User talk:MIskander-WMF

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2022-11-28/News and notes

Hey there! Don't know if you're aware of English Wikipedia's monthly newsletter, but I hope you won't mind us quoting your post. I kind of got tapped to write this up because I'm A. Honestly the person who cares the least about it, so I can do so neutrally, and B. live in the UK, and while I grew up in America, don't have any real American holiday traditions so was available while others were eating Thanksgiving.

Don't get me wrong: It's hardly the most stellar reporting given it all dropped a couple days before publication: I quote the RFC closer, I quote you, and provide just enough linking text to hold that all together, but... well, a lot of other stuff got dropped in my lap at the same time, including being asked to polish up an article for a plan for compression of pageviews which meant writing a simplified summary of it for those who don't know about compression algorythms so that it's a little more accessible. Oh, and, y'know, the whole image restoration thing I come here to do. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.2% of all FPs. Currently celebrating his 600^th FP!} 02:43, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Related to this, could you please comment, for potential inclusion in the Signpost, on this quote: The vast majority of Wikimedia’s value to ordinary people – the website we know and use – costs the firm about 30 percent of their $112.5 million operating budget ($33.75 million) to maintain according to Lisa Seitz Gruwell, Chief Advancement Officer at Wikimedia.. This is from an article published on the website of the Institute for New Economic Thinking last year, authored by an INSEAD fellow. Regards, --Andreas JN 466 11:11, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Jayen466 Looking at the original article linked there is no source or citation offered beyond just attributing it directly to Lisa. I am not an accountant but prima facie the number looks wrong to me. MPaul (WMF) (talk) 14:59, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

According to the article author's recollection, this was said in a recorded meeting. Andreas JN 466 21:48, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I occurs to me that a similar breakdown was given here: So we spend about 12% on fundraising; it costs us about 9 cents to raise a dollar. That’s a lot of– I mentioned all of those payment processors around the world, that’s the bulk of the fees there, and just building the technical infrastructure to run a big fundraising operation like that. About 13% goes towards just administration and governance; 43% goes towards the technical infrastructure, so the website itself. And the remainder goes to supporting our communities, which I just discussed earlier, the grants, but also other types of work: legal support that we give to our editors; the training we give to our editors; big events that we host in non-pandemic times to bring our editors together. So, there’s a lot of work that goes into just supporting the volunteer community.

In fact, this also appears to be the breakdown used in the Annual Report and in some of the fundraising messages (used in this year's emails, for example) that people in the RfCs were wondering about, where it was said:

42% of your gift will be used to sustain and improve Wikipedia and our other online free knowledge projects.

31% of your gift will be used to support the volunteers who share their knowledge with you for free every day.

27% of your gift will give the Wikimedia Foundation the resources it needs to fulfill its mission and advance the cause of free knowledge in the world.

So "supporting the volunteers" appears to include all chapter grants, salary costs of legal and community-facing WMF staff, grants for edit-a-thons and the like, funding for organisers and consultants trying to build volunteer communities, etc. Does this sound right? Regards, Andreas JN 466 19:22, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Adam Cuerden, @MIskander-WMF is currently in transit (and like you I am in the UK without any holiday hindrances :-) ) so popping by here to say that what you are proposing above sounds great - thank you for willing to be tapped up for it. P.S: Love your restorative work - Mary Jackson's image is so valuable! MPaul (WMF) (talk) 11:20, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Library

Hi Maryana, I have been following the discussions about the fundraising banners including your messages. I am a largely a "quiet" editor so posting here rather than at the Village Pump (too noisy for me lol). I noticed much of conversation revolves around technical support, which is needed, but don't want to loose sight of other things the WMF can do and do well. In order for editors to share human knowledge, they must have access to the published sources of that knowledge. A few months ago I got access the Wikipedia Library and I can certainly attest it has been life changing for me as an editor. As an Articles for Creation reviewer (reviewing drafts, often from unregistered or new editors, to determine if they are acceptable as articles), I am much more able to help drafts along by adding sources so they meet our notability guidelines. Recently, I have used the library resources to prevent active articles from being deleted. Yet, I am one of many who use the library's resources. Of course, more is needed and likely needed from a global perspective (more languages, etc.). Pinging @Samwalton9 (WMF): (our library hero) as they may be able provide more insight as to what is needed based on feedback they get from editors, at least from an English Wikipedia perspective, but I imagine the need is greater for other languages/parts of the world (Africa comes to mind). S0091 (talk) 20:34, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@S0091 I'm glad to hear that the library has been useful to you! @Vipin has been doing great work on the partnerships side of the program expanding the number of collections we have access to, with a focus on language and topic diversity. I did just want to highlight that the library is also a technical project, though! We maintain a fairly substantial product, hosted via Cloud VPS (the Cloud Services team do a great job of making this reliable and easy to use!), and we also configure other hosted software including the proxy server and discovery service. I'd love to hear from you what you think is needed - whether that relates to technical features or partnerships - to make the library better. Samwalton9 (WMF) (talk) 11:41, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@S0091 thank you for the message, I have seen a lot of appreciation from volunteers for the Wikipedia Library. I am glad to see @Samwalton9 (WMF)'s weighed in already to share more information. MIskander-WMF (talk) 17:49, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Its good to hear you see that feedback, Maryana.

@Samwalton9 (WMF), thanks for correcting me and explaining the Library is a technical project. I don't quite follow some of what you said but will take that to your talk page rather then here or if there is a better venue, please drop a note on my talk page with the info. S0091 (talk) 21:44, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you'll forgive a little levity on the subject, here's next month's cartoon for the Signpot, after Thomas Cole:

Might work in a little Wikipedia globe in there. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.3% of all FPs. Currently celebrating his 600^th FP!} 02:09, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]