Return to article

Talk: 2014 Annual Plan

(comments)
 
(add)
Line 1: Line 1:
==A few comments==
==A few comments==


This looks pretty good to me, and seems quite realistic. I have the following  
This looks pretty good to me, and seems quite realistic. I have the following comments and suggestions:
*Should "Grants: $10,000 (to cover Wiki loves...my town and QR codes)" be listed as expenditure instead of income? If it's income, could you please provide some background on what this involves?  
*Should "Grants: $10,000 (to cover Wiki loves...my town and QR codes)" be listed as expenditure instead of income? If it's income, could you please provide some background on what this involves?  
*It would be good to explicitly link the two Improve Quality programs with the "Increase reach; increase participation" programs - I don't think that there's much awareness among Australian Wikipedia/Commons contributors that WMAU can help fund research projects and support photography. A program to raise awareness of WMAU might be a good idea!  
*It would be good to explicitly link the two Improve Quality programs with the "Increase reach; increase participation" programs - I don't think that there's much awareness among Australian Wikipedia/Commons contributors that WMAU can help fund research projects and support photography. A program to raise awareness of WMAU might be a good idea!  
*I have to say that I'm a bit concerned that this plan doesn't include an emphasis on preparing for a grant application from the WMF. The organisation's finances are obviously fine to support this year's planned (and modest) expenditure, but am I right in thinking that it's been a few years since WMAU received a significant inflow of funds?
*I have to say that I'm a bit concerned that this plan doesn't include an emphasis on preparing for a grant application from the WMF. The organisation's finances are obviously fine to support this year's planned (and modest) expenditure, but am I right in thinking that it's been a few years since WMAU received a significant inflow of funds?
*On that topic, is there also scope for people to propose good ideas which, if approved, would receive funding after the plan is adopted? If so, should an explicit provision (and possibly a "bucket" of funds) be identified for this in the plan? [[User:Nick-D|Nick-D]] ([[User talk:Nick-D|talk]]) 21:35, 30 March 2014 (EST)
*On that topic, is there also scope for people to propose good ideas which, if approved, would receive funding after the plan is adopted? If so, should an explicit provision (and possibly a "bucket" of funds) be identified for this in the plan? [[User:Nick-D|Nick-D]] ([[User talk:Nick-D|talk]]) 21:35, 30 March 2014 (EST)

Revision as of 10:35, 30 March 2014

A few comments

This looks pretty good to me, and seems quite realistic. I have the following comments and suggestions:

  • Should "Grants: $10,000 (to cover Wiki loves...my town and QR codes)" be listed as expenditure instead of income? If it's income, could you please provide some background on what this involves?
  • It would be good to explicitly link the two Improve Quality programs with the "Increase reach; increase participation" programs - I don't think that there's much awareness among Australian Wikipedia/Commons contributors that WMAU can help fund research projects and support photography. A program to raise awareness of WMAU might be a good idea!
  • I have to say that I'm a bit concerned that this plan doesn't include an emphasis on preparing for a grant application from the WMF. The organisation's finances are obviously fine to support this year's planned (and modest) expenditure, but am I right in thinking that it's been a few years since WMAU received a significant inflow of funds?
  • On that topic, is there also scope for people to propose good ideas which, if approved, would receive funding after the plan is adopted? If so, should an explicit provision (and possibly a "bucket" of funds) be identified for this in the plan? Nick-D (talk) 21:35, 30 March 2014 (EST)