend money in the way it best sees fit to achieve its goals and those of the movement. However, please point out any significant changes from the original proposal, and the reasons for the 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."

Program 1

A qualitative improvement of Wikipedia

What were the stated objectives of this program? Please use SMART criteria to explain these goals.

Stated objectives of this program	Progress	Comment
Develop the ongoing co-operation with at least 3 GLAM institutions		3/3
Develop new co-operations with at least 2 new GLAM institutions		2/2
Support at least 2 institutions and/or organisations in mass uploading image collections		3/2
Produce a tutorial video for new Wikipedia editors		5/1
Conclude at least 5 agreements for Fall 2015 editing training of female students, in co-operation with campus libraries		9/5
Produce a template for improving core (lemma) articles, in co-operation with the volunteer community		0/0

What is your progress against these objectives? (Include metrics and number of volunteers/staff involved.)

Develop the ongoing co-operation with at least 3 GLAM institutions

Wikimedia Norge has developed it´s partnerships with The National Library, The Directorate of Cultural Heritage and The National Archives.

The Directorate for Cultural Heritage has for several years supported the Wikipedia community. Wikimedia Norway has been a valuable partner to us, and in 2015 we co-hosted a Commons Workshop on GLAM mass uploads, and also an open seminar on World War II Cultural Heritage in the Digital Era. 25. September 2015, Håkon Magne Bjerkan, The Directorate for Cultural Heritage

• Community activities: Wiki meetups at The National Library, guided tours at the National Archives for community members, editing content with prizes sponsored from these partners
• Wikimedia Commons-seminar in April at the National Library. Organized together with the Directorate for Cultural Heritage and The National Library. Participants from The Technical Museum in Oslo and The National Archive. Blog post was shared by many, on example
• Open seminar on World War II Cultural Heritage in the Digital Era in June. Blog post This blog post was shared by the other organizers as well.
• Wikipedia-akademiet 2015 took place at the University of Tromsø 23-.24. April. Homepage for the academy

Participants at the Wikipedia-academy 2015 in Tromsø

Topic of the academy: Wikipedia as the extended library. Program and speakers
Organizers: Board members Wikimedia Norge, Trond Trosterud and Harald Groven, staff Wikimedia Norge, Astrid Carlsen, and Philipp Conzett from University of Tromsø. Speakers included representatives from The National Library, Nordlandsmuseet, Wikimedia Sverige. Wikipedians could apply for reimbursement of travel expenses announced at the village pump. One did, but could not attend because of work.

All drafts for presentations at the academy were peer reviewed and all presenters have been invited to publish their articles in the scientific open access journal Nordlit in 2016. A edition concentrating on Wikipedia will be published in 2016 with Wikimedia board member and professor at the University of Tromsø, Trond Trosterud, and Philipp Conzett from the University of Tromsø as guest editors.

Develop new co-operations with at least 2 new GLAM institutions

Wikimedia Norge has developed new collaborations with two GLAM institutions outside Oslo, Nordlandsmuseet and The NTNU Unversity Museum. In November and December we organized Wikimedia Commons seminars at both institutions together with the Arts Council of Norway. We have applied for funding from The Arts Council in collaboration with both institutions A representative from the Nordlandsmuseet was one of the speakers at the Wikipedia academy in Tromsø Nordlandsmuseet has uploaded approx. 2000 images to Wikimedia Commons with help from The National Library.

A representative from The NTNU University Museum, Tove Eivindsen, was elected board member at the general assembly in April 2015.

Support at least 2 institutions and/or organisations in mass uploading image collections Many of our GLAM activities are not directly organized by Wikimedia Norge, but are rather activities where our partners themselves take the initiative. These activities may often be traced back to talks, meeting or events where Wikimedia Norge took initiative. Wikimedia Norge´s role is to connect for example the person at the National Library who can help the Nordlandsmuseet or others to do mass uploading.

• The National Library: Uploaded 20,285 images in total: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Images_from_Nasjonalbiblioteket. Immigration of photos NB
• Nordlansmuseet: 2271

One of the first images upload from the Finn Bergan collection from the Norwegian Museum of Science and Technology by Nasjonalbibliotketet-bot/teknisk museum

• The Norwegian Museum of Science and Technology er i gang med hjelp av Nasjonalbiblioteket: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Files_uploaded_by_Nasjonalbiblioteket-bot/teknisk_museum

More info: http://www.tekniskmuseum.no/besok-oss/nyheter/1050-fotoskatt-blir-stor-folkegave

Produce a tutorial video for new Wikipedia editors

• 5 videos were produced by employee Tor Arne Bjerke: https://vimeo.com/channels/wikipedia. A community member participated in all 5 videos as the presenter.

Conclude at least 5 agreements for Fall 2015 editing training of female students, in co-operation with campus libraries.

• This fall we will hold 9 editing workshops and one full-day seminar to train Wikipedia-trainers.

21 people attended the four workshops this spring, even though the number people who had signed up were twice as many. All participants have been emailed after the classes with tips on how to continue their editing. They will also be invited to a full day workshop in November 2015. Arranging this type of workshop was new to us, both in terms of the collaboration with university libraries and having all female courses. Also, we were not sure how to do a good measurement of results, and also felt somewhat uncomfortable surveilling the user names.

Getting participants for the workshops was much more work than we had expected. We learned that we are absolutely dependent on the libraries engaging themselves in promoting the workshops. Also, we tried to invite the libraries to have one of their own employees to talk about source criticism in the beginning of the workshop, but it varied a lot on how well this worked out - all depending on the person’s knowledge and awareness of the Wikipedia system.

At the end of the semester, on November 7th, we will invite participants from all of the workshops to a full day “Train the trainers”-workshop, where they will get more Wikipedia knowledge and also will be given tips on how to arrange their own editing workshops. We have set up a wiki page for the participants, where they are asked to register, and where we also will gather the most important how to-guides and information on who to contact if they have questions.

Produce a template for improving core (lemma) articles, in co-operation with the volunteer community

• We have not started this project.

Which Wikimedia movement strategic priority (or priorities) did this program address and how?

• Improve quality by working together with GLAM partners and university libraries

What key activities were conducted and/or milestones achieved with this program?

• We have achieved making a good network among our main GLAM partners for regular meetings, exchange of ideas and planning of events.

If your entity did not achieve the desired objectives, why not? If it did, what enabled this? If the initiative was not in your plan, why did you pursue it?

What have enabled our plan is much due to the Arts Council Norway collaboration project with Wikimedia Norway from 2012 to 2014. This is how the Arts Counsil sums up the intention with the collaboration:

Arts Council Norway ran a collaboration project with Wikimedia Norway from 2012 to 2014 to get the professionals in the archive, museum and gallery sectors to use and contribute to Wikipedia. For us as a governmental agency, we found it important to endorse Wikipedia and to build trust within the sectors towards Wikipedia as a movement and as a platform for knowledge sharing. Tom Klev, special adviser, Arts Counsil Norway (18. September 2015)

This project may not have resulted in that many new editors from GLAMs in Norway, but this project has made many GLAMs in Norway positive to sharing cultural data on Wikipedia. The discussion we have with GLAMs are more concentrated on HOW then WHY.

More about the project: http://www.kulturradet.no/wikipedia
Film made by Arts Council Norway about cultural heritage on Wikipedia: https://vimeo.com/96640386
One of the articles mentioned in the film is this: https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_mortem-portrett

Any additional details:

Program 2

A visible advocate for free knowledge

What were the stated objectives of this program? Please use SMART criteria to explain these goals.

Stated objectives of this program	Progress	Comment
Stage at least one open editing workshop or seminar every month		17/12
Reply to any relevant public hearings		1 relevant rearing
Publish opinion pieces on free knowledge in the media		0/0
Take an active role in public debates regarding core issues		0/0
Update the WMNO blog regularly		10 post. Not updated June-August 2015
Update WMNO Facebook and twitter accounts regularly		Not updated June-August 2015
Submit postings to the WMF blog at least every quarter		3/4

What is your progress against these objectives? (Include metrics and number of volunteers/staff involved.)

Stage at least one open editing workshop or seminar every month

Bente Eriksen, director at the Nobel Peace Center, and Astrid Carlsen, Wikimedia Norge

• Editathon Nobel Peace Center: Fall 2014
• Seminars Wikimedia Commons: 3x. Fall 2014: NTNU University Museum, Nordlandsmuseet. Spring 2015: Wikimedia Commons seminar at The National Library
• The Wikipedia-academy: Spring 2015. Call for papers
• Open 2 day seminar about 2. world war at the Directorate of Cultural Heritage. Organized by Wikimedia Norge, The National Archive, The Directorate of Cultural Heritage.
• Wiki meet ups at The National Library. 3x fall 2014 and 3x spring 2015. All meet ups are announced at the homepage of The National Library as well as Wikimedia Norge.

One of the participants at the women editing relay and staff Jorid Martinsen

• Female editing workshops: 4x. Spring 2015. Blog post
• Seminar about gender gap at The House of Literature: Fall 2014. Blog post about the open seminar. Organized by staff, several community members and GLAM partners participated.

All events organized by staff and partners and / or community members together. Community members took part as presenters and/ or participants at all events.

Reply to any relevant public hearings
Open Government Partnership (OGP) hearing.

Publish opinion pieces on free knowledge in the media
Staff has not had time to do this.

Take an active role in public debates regarding core issues
Staff has not had time to do this.

Update the WMNO blog regularly

• Blog posts published fall 2014: 5 x
• Blog posts published spring 2015: 5 x

Update WMNO Facebook and twitter accounts regularly
Facebook and Twitter are updated reguarly. We mainly reach institutions and people outside the community by using social media. Facebook: 1504 likes Twitter: 1117 followers

Submit postings to the WMF blog at least every quarter
3 post has been submitted.

Which Wikimedia movement strategic priority (or priorities) did this program address and how?

• Improve quality by working together with GLAM partners
• Increase reach by taking part in public discussions and by using social media

What key activities were conducted and/or milestones achieved with this program?

• Wikimedia Norge has organized many events this last year. A milestone reached was conducting a big event with our main GLAM partners in June 2015.

If your entity did not achieve the desired objectives, why not? If it did, what enabled this? If the initiative was not in your plan, why did you pursue it?

• It is obvious that this last year a lot of hours have been put into events and not to do work related to advocacy.

Any additional details:

Program 3

Professionalization of Wikimedia Norge

What were the stated objectives of this program? Please use SMART criteria to explain these goals.

Stated objectives of this program	Progress	Comment
Apply for project grants in cooperation with other institutions or organizations		2/2
Apply for public funds for the purposes of knowledge or language efforts		1/1
Apply for project funding from "Fritt Ord" and other relevant foundations		03/3
Recruit board members from external organizations		1/1
Propose new bylaw elements designed to achieve gender balance in the board, for the 2015 Annual Assembly		Not done, but gender balance achieved
Enhance the technical skills of the WMNO office staff

What is your progress against these objectives? (Include metrics and number of volunteers/staff involved.)

Apply for project grants in cooperation with other institutions or organizations

• Staff applied for 2 project grants from The Arts Counsil Norway together with Nordlandsmuseet (spring 2015) and NTNU University Museum (Fall 2014). Unfortunately, we were not successful this time.

Apply for public funds for the purposes of knowledge or language efforts
Board members and staff applied for state funding for language efforts August 2014. The application was rejected.

Apply for project funding from "Fritt Ord" and other relevant foundations

Jorid Martinsen and Åsa P. Gulbrandsen preparing editing training at a university library

• Staff has applied for funding from the foundations Fritt Ord (100 000 NKR), Finansmarkedsfondet (150 000 NKR) and NUUG Foundation (56 000). All three applications were accepted.
• Both Fritt Ord and Finansmarkedfondet have given funding for our gender gap project. The funding made it possible to hire Åsa P. Gulbrandsen to take part at the different editing trainings at university libraries. She has plenty of organizational experience which is very useful for Wikimedia Norge. Blog post
• NUUG Foundation has given us funding to buy technical equipment.

From left: Trond Trosterud, board treasurer and Guro Faller, vice chair, Wikimedia Norge and Garfield Byrd, Wikimedia Foundation

Recruit board members from external organizations
One board member elected at the annual assembly was Tove Eivindsen who works at NTNU University Museum.

Propose new bylaw elements designed to achieve gender balance in the board, for the 2015 Annual Assembly
New bylaws was not proposed to the Annual Assembly, but staff was given the chance to work with the Audit- and election committee in proposing candidates for the board. We concentrated on finding female candidates.

• Gender balance board: Female: 3 Male: 4
• Gender balance Election- and audit committee: Male: 3
• Gender balance staff, 1,5 FTP: Female 3
• Gender balance interns: Female: 1 Tanja Lundqvist Male: 1 Johan A.S. Jørgensen
  

Total: Female: 7 Male: 8

Enhance the technical skills of the WMNO office staff
In October-November 2014 the board had some suggestions on how to do this, but the plans had to be cancelled since there was no money in our budget for this plan.

Which Wikimedia movement strategic priority (or priorities) did this program address and how?

• Stabilize infrastructure by getting funding and through funding expand public awareness and focus on diversity (skills and gender) in our board

What key activities were conducted and/or milestones achieved with this program?

• External funding was awarded and the the gender imbalance in the board was improved

If your entity did not achieve the desired objectives, why not? If it did, what enabled this? If the initiative was not in your plan, why did you pursue it?

Any additional details:

Program 4

A transparent and inclusive organization

What were the stated objectives of this program? Please use SMART criteria to explain these goals.

Stated objectives of this program	Progress	Comment
In institutional co-operations, the volunteer community should always be invited to take part
Implement predictable routines for staff, board members, members, and volunteers
Publish Board minutes immediately after each board meeting
Publish documents, information about the organization's work, and accounting, on the WMNO website
Focus on efforts and co-operations that can not be performed by the volunteer community itself

What is your progress against these objectives? (Include metrics and number of volunteers/staff involved.)

In institutional co-operations, the volunteer community should always be invited to take part

Staff uses the village pump to ask for advice, ask for participants before events and to follow up meetings

Implement predictable routines for staff, board members, members, and volunteers From December 2014 - June 2015 this has been a main issue for Wikimedia Norge

• Wikimedia Norge now has an outside accountant
• A new accounting system
• Staff has new long term contracts
• Staff has written job descriptions

There is now a system in place for more predictable routines for staff and board members, but yet to be addressed is redictable routines for members and volunteers.

Publish Board minutes immediately after each board meeting

This is always done by the board and published here.

Publish documents, information about the organization's work, and accounting, on the WMNO website

Intern Melinda Leung from Karlstad University

This has only been done to some extent and Wikimedia Norge has been criticized by the community because of this. We are now redoing the WMNO website, with help from an intern this fall.

Focus on efforts and co-operations that can not be performed by the volunteer community itself

Wikimedia Norge focus on building partnerships that can not be done on a voluntarily basis. We have received positive feedback from the community that we concentrate on this. But we do struggle at times to engage community members in our partnerships. It could be that we have focused to much on offline work (events) and that we should concentrate more on work online.

Which Wikimedia movement strategic priority (or priorities) did this program address and how?

• Stabilize infrastructure of Wikimedia Norge by building a system where the organization has a necessary governance infrastructure in place
• Increase reach by focusing on working together and for the community and involve community members from the start when we plan projects or outreach.

What key activities were conducted and/or milestones achieved with this program?

• By using the village pump staff is slowly getting to know more community members
• Staff signing new long term contracts, and signing a contract with an outside accountant

If your entity did not achieve the desired objectives, why not? If it did, what enabled this? If the initiative was not in your plan, why did you pursue it?

• Reorganiztion of Wikimedia Norge helped push changes through.

Any additional details:

Lessons learned

Lessons from the past

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 and insights from entities who receive funds, and to share these lessons across the movement. Please answer the following questions in 1–2 paragraphs each.

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

• We have developed our GLAM partnerships focusing on improving quality.
• We have gained publicity and funding for our gender gap project. The project focus on improving quality by getting more female editors to share their knowledge on Wikipedia.

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

• The first 4 goals under program 2 were to ambitious for the staff to achieve

3. What factors (organizational, environmental) enabled your success?

Wiki workshop at The National Library, organized together with staff from the library

• The library sector in Norway has turned out to be a very welcoming partner for Wikimedia Norge.
• The Arts Counsil Norway´s Wikipedia project from 2012-2014.
• The reorganization of Wikimedia Norge and and getting an outside accountant has helped staff to work more efficient

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

• Wikimedia Norge has had many governance issues to address tis last year. This was time consuming for board and staff, especially from December 2014-June 2015
• One employee left 31. May an another was on furlough in June 2015. This delayed The Wikipedia Library project In Norway which was suppose to start in June and Wikimedia Norge was not present at other events we had planned together with GLAM partners. The first meeting was held in August 2015.

5. What are the 2–3 most important lessons that other entities can learn from your experience? Consider learning from both the programmatic and institutional (what you have learned about professionalizing your entity, if you have done so) points of view.

• Division of duties between board and staff is essential
• If you are a small organizations, concentrate on few partners that you know are positive to a collaboration
• Define what you what to achieve with organizing events. They always take more time to plan and organize then we think

Lessons for the future

The Wikimedia movement grows as each entity in the movement reflects and adapts its approaches to changing needs and contexts. The questions below encourage you to apply your thinking in the sections above of "how well have we done" and "what have we learned" to the development and execution of future organisational and program strategies. The questions below can be informed both by your own entities' learnings, as well as the learnings of other movement entities (e.g., adding a new program that appears to have caused significant impact in several other countries or communities).

1. What organisational or program strategies would you continue?

• Program 1: Focus on few partners and build connections between these partners. Any new partners should "fit in" with existing partners
• Program 4: Maintain and secure new system for division of duties in Wikimedia Norge

2. What might you change in organisational and program strategies in order to improve the effectiveness of your entity?

• Fewer events and make sure most events include more than one partner
• Wikimedia Norge has until now often not planned how / when / if we can collect data from our program work in order to report on global metrics. For this falls visits to univeristy libraries we have set up this page to do so and to give the participants a place to connect. This page has been helpful in gaining better understanding of what Wikimedia Foundation means by global metrics.

3. Please create at least one learning pattern from your entity's experiences this year and link to it here.

• Learning pattern: Beeing the connector between GLAM partners and community

Stories of success and challenge

Of all the accomplishments highlighted through this report, please share two detailed stories: one story of a success and one story of a challenge that your entity experienced over the past year in a few paragraphs each. Provide any details that might be helpful to others in the movement on the context, strategy, and impact of this initiative. We suggest you write this as you would tell a story to a friend or colleague. Please refrain from using bullet points or making a list, and rather focus on telling us about your organization's experience.

Case study: Immigration of photos - How did the photo of Sir John Benjamin Stone escape from the Nansen collection at The National Library?

Sir John Benjamin Stone, a British Conservative politician, and noted photographer.

This is a story about how photos can immigrate. If images are shared and can be used by everyone they can immigrate. The National Library holds the Nansen collection. This is a collection of photos mostly of the explorer Fridjof Nansen, his family and his travels to Russia and the polar regions. And a photo of Sir John Benjamin Stone (9 February 1838 – 2 July 1914), known as Benjamin, a British Conservative politician, and noted photographer. He was the major of Sutton Coldfield outside Birmingham. The photo of Sir John (from a business card) somehow ended up in the Nansen collection. Now one would have looked for him there. 2 weeks after the photo was uploaded to Wikimedia Commons it was cropped and used in this article on English Wikipedia. We think it is a good story on how images can come alive again, and has used this story as an example in an article we have written this fall for the Norwegian Union of Librarians´ journal about why librarians and wikipedians like each other so much.

Case study: challenge: Transition from a working board to having staff

This last year there has been many organizational changes in Wikimedia Norge. We have a new chair and vice chair, new board members, one staff member was made ED, another staff member left in May and we have one new staff member financed by Norwegian funding. Spring 2015 we also had to interns joining us at the office. In the transition from a working board to having staff these changes were necessary and we have had many discussions on the divisions of duties between board and staff. This discussions started in December 2014 and took more or less place until June 2015 when staff signed new contracts and detailed job descriptions. During spring staff, in agreement with the board, could start the search for an outside accountant. We hope that the systems we now have build will secure good governance and.

During the last 6 Months it has been important for us to talk to other chapters, staff at Wikimedia Foundation and our neighbor organizations in Frivillighetshuset. The issues discussed in Wikimedia Norge are the same as so many other organizations and just from talking to our neighbors we found a very skilled outside accountant and suggestions for new board members. These learning patterns have also been useful for Wikimedia Norge: Divisions of tasks and responsibilities between board, staff and volunteers and Governance Codex The Governance Codex we used as a starting point for discussions in December and it helped get many issues on the table.

Additional learning

1. What are some of the activities that are happening in your community that are not chapter-led? What are the most successful among these, and why?

• Community (wikipedians): Editing contests. The weekly editing contest runs on bokmål, nynorsk and nordsamisk Wikipedia. Organized week to week by community members, and from time to time by staff and then with prizes sponsored or paid for by Wikimedia Norge. The Norwegian community member who did the UKbot also helped Finnish Wikipedia set up a Finnish version of the weekly editing contest. Metrics from editing contests from week 27 2014 - week 26 2015 (thanks to Danmichaelo):
• 2,417 new articles
• 312,822 new words
• 11,202 sources added
• Community (partners): Both at the National Archive and The Directorate of Cultural Heritage they have editing groups that meet on a regulary basis. This show commitment to doing Wikipedia related work during working hours. Discussions around mass uploading of pictures is often made directly between The National Library and other institutions after Wikimedia Norge has made introductions. The new government strategy for libraries in Norway is very strong on digitaliztion and access and is a strong indicator for a continued collaboration between Wikimedia Norge and The National Library.

2. Provide any links to any media coverage, blog posts, more detailed reports, more detailed financial information that you haven't already, as well as at least one photograph or video that captures the impact your entity had this past year.

One of the illustrations made at a 2 day workshop at Oslo National Academy of the Arts August 2014. The illustration is used in the article "Crowdsourcing".

Wikimedia Norge´s impact this last year is a result of how we have concentrated more on having the role as a connector rather then an organizator. Our impact is the result of how we can link community members, partners, sponsors, board and staff together. We are a small organization and impact can best be achieved in collaboration with others.

Media coverage, highlights from 2014-2015:

• National media coverage in the newspaper Dagsavisen, interview with the new female editor Monica Annett Dyrø, and WMNO project officer Jorid Martinsen.
• National media coverage in the Nynorsk Media.
• National radio (NRK) program interviewing WMNO staff and a language researcher from the University of Oslo, about male and female language and power at the Wikipedia.
• Visible media debate in Nov-Dec, initiated by CEO Frank Meyer (a wikipedian) of the Labour Union Archives ensuing debate in the newspaper Klassekampen between Meyer and Astrid Carlsen (WMNO) resulted in a conclusion that labour union members should volunteer to edit the Wikipedia. Spread to newspapers Dagbladet, Adresseavisen, Hordaland.
• The Wikipedian-in-Residence at The National Library online (link) and on national radio.
• Promoted the drawing and illustrations workshop at the Arts Academy of Oslo, on National public radio (NRK), and in the countries largest newspaper Aftenposten, the weekend magazine Aftenposten K (not online).

• Wikimedia Norge´s blog
• Other WMF reports we have given data to: Evaluation reports on Writing contes and Financial Trend Report 2103

Compliance

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

1. 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 due to lack of funding is described above. Some missions in our grant proposal was not possible to fulfil.

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

• Yes

3. 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

Financial information

1. Report any Grant funds that are unexpended fifteen (15) months after the Effective Date of the Grant Agreement. These funds must be returned to WMF or otherwise transferred or deployed as directed by WMF.

• Nothing to report.

2. Any interest earned on the Grant funds by Grantee will be used by Grantee to support the Mission and Purposes as set out in this Grant Agreement. Please report any interest earned during the reporting period and cumulatively over the duration of the Grant and Grant Agreement.

• The Credit interest in the bank is 0,1 %. Accrued interests on the project account were NOK 311,22 until August 31, 2015. This corresponds to USD 44.

Signature

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

Hogne (talk) 14:48, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

WMNOastrid (talk) 21:14, 28 September 2015 (UTC)