Grants talk:PEG/WM PH/General operations 2013/Report

Report Comments

Thank you for this report. We have the following questions/comments and would appreciate your prompt response.

1. We acknowledge your difficulties with reporting and would like to work with you on developing a process that ensures on-time and quality reports. Let's set up a time to discuss this and we can also check-in at Wikimania.
2. Strategic planning: It would be great to have more specific targets for each of the project areas. For example, what percentage of cultural heritage sites are you hoping to have covered and at what quality in the next year, 3 years, 5 years? How are you prioritizing partnerships with cultural institutions and what is the goal of those partnerships?
3. Amsterdam hackathon: Thank you for providing a detailed trip report. What is the "roadmap" mentioned in the report?
4. Tagalog anniversary: Can you provide more details on “charting the future course of the Tagalog Wikipedia”? Were there specific project ideas developed to promote/support the Tagalog Wikipedia? If yes, have any of them started?
5. Reallocation request 1: This pays for a legal opinion on FOP in the Philippines. The opinion will only have impact if a positive opinion is then brought to the IP Office for a formal ruling. Will this require additional resources?

Thanks, Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 23:06, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

1. Reporting

What I've observed that works so far is locking people down in one place. I hope that once we get Internet connection at our storage/working facility where we can stay late we can work to prepare our reports. That of course is mundane :). -- Roel (talk) 08:13, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

2. Strategic planning

We actually wanted our strategic planning to be coupled with team-building activities which foster team work especially among the Board and key members of the organization. However the two days were consumed by series of discussions of different concerns. From the activity report it can be seen that certain specific targets were not laid out as this was left to the respective project groups to determine. The two day activity wasn't actually even enough to iron out the details of what the Board could do for the year. -- Roel (talk) 07:59, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

• Specific goals of GLAM-Wiki activities

  Subsequent GLAM-Wiki group discussions decided to forego with Wiki Loves Monuments in 2014, however the alternative Wiki Loves Earth was considered but the absence of infrastructure comparable to WLM is holding off the decision to implement WLE. As to covering the number of "declared" heritage sites, no quantitative measures were set fearing this may just lead to dumping of low quality photos in Wikimedia Commons, which was seen in 2014. Also the list of heritage sites used for WLM needs to be purged because it inadvertently included "heritage institutions" that do not necessarily associate with built structures. The "Cultural Heritage Mapping Project" was in the works before the strategic planning and it was decided that it will build on the work already initially done by WLM. The specific targets have already been laid out in the project's Measures of success. -- Roel (talk) 02:01, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Currently, the focus of the team is to ensure that the Cultural Heritage Mapping Project will be successful in terms of hitting the targets set and generating the desired impact to the community. Our long term strategic objective is to use this project as leverage when we deal with GLAM institutions. We want to show them that we have a footprint in the Philippines and we can do more by helping them to achieve that mutual benefit. Prior to this project, Roel and I presented to the senior management of a museum and a library. We received excellent feedback with the ideas about GLAM but at that time, we do not have that track record yet, what we showed them is how successful GLAM was in Europe, Australia and in the American continent. They also have issues with the idea of putting their images in CC-BY-SA licenses and we are trying to let them realize the benefits. WMPH President and some members of the Board is also in contact with the Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office (PCDSPO)in Malacanang Palace for potential partnerships and GLAM related joint projects(The Malacanang Museum has an awesome collection). --Sunkissedguy (talk) 05:35, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

• On prioritizing partnerships with cultural institutions and what is the goal of those partnerships?

  Under the categories of non-profits that may receive tax-free donations set under the Philippine Internal Revenue Code (Section 30), the closest and most plausible we can fall under is as a cultural organization, hence we need to be recognized by Philippine cultural agencies. This new regulation RMO 20-2013 issued last 2013, seeks to closely monitor non-profits that they fall under these categories before they can be granted exemptions.

Locally, partnerships with institutions gives you a certain legitimacy on the work that you do, and their recognition enables you to network with like-minded organizations which you can also introduce the projects you would like to accomplish. As we speak we already have direct contact with the Chairperson of the National Historical Commission of the Philippines (NHCP), an agency under the National Commission on Culture and the Arts, recognizing the projects we do. Despite Dr. Diokno's intial misgivings about Wikipedia, she has granted us an audience and saw the work of Wikipedia contributors which she intends the NHCP to use.-- Roel (talk) 08:51, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

3. Amsterdam hackathon / MediaWiki Startup Initiative

Re #3. I don't see a roadmap mentioned in relation to the Amsterdam hackathon or the MediaWiki Startup Initiative. Maybe you meant the strategic planning? —seav (talk) 23:44, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry. I just spotted this "roadmap". I will ask the MediaWiki Startup Initiative group regarding this roadmap, but they discussed it during a meeting on June 9, 2012. Please see the photo of the meeting on the right below, which I assume shows the roadmap on the whiteboard. —seav (talk) 23:50, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

I've added another photo of the whiteboard showing what I presume is the roadmap. —seav (talk) 23:56, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

• 
  June 2, 2012 meeting participants
• 
  June 2, 2012 roadmap?

Thanks seav. It would be interesting to know what the main targets of the roadmap are and what the follow-up has been since the hackathon. Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 00:17, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

As far as I could remember, that is for the training of those who are interested to tweak into the MediaWiki engine. There has been a couple of mini-seminars which I have conducted with the developers and students, and more are still yet to come. Hopefully we can setup related projects about this later this year, preferably seminars and/or training, and the target persons for this are professionals (programmers, web developers) and students (preferably taking any computer-related courses). The details of the proposed projects are yet to be discussed. Chitetskoy (talk) 07:02, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

This is still vague. I understand training was held. But how many people from the Philippines are actively contributing on the Mediawiki project these days? Of those, can any be attributed to this hackathon or any follow-up activity? Asaf Bartov (WMF Grants) talk 23:55, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Here it is. Our goal is to set up even a small MediaWiki developer community, and this can be accomplished by having seminars on MediaWiki to target audiences (like programmers and computer students), where we can get some people who are willing to volunteer in this endeavor. As I said before, we already conducted about three or four seminars last year: one of them is in WikiCon and the other two is among the professionals and developers (not MediaWiki developers) where some students has also been invited. We would be collaborating with tertiary schools, preferably computer-inclined schools, where we can conduct seminars during weekends, and to make use of their facilities such as computer labs. We will also be preparing a set of modules, which will be taught depending on the target audience and on their knowledge level about related technologies. The entry level modules contain basic MediaWiki installation, usage and basic creation of pages, and basic customization, while higher level modules may involve installation of extensions and even crafting own extensions. The modules which we crafted will then be made reusable and they can be used by other chapters. Aside from that, audiences are encouraged to bring their own devices so they can have a hands-on on what we're teaching, this will be like a mini-hackathon, perhaps.

The plan was actually laid last year, but it is yet to be implemented. Hopefully by this year, we can implement this. Chitetskoy (talk) 04:39, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

This is part of the development program of our MediaWiki group being led by Butch Bustria as they stated here. -- Roel (talk) 06:47, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for this further information. However, I'm not seeing an answer to my two questions above. (Hint: the answer should include a number.:)) Asaf Bartov (WMF Grants) talk 13:05, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

I apologize Asaf, we are communicating with the lead of the local initiative, he sees the message in Facebook but has not even replied. Apart from program plans which are still not posted on our website, I'd assume there aren't really any active contributors on MediaWiki. -- Roel (talk) 23:33, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

4. Tagalog Wikipedia

There are plans to hold a Tagalog-language edit-a-thon later this year (contingent on manpower requirements), and the Tagalog Wikipedia community intends to hold preliminary community-wide discussions on the project's linguistic issues. There is a consensus that while Tagalog-language projects are feasible, it would be better to address the project's linguistic issues first in order to make them more appealing to university Filipino departments, who we hope to partner with in pursuing these types of projects. The organization is open to temporarily hiring an impartial adviser to help determine the project's needs, assess the current state of the project vis-à-vis its intended audience, and come up with recommendations as to what needs to be done in order to elicit greater public acceptance of and support for the project. --Sky Harbor ^(talk) 00:17, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

5. Reallocation request 1 (FOP)

We do admit it will only have an impact if a positive opinion is rendered, but we should make an effort to once and for all clarify FOP in the Philippines to resolve this gray area in our IP laws. Once we file for a declaratory relief before the IP Office, we will be under its graces when we can be scheduled and how frequent the hearing would be (we hope there won't be multiple hearings to save on lawyer appearance fees). At the moment it's difficult to say if this will require additional resources. We believe the amount we are requesting to be reallocated is somewhat a conservative amount that we hope will be enough. -- Roel (talk) 23:41, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Reallocation Request

We would like to have a more in-depth discussion regarding the reallocation requests. Due to time constraints, we will deduct the remaining funds from your 2014 grant payment. However, we will follow-up with additional questions shortly. Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 23:02, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

We are fine with that. Thank you very much. -- Roel (talk) 23:26, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Report Accepted

The report is accepted. We look forward to futher discussions regarding WMPH's strategy and the reallocation request. Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 16:17, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Alex! Let's set another time to discuss ways on how WMPH can consistently submit on-time reports. On our end, we will still continue trying out various methods to ensure compliance. We will also wait for the discussion regarding our reallocation request. —seav (talk) 16:26, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Reallocation requests

The reallocation requests have been approved. Alex Wang (WMF) (talk) 23:47, 12 August 2014 (UTC)