Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update - Big English Fundraiser

[Chris Keating]

Also,



> Speaking for myself, I would hesitate to devote an hour or similar of my
> time to a feedback session run by the WMF. Partly, because I would want to
> be compensated for that time;


Looking at this list and many many other fora there is scarcely a shortage
of free advice from Wikimedians with their thoughts about what the WMF is,
isn't, should or shouldn't be doing. Starting to pay for it is probably not
a great use of donors' funds ;)

Chris
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update - Big English Fundraiser

[Gnangarra]

why arent these types of session included in events like Wikimedia
Conference and Wikimania where there is the capacity personal engagement
with individuals and or groups of people

On 2 December 2016 at 18:56, Chris Keating 
wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 2:51 AM, Pete Forsyth 
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > However, I think I may not have been clear enough about what I was
> > suggesting. (And I should note, I understand this is an unusual kind of
> > approach, that might not feel very "wiki-like" to many in our community;
> > but if I'm right in my hunch that it would be an *effective* approach, it
> > might merit further consideration.)
> >
> > I used the term "expert" to refer to two different kinds of efforts,
> which
> > I think made my point hard to follow. This is what I suggest:
> >
> > * Hire a service provider that is *expert at learning from a certain
> > important audience*
> > * Work with that service provider to properly incentivize and efficiently
> > garner insights from those who are *expert about Wikimedia values* and
> how
> > they might apply to the fundraiser.
> >
> > Speaking for myself, I would hesitate to devote an hour or similar of my
> > time to a feedback session run by the WMF. Partly, because I would want
> to
> > be compensated for that time; and partly, because I have some skepticism
> > about WMF's ability to run a session that would fully absorb the points I
> > might have to make.
>
>
> Also speaking for myself, I think it's better that WMF staff do this kind
> of work themselves wherever possible -  what we gain from direct engagement
> between staff and volunteers is quite significant, in terms of
> relationships, understanding and building skills - much more important than
> what we might lose from poor methodology.
>
> Or another way of putting it, I think Seddon is likely to be better at
> consulting community members on the fundraiser than a market research
> consultant would be (as well as being cheaper ;) )
>
> Also personally I don't tend to participate in these sessions as I assume
> everyone knows my often-repeated views on the importance of recurring
> gifts, payment channels that suit the donor's expectations, and
> tax-deductibility. ;)
>
> Chris
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
GN.
President Wikimedia Australia
WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update - Big English Fundraiser

[Chris Keating]

On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 2:51 AM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:
>
>
> However, I think I may not have been clear enough about what I was
> suggesting. (And I should note, I understand this is an unusual kind of
> approach, that might not feel very "wiki-like" to many in our community;
> but if I'm right in my hunch that it would be an *effective* approach, it
> might merit further consideration.)
>
> I used the term "expert" to refer to two different kinds of efforts, which
> I think made my point hard to follow. This is what I suggest:
>
> * Hire a service provider that is *expert at learning from a certain
> important audience*
> * Work with that service provider to properly incentivize and efficiently
> garner insights from those who are *expert about Wikimedia values* and how
> they might apply to the fundraiser.
>
> Speaking for myself, I would hesitate to devote an hour or similar of my
> time to a feedback session run by the WMF. Partly, because I would want to
> be compensated for that time; and partly, because I have some skepticism
> about WMF's ability to run a session that would fully absorb the points I
> might have to make.


Also speaking for myself, I think it's better that WMF staff do this kind
of work themselves wherever possible -  what we gain from direct engagement
between staff and volunteers is quite significant, in terms of
relationships, understanding and building skills - much more important than
what we might lose from poor methodology.

Or another way of putting it, I think Seddon is likely to be better at
consulting community members on the fundraiser than a market research
consultant would be (as well as being cheaper ;) )

Also personally I don't tend to participate in these sessions as I assume
everyone knows my often-repeated views on the importance of recurring
gifts, payment channels that suit the donor's expectations, and
tax-deductibility. ;)

Chris
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update - Big English Fundraiser

[Joseph Seddon]

I think I better understand at where you are coming from.

One of the difficulties of the role stems from the particularly brutal
nature of A/B testing. I don't mean that inasmuch as the decisions based on
them them can be without care or thought (and I assure you, in the case of
fundraising they aren't), but more that when 95 in 100 ideas turn out to be
failures it's difficult to make people feel that they are appreciated when
the testing machine appears at face value to have a personal vendetta
against you. I am personally amazed that my colleagues who have been
working in fundraising at this continuously for the last 5, 6 or 7 years
still remain as optimistic as they do. Combined with that there are also
only so many tests that the data allows you to run without reducing the
effectiveness of testing. You have a finite number of opportunities for
success, a system that failure is an inherent part of and all done against
a background consisting of a budget that up until this year was increasing
about 30% every year for the last five years. That's a pretty daunting task
to be asked to be a part of and not exactly one that would be enticing to
everyone. My colleagues do what they do because they know and believe in
the values that are so important to this movement. You can't do that job,
with the level of dedication they show, without that.

So part of the reason my position exists, and similarly those of the
Community Liasons, is not simply to be the mouthpiece of the department.
The role is there to act as a conduit between the teams at the foundation
and the communities they serve. Much of that is facilitation of thought,
ideas and conversation, ensuring that the team remains grounded and
conscious of the community in its work. Certainly in this case the role
itself was the embodiment of the team's desire for that to happen. Part of
that involves being advocate for the community to colleagues, and
particularly when the work is intense, fast paced and there are goal that
need to be reached, ensuring they are keeping in touch with their own roots
and the values they hold in being part of our movement that despite what
many think, are no different to our own values.

Regards
Seddon

On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 3:51 AM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:

> Joseph,
>
> Thank you for the timely and thorough response -- good info in there, and
> I'm especially gratified to know that Lodewijk's op-ed has sparked some
> worthwhile discussion.
>
> However, I think I may not have been clear enough about what I was
> suggesting. (And I should note, I understand this is an unusual kind of
> approach, that might not feel very "wiki-like" to many in our community;
> but if I'm right in my hunch that it would be an *effective* approach, it
> might merit further consideration.)
>
> I used the term "expert" to refer to two different kinds of efforts, which
> I think made my point hard to follow. This is what I suggest:
>
> * Hire a service provider that is *expert at learning from a certain
> important audience*
> * Work with that service provider to properly incentivize and efficiently
> garner insights from those who are *expert about Wikimedia values* and how
> they might apply to the fundraiser.
>
> Speaking for myself, I would hesitate to devote an hour or similar of my
> time to a feedback session run by the WMF. Partly, because I would want to
> be compensated for that time; and partly, because I have some skepticism
> about WMF's ability to run a session that would fully absorb the points I
> might have to make. (I do not suggest that my own perspective is especially
> important, but rather, that others might share one or both of my concerns.
> And I mean no disrespect to WMF by saying this; most people and
> organizations have difficulty fully absorbing feedback, and can benefit
> from skilled facilitation of some kind.)
>
> Sometimes, a trained professional whose expertise lies in helping
> organizations understand what their stakeholders think can be very
> valuable.
>
> In that way, what I suggest is fundamentally different from the expert
> (Jelly, who is indeed extraordinarily good at what he does, even if that
> one campaign did not turn out to everybody's liking), and is a
> fundamentally different kind of engagement, from what you mention at the
> end of your message.
>
> -Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Joseph Seddon 
> wrote:
>
> > So we have definitely worked with market research companies, mostly to
> help
> > us get a better understanding of our audience rather than directly
> sourcing
> > design input. We worked with Lake Research Partners [1], on our English
> > Reader Survey in 2014-15 [2] and our Japan Reader Survey in 2015-2016
> [3].
> > And we may consider commissioning similar research in other geographies
> but
> > I don't believe we haven't taken any decision about future work at the
> > moment.
> >
> > The purpose of the sessions is try and do what we can to ensure that the
>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update - Big English Fundraiser

[Pete Forsyth]

Joseph,

Thank you for the timely and thorough response -- good info in there, and
I'm especially gratified to know that Lodewijk's op-ed has sparked some
worthwhile discussion.

However, I think I may not have been clear enough about what I was
suggesting. (And I should note, I understand this is an unusual kind of
approach, that might not feel very "wiki-like" to many in our community;
but if I'm right in my hunch that it would be an *effective* approach, it
might merit further consideration.)

I used the term "expert" to refer to two different kinds of efforts, which
I think made my point hard to follow. This is what I suggest:

* Hire a service provider that is *expert at learning from a certain
important audience*
* Work with that service provider to properly incentivize and efficiently
garner insights from those who are *expert about Wikimedia values* and how
they might apply to the fundraiser.

Speaking for myself, I would hesitate to devote an hour or similar of my
time to a feedback session run by the WMF. Partly, because I would want to
be compensated for that time; and partly, because I have some skepticism
about WMF's ability to run a session that would fully absorb the points I
might have to make. (I do not suggest that my own perspective is especially
important, but rather, that others might share one or both of my concerns.
And I mean no disrespect to WMF by saying this; most people and
organizations have difficulty fully absorbing feedback, and can benefit
from skilled facilitation of some kind.)

Sometimes, a trained professional whose expertise lies in helping
organizations understand what their stakeholders think can be very valuable.

In that way, what I suggest is fundamentally different from the expert
(Jelly, who is indeed extraordinarily good at what he does, even if that
one campaign did not turn out to everybody's liking), and is a
fundamentally different kind of engagement, from what you mention at the
end of your message.

-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Joseph Seddon  wrote:

> So we have definitely worked with market research companies, mostly to help
> us get a better understanding of our audience rather than directly sourcing
> design input. We worked with Lake Research Partners [1], on our English
> Reader Survey in 2014-15 [2] and our Japan Reader Survey in 2015-2016 [3].
> And we may consider commissioning similar research in other geographies but
> I don't believe we haven't taken any decision about future work at the
> moment.
>
> The purpose of the sessions is try and do what we can to ensure that the
> messaging we use is as representative of the community as we can make it
> whilst also having a successful fundraiser. To do that we need to be able
> to offer as many possibilities to volunteers to be able to contribute to
> the Fundraiser, and this touches on many of the issues in Lodewijk's op-ed
> in the Signpost over the weekend (which I intend to provide a fuller
> response to soon).
>
> Although we didn't run the second series in English we are still planning
> on running sessions for input in other languages next year. Most likely in
> Dutch and in Swedish where we've already gauged some early interest, and
> potentially other languages too if there is the desire for it.
>
> We ran a successful couple of test sessions back in September with
> community members and with staff earlier in year. They produced some
> fantastic input into our processes with both a critique of our banners as
> well as being a source new ideas. These sorts of sessions help guide us
> towards the areas that are important to our communities, allowing us to
> focus our efforts on dealing with issues raised by the community such as
> getting rid of the ominous black banners, not describing ourselves as a
> small non-profit and doing our best to find alternatives to the infamous
> coffee cup line that has been present in our appeals for th. Outside
> experts can't provide that same touch we are looking for that members of
> the movement, staff or community can provide.
>
> This particular way of garnering input wasn't successful at this moment in
> time but there will be other opportunities but it's not the only way and I
> am definitely hopeful to find other methods for the wider community to be
> able to get involved in the campaign.
>
> Plus experts gave us this:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/
> 2009-11-16/Fundraiser
>
> Regards
> Seddon
>
> [1 http://www.lakeresearch.com/]
> [2
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/c/c2/
> Wikimedia_Survey_2014_English_Fundraiser.pdf
> ]
> [3
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/e/ef/
> Report.WikimediaJapan.f.071916.pdf
> ]
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 10:36 PM, Pete Forsyth 
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Joseph Seddon 
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Finally we didn't get any interest in our fundraising feedback and
> design
> > > sessions last week a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update - Big English Fundraiser

[Joseph Seddon]

So we have definitely worked with market research companies, mostly to help
us get a better understanding of our audience rather than directly sourcing
design input. We worked with Lake Research Partners [1], on our English
Reader Survey in 2014-15 [2] and our Japan Reader Survey in 2015-2016 [3].
And we may consider commissioning similar research in other geographies but
I don't believe we haven't taken any decision about future work at the
moment.

The purpose of the sessions is try and do what we can to ensure that the
messaging we use is as representative of the community as we can make it
whilst also having a successful fundraiser. To do that we need to be able
to offer as many possibilities to volunteers to be able to contribute to
the Fundraiser, and this touches on many of the issues in Lodewijk's op-ed
in the Signpost over the weekend (which I intend to provide a fuller
response to soon).

Although we didn't run the second series in English we are still planning
on running sessions for input in other languages next year. Most likely in
Dutch and in Swedish where we've already gauged some early interest, and
potentially other languages too if there is the desire for it.

We ran a successful couple of test sessions back in September with
community members and with staff earlier in year. They produced some
fantastic input into our processes with both a critique of our banners as
well as being a source new ideas. These sorts of sessions help guide us
towards the areas that are important to our communities, allowing us to
focus our efforts on dealing with issues raised by the community such as
getting rid of the ominous black banners, not describing ourselves as a
small non-profit and doing our best to find alternatives to the infamous
coffee cup line that has been present in our appeals for th. Outside
experts can't provide that same touch we are looking for that members of
the movement, staff or community can provide.

This particular way of garnering input wasn't successful at this moment in
time but there will be other opportunities but it's not the only way and I
am definitely hopeful to find other methods for the wider community to be
able to get involved in the campaign.

Plus experts gave us this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-11-16/Fundraiser

Regards
Seddon

[1 http://www.lakeresearch.com/]
[2
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/c/c2/Wikimedia_Survey_2014_English_Fundraiser.pdf
]
[3
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/e/ef/Report.WikimediaJapan.f.071916.pdf
]

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 10:36 PM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Joseph Seddon 
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Finally we didn't get any interest in our fundraising feedback and design
> > sessions last week and the week before so they were put on hold, however
> if
> > there are individuals who are interested in taking part in such a
> session,
> > one on one, then reach out to me and I would be happy to arrange a time
> > with you.
> >
>
> Often, when an organization needs to get the sense of a stakeholder group,
> they work with a market research firm, which would have expertise in
> getting the needed feedback. It's common for that research to compensate
> those participating.
>
> I've participated in such studies; and while some of them evaluate common
> products like refrigerators or cell phones, others are quite specialized.
> An interesting example: I actually participated in one that was modeled
> after a jury trial. The parties in an actual trial ran a process, which
> included four juries of (if I recall correctly) 11 people each. We heard
> expert testimony and lawyer arguments for two days before being sequestered
> for deliberation; our findings were used to determine the settlement in the
> case.
>
> The kind of input the WMF seeks is fairly sophisticated. There are not many
> people with the depth of knowledge of the Wikimedia movement to give
> worthwhile input, and to be frank, I would imagine few of them, like me,
> would be reluctant to volunteer time for the kind of session you suggest.
>
> Has the WMF considered seeking the assistance of an experienced market
> research firm, and/or compensating experts, to get the kind of input you
> desire?
>
> -Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Seddon

*Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)*
*Wikimedia Foundation*
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mai

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update - Big English Fundraiser

[Pete Forsyth]

On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 5:25 PM, Joseph Seddon 
wrote:

>
> Finally we didn't get any interest in our fundraising feedback and design
> sessions last week and the week before so they were put on hold, however if
> there are individuals who are interested in taking part in such a session,
> one on one, then reach out to me and I would be happy to arrange a time
> with you.
>

Often, when an organization needs to get the sense of a stakeholder group,
they work with a market research firm, which would have expertise in
getting the needed feedback. It's common for that research to compensate
those participating.

I've participated in such studies; and while some of them evaluate common
products like refrigerators or cell phones, others are quite specialized.
An interesting example: I actually participated in one that was modeled
after a jury trial. The parties in an actual trial ran a process, which
included four juries of (if I recall correctly) 11 people each. We heard
expert testimony and lawyer arguments for two days before being sequestered
for deliberation; our findings were used to determine the settlement in the
case.

The kind of input the WMF seeks is fairly sophisticated. There are not many
people with the depth of knowledge of the Wikimedia movement to give
worthwhile input, and to be frank, I would imagine few of them, like me,
would be reluctant to volunteer time for the kind of session you suggest.

Has the WMF considered seeking the assistance of an experienced market
research firm, and/or compensating experts, to get the kind of input you
desire?

-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update - Big English Fundraiser

[Joseph Seddon]

Hey all!

I wanted to send a quick reminder that our English language fundraiser is
launching tomorrow afternoon (29th Nov, ~1300-1500 UTC).

A few other reminders:
* Have an idea? Leave it here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising
/2016-17_Fundraising_ideas
* Want to see the current control banner messaging and designs?:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising/2016-17_Fundraising_ideas#Current_Control_Banner_Message
* Need to report a bug or technical issue with a banner or payments page?
Create a Phabricator ticket - https://phabricator.
wikimedia.org/maniphest/task/create/?template=118862
* Here is also the ever present fundraising IRC channel to raise urgent
issues: #wikimedia-fundraising (
http://webchat.freenode.net?channels=%23wikimedia-fundraising&uio=d4
 )
* You can also email me directly with feedback, ideas or issues (
sed...@wikimedia.org)

Finally we didn't get any interest in our fundraising feedback and design
sessions last week and the week before so they were put on hold, however if
there are individuals who are interested in taking part in such a session,
one on one, then reach out to me and I would be happy to arrange a time
with you.

Many thanks

Seddon


On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 12:57 AM, Joseph Seddon 
wrote:

> Hello!
>
> We are coming up to that time of year again with the launch of our English
> fundraiser. Our E-mail campaign is already underway and in a little under
> three weeks time, the banner campaign will launch in the US, UK, Canada,
> Australia, New Zealand and Ireland on Giving Tuesday [1], November 29,
> 2016. We will continue to try and limit the disruption from these banners.
> Our current expectation is to run our banners for all traffic for the first
> two weeks. Following that we will some combination of either reducing the
> amount of traffic being shown banners or the number of times a banner is
> shown to each user. There will then be one last final push before the end
> of December. It is my hope to update you after both of these stages with
> our progress.
>
> It is certainly no secret that it is a very important period for
> fundraising as our December activities are responsible for raising around
> 45% of all movement funds. As we reported in last years fundraising report
> [2] and at the September metrics meeting [3] we continue to adapt to the
> shift in our readership from desktop to mobile. Over the last two years,
> our e-mail efforts have played an increasingly major role in our
> fundraising to counter this shift and will certainly be the case over the
> next two months.
>
> As always it’s critical for my team to have both broader staff and
> community input in our fundraising efforts. This year we have been working
> closely with the Reading product team along with members from both the
> Reading and Editing design teams to improve our fundraising flow, in
> particular, trying to keep closer to the new standardised Wikimedia UI
> guidelines [4]. In addition to this, over the last five months we ran a
> number of staff and community feedback sessions and we have been very
> grateful to everyone who took part in those. They proved very successful in
> providing both a constructive critical eye for existing banner and email
> appeals as well being a source for a plethora of new ideas.
>
> The plan is that we will run more of these in conjunction with some of our
> major campaigns throughout the year. This will start with a series of
> sessions focusing on the English Campaign and would like to invite you all
> to a number of session being run over the next two weeks:
>
> * Thursday 17th November @ 1300 UTC
>
> * Thursday 17th November @ 1900 UTC
>
> * Monday 21st November @ 0100 UTC
>
> Please do sign up and find out more information [5]. Participation will be
> via IRC, Youtube live & via Google Hangout for ease of participation.
>
> As always if you have ideas and are not able to participate in these
> sessions you can leave feedback on our Fundraising Ideas page where you can
> see links to our current fundraising banners and current appeal text [5].
> Over the last year: use of Phabricator [6] for bug reporting; event and
> related content specific banners; improving the ease with which to dismiss
> banners; numerous improvements to the language used; and country specific
> images all came about from suggestions made on that page. So please do keep
> the ideas coming and I would like to thank you all in advance both for your
> input into the campaigns but more importantly the awesome work in building
> one of the largest sources of freely accessible knowledge in human history.
>
> I look forward to working with you all in the coming weeks.
>
> Many Thanks
>
> --
> Seddon
>
> *Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)*
> *Wikimedia Foundation*
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giving_Tuesday
>
> [2] 2015-2016 WMF Fundraising Report:
>
> https://wikimediafoundatio

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update - Big English Fundraiser

[MZMcBride]

Joseph Seddon wrote:
>So firstly you can see all of our standard banners here [1]. Those links
>will always contain our most current control banner designs and the
>control text will be updated regularly through the English campaigns. We
>are working to limit the number of banners each reader sees and it is
>important to note that readers will only see the large banner once. On
>the large banner, the close button is accompanied  with explicit text.
>The smaller banner doesn’t have the text because of the more limited real
>estate but has an “X” around 45% large. Dismissing the banner or using
>the remind me later function will hide the banner for a period of 1 week.
>
>We have worked hard over the years to rephrase many of the areas of
>criticism relating to our appeals taking into account both staff and
>community feedback. The most recent such change was a small edit from
>“small non-profit” to “non-profit”. I’ll be keeping that page up to date
>with the changes to our copy through the campaign. We are working with the
>Communications team on our new messaging for banners and emails not just
>for new ideas but to ensure it remains consistent with overall WMF
>messaging. The WMF Legal department also reviews all fundraising messages
>to ensure accuracy.
>
>Finally, I foresee absolutely no reason for us to change our policy of not
>showing fundraising banners to logged in users and will definitely
>maintain this for the English campaign.

This was an excellent reply and read. Thank you!

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update - Big English Fundraiser

[Joseph Seddon]

Hey MZ,

So firstly you can see all of our standard banners here [1]. Those links
will always contain our most current control banner designs and the control
text will be updated regularly through the English campaigns. We are
working to limit the number of banners each reader sees and it is important
to note that readers will only see the large banner once. On the large
banner, the close button is accompanied  with explicit text. The smaller
banner doesn’t have the text because of the more limited real estate but
has an “X” around 45% large. Dismissing the banner or using the remind me
later function will hide the banner for a period of 1 week.

We have worked hard over the years to rephrase many of the areas of
criticism relating to our appeals taking into account both staff and
community feedback. The most recent such change was a small edit from
“small non-profit” to “non-profit”. I’ll be keeping that page up to date
with the changes to our copy through the campaign. We are working with the
Communications team on our new messaging for banners and emails not just
for new ideas but to ensure it remains consistent with overall WMF
messaging. The WMF Legal department also reviews all fundraising messages
to ensure accuracy.

Finally, I foresee absolutely no reason for us to change our policy of not
showing fundraising banners to logged in users and will definitely maintain
this for the English campaign.

I hope that helps

Seddon

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising/2016-17_Fundraising_ideas#Current_Banner_Mockups

On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 12:59 AM, MZMcBride  wrote:

> Joseph Seddon wrote:
> >We are coming up to that time of year again with the launch of our English
> >fundraiser. Our E-mail campaign is already underway and in a little under
> >three weeks time, the banner campaign will launch in the US, UK, Canada,
> >Australia, New Zealand and Ireland on Giving Tuesday [1], November 29,
> >2016. We will continue to try and limit the disruption from these banners.
> >Our current expectation is to run our banners for all traffic for the
> >first two weeks. Following that we will some combination of either
> >reducing the amount of traffic being shown banners or the number of times
> >a banner is shown to each user.
>
> Thanks for this e-mail. I have a number of questions. I can post these on
> a talk page or elsewhere if that's better. For now, they're below.
>
> Is there a place to see what the 2016 advertisements will look like and
> how they will behave? Some of the strongest objections in past years have
> come from the fact that these ads have stopped being 1-inch banners on
> desktop and instead consume the entire screen. Readers can get confused
> and think that they need to pay in order to read Wikipedia, when this is
> obviously not the case. When an advertisement consumes the whole viewing
> area, obfuscating the page content and demanding money, I think it's
> reasonable to assume that some of our millions of readers will mistake the
> ad for ransomware.
>
> Where can the upcoming ad creatives be seen? I'd like to know if they'll
> be explicit about being able to simply dismiss the ad.
>
> How long will dismissing the ad be effective for? Two weeks? Longer?
>
> Will the ads be reasonable in size and in content? The other recurring
> criticism for these ads has been deceptive and misleading text. Sometimes
> we've even been simply wrong. I'd like to avoid any repeats of that.
>
> And finally, as a show of good will and good faith to our editors, in past
> years we have not targeted these ads at logged-in users. Will logged-in
> users be targeted for ads in this upcoming fund-raising drive?
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 




-- 
Seddon

*Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)*
*Wikimedia Foundation*
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update - Japan - Focus Group and Survey Findings

[Yusuke Matsubara]

Thanks for sharing the update, Seddon. It indeed contains a wealth of
information on readers from Japan.

Could you please expand on this:

> We found a more urgent, direct translation was perceived as better than a 
> more natural translation.

I have just skimmed it, so I might have missed something, but the PDF
you linked 

(Page 8, "Executive Summary: Banners, Emails, and Images") gives this
analysis:

> On explicit measures of which banner they find most visually
> appealing and which they prefer overall, readers say they prefer
> Banner B (the more polite language) over Banner A. Banner A is
> viewed as too blunt and direct.

It sounds like at least there is one factor against using banners with
a direct translation.

Best,
Yusuke

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update - Japan - Focus Group and Survey Findings

[Joseph Seddon]

Hey Christof,

Not currently but I'll see if we have those to hand and can get them up.

Seddon


On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Christof Pins 
wrote:

> Hello Seddon,
>
> Very insightful! Are the research instruments of this project
> (questionnaire, focus group guidelines used) freely accessible somewhere on
> Meta or Commons?
>
> Cheers,
> Christof
>
> 2016-08-31 10:29 GMT+02:00 Michael Jahn :
>
> > Thanks a lot for sharing, Seddon!
> > Michael
> >
> > 2016-08-30 17:11 GMT+02:00 Joseph Seddon :
> >
> > > Hello wikimedia-l!
> > >
> > > Back in February of 2015, the fundraising team engaged Lake Research
> > > Partners (LRP) to conduct a detailed survey of English language
> Wikimedia
> > > readers
> > >  > > Wikimedia_Survey_2014_English_Fundraiser.pdf>.
> > > As
> > > we look to continue to improve our efforts fundraising in non-EN
> > languages
> > > we decided to conduct a similar fact finding exercise in one of our
> > larger
> > > fundraising countries. Japan, being an affluent country with a large
> > > population and where our projects have had a large reach, has in some
> > ways
> > > under-performed and seemed ripe to deliver the greatest impact for such
> > > efforts.
> > >
> > > With that in mind we again partnered with Lake Research Partners to run
> > two
> > > focus groups consisting of readers and donors, and an online survey of
> > 1000
> > > Wikipedia readers and I am pleased to provide the findings of these
> > >  > > Report.WikimediaJapan.f.071916.pdf>
> > > .
> > >
> > > We found the results show mostly favorable attitudes toward Wikipedia,
> > with
> > > positive ratings on quality, look and feel, and readability, while
> > accuracy
> > > is rated lower and mentioned as a concern among focus groups
> > participants.
> > >
> > > We found a more urgent, direct translation was perceived as better
> than a
> > > more natural translation. This may be because Japanese readers are less
> > > likely to donate spontaneously than some of our Western audiences;
> donors
> > > are generally motivated by significant events like natural disasters.
> We
> > > will have to balance an urgent tone with frank politeness when crafting
> > our
> > > appeals, and are still working to find the right balance of direct and
> > > natural translation. Soon there will be a follow up survey of
> > > the Japanese Wikimedia community to help further our understanding and
> > one
> > > of several means by which we are improving and strengthening the
> > community
> > > involvement in movement fundraising.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > --
> > > Seddon
> > >
> > > Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)
> > > Wikimedia Foundation
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Michael Jahn
> > Leiter Kommunikation & Partnerschaften
> > Head of Communications & Partnerships
> >
> > Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> > Tel. (030) 219 158 260
> >
> > http://wikimedia.de 
> >
> > Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch freien Zugang zu der
> > Gesamtheit des Wissens der Menschheit hat. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> >
> > Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
> > Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
> unter
> > der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
> > Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Christof Pins
> Monitoring & Evaluation
> Cooperation & Development Unit (ZEN)
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> http://wikimedia.de
>
> Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen
> Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> http://spenden.wikimedia.de/
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
> Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
> der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
> Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: http

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update - Japan - Focus Group and Survey Findings

[Christof Pins]

Hello Seddon,

Very insightful! Are the research instruments of this project
(questionnaire, focus group guidelines used) freely accessible somewhere on
Meta or Commons?

Cheers,
Christof

2016-08-31 10:29 GMT+02:00 Michael Jahn :

> Thanks a lot for sharing, Seddon!
> Michael
>
> 2016-08-30 17:11 GMT+02:00 Joseph Seddon :
>
> > Hello wikimedia-l!
> >
> > Back in February of 2015, the fundraising team engaged Lake Research
> > Partners (LRP) to conduct a detailed survey of English language Wikimedia
> > readers
> >  > Wikimedia_Survey_2014_English_Fundraiser.pdf>.
> > As
> > we look to continue to improve our efforts fundraising in non-EN
> languages
> > we decided to conduct a similar fact finding exercise in one of our
> larger
> > fundraising countries. Japan, being an affluent country with a large
> > population and where our projects have had a large reach, has in some
> ways
> > under-performed and seemed ripe to deliver the greatest impact for such
> > efforts.
> >
> > With that in mind we again partnered with Lake Research Partners to run
> two
> > focus groups consisting of readers and donors, and an online survey of
> 1000
> > Wikipedia readers and I am pleased to provide the findings of these
> >  > Report.WikimediaJapan.f.071916.pdf>
> > .
> >
> > We found the results show mostly favorable attitudes toward Wikipedia,
> with
> > positive ratings on quality, look and feel, and readability, while
> accuracy
> > is rated lower and mentioned as a concern among focus groups
> participants.
> >
> > We found a more urgent, direct translation was perceived as better than a
> > more natural translation. This may be because Japanese readers are less
> > likely to donate spontaneously than some of our Western audiences; donors
> > are generally motivated by significant events like natural disasters. We
> > will have to balance an urgent tone with frank politeness when crafting
> our
> > appeals, and are still working to find the right balance of direct and
> > natural translation. Soon there will be a follow up survey of
> > the Japanese Wikimedia community to help further our understanding and
> one
> > of several means by which we are improving and strengthening the
> community
> > involvement in movement fundraising.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > --
> > Seddon
> >
> > Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
>
>
>
>
> --
> Michael Jahn
> Leiter Kommunikation & Partnerschaften
> Head of Communications & Partnerships
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. (030) 219 158 260
>
> http://wikimedia.de 
>
> Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch freien Zugang zu der
> Gesamtheit des Wissens der Menschheit hat. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
> Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
> der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
> Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Christof Pins
Monitoring & Evaluation
Cooperation & Development Unit (ZEN)

Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
http://wikimedia.de

Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen
Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
http://spenden.wikimedia.de/

Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update - Japan - Focus Group and Survey Findings

[Michael Jahn]

Thanks a lot for sharing, Seddon!
Michael

2016-08-30 17:11 GMT+02:00 Joseph Seddon :

> Hello wikimedia-l!
>
> Back in February of 2015, the fundraising team engaged Lake Research
> Partners (LRP) to conduct a detailed survey of English language Wikimedia
> readers
>  Wikimedia_Survey_2014_English_Fundraiser.pdf>.
> As
> we look to continue to improve our efforts fundraising in non-EN languages
> we decided to conduct a similar fact finding exercise in one of our larger
> fundraising countries. Japan, being an affluent country with a large
> population and where our projects have had a large reach, has in some ways
> under-performed and seemed ripe to deliver the greatest impact for such
> efforts.
>
> With that in mind we again partnered with Lake Research Partners to run two
> focus groups consisting of readers and donors, and an online survey of 1000
> Wikipedia readers and I am pleased to provide the findings of these
>  Report.WikimediaJapan.f.071916.pdf>
> .
>
> We found the results show mostly favorable attitudes toward Wikipedia, with
> positive ratings on quality, look and feel, and readability, while accuracy
> is rated lower and mentioned as a concern among focus groups participants.
>
> We found a more urgent, direct translation was perceived as better than a
> more natural translation. This may be because Japanese readers are less
> likely to donate spontaneously than some of our Western audiences; donors
> are generally motivated by significant events like natural disasters. We
> will have to balance an urgent tone with frank politeness when crafting our
> appeals, and are still working to find the right balance of direct and
> natural translation. Soon there will be a follow up survey of
> the Japanese Wikimedia community to help further our understanding and one
> of several means by which we are improving and strengthening the community
> involvement in movement fundraising.
>
> Regards
>
> --
> Seddon
>
> Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)
> Wikimedia Foundation
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 




-- 
Michael Jahn
Leiter Kommunikation & Partnerschaften
Head of Communications & Partnerships

Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. (030) 219 158 260

http://wikimedia.de 

Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch freien Zugang zu der
Gesamtheit des Wissens der Menschheit hat. Helfen Sie uns dabei!

Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update

[Peter Southwood]

I see that there are only two banners that work at present (two links do not 
display the expected banners)
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Lisa Gruwell
Sent: Monday, 23 November 2015 12:28 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update

Hi Peter-

Yes, we have mockups of the banners on the Fundraising Ideas 
<<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising/2015-16_Fundraising_ideas>>
page on meta. We will be making further refinements and possibly adding a 
couple more banners this week.

Thank you,
Lisa

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 10:01 PM, Peter Southwood < 
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> Are these new improved banners available for inspection and comment?
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On 
> Behalf Of Megan Hernandez
> Sent: Friday, 20 November 2015 10:07 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update
>
> Hi all,
>
>
> We are just a few weeks away from the launch of the December English 
> fundraiser.  The end of the year is the most critical time of the year 
> for Wikimedia’s fundraising: The goal this year is $25 million.  The 
> campaign will launch in the US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and 
> Ireland on Giving Tuesday 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giving_Tuesday>, December 1st.
>
> In these past months of preparation, we have relied on feedback from 
> the volunteer community, readers, and staff through discussion pages, 
> feedback sessions, phone calls, interviews, user testing, surveys and A/B 
> tests.
> Thank you to everyone for participating! It has truly been a helpful 
> experience and wonderful to hear from so many voices from all 
> different parts of the movement.
>
> In just the last two weeks, an independent research firm conducted a 
> new survey of Wikipedia readers. (You may remember that we did a 
> similar survey last February.) We heard from you last spring that 
> there were some additional concerns that you would like us to explore 
> with readers.  We tried to look into those concerns in this survey. We 
> have uploaded the survey report on Commons < 
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Wikimedia_Reader_S
> urvey_November_2015.pdf
> >
> for anyone who is interested in reading it. We have also setup a 
> section on the Fundraising Meta page <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fundraising#Reader_Survey_Novembe
> r_2015
> >
> to discuss the survey.
>
> The feedback from readers, the volunteer community and staff has been 
> critical to shape the campaign. Several improvements have been made so 
> far as a direct result of this input.  We have changed a few specific 
> sentences of the message that were discussed heavily on meta pages and 
> also tried a variety of design ideas based on comments.
>
> We also have some fresh banner ideas that came about through a recent 
> workshop with staff.  We will be testing those new banner ideas in 
> small runs throughout the campaign as well.  And we’re still gathering 
> ideas! To see the latest version of the message and submit your ideas, 
> please visit the fundraising ideas meta page < 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising/2015-16_Fundraising_ideas>.
>
> Since last year, we have made improvements to our banner targeting and 
> analytics systems with the goal of raising the budget, while limiting 
> the number of banners and disruption for our readers. We aim to run 
> the campaign for roughly two weeks at a high traffic level and then at 
> a much reduced level for the rest of December.
>
> The fundraising team faces a great challenge this year: the highest 
> revenue target in WMF history along with a decline in page views – 
> particularly in desktop pageviews where readers are more likely to donate.
> The team has and will continue to work hard to make improvements 
> needed to reach this goal.
> We cannot do this alone.  Thank you to everyone who has offered input, 
> expertise, time and energy into helping make this fundraiser a success.
>
> We look forward to your ideas and questions. Since the team 
> experiences an incredibly high volume of seasonal work, we will not be 
> able to respond immediately to questions or feedback.  We will review 
> feedback and bug reports regularly and we have dedicated time to post 
> an update by mid-December and again at the end of the campaign.  
> Here’s how to get
> involved:
>
>-
>
>To file a bug report or technical issue, please create a phabricator
>ticket
><
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.o

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update

[Lisa Gruwell]

Hi Peter-

Yes, we have mockups of the banners on the Fundraising Ideas
<>
page on meta. We will be making further refinements and possibly adding a
couple more banners this week.

Thank you,
Lisa

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 10:01 PM, Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> Are these new improved banners available for inspection and comment?
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf Of Megan Hernandez
> Sent: Friday, 20 November 2015 10:07 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update
>
> Hi all,
>
>
> We are just a few weeks away from the launch of the December English
> fundraiser.  The end of the year is the most critical time of the year for
> Wikimedia’s fundraising: The goal this year is $25 million.  The campaign
> will launch in the US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Ireland on
> Giving Tuesday , December
> 1st.
>
> In these past months of preparation, we have relied on feedback from the
> volunteer community, readers, and staff through discussion pages, feedback
> sessions, phone calls, interviews, user testing, surveys and A/B tests.
> Thank you to everyone for participating! It has truly been a helpful
> experience and wonderful to hear from so many voices from all different
> parts of the movement.
>
> In just the last two weeks, an independent research firm conducted a new
> survey of Wikipedia readers. (You may remember that we did a similar survey
> last February.) We heard from you last spring that there were some
> additional concerns that you would like us to explore with readers.  We
> tried to look into those concerns in this survey. We have uploaded the
> survey report on Commons <
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Wikimedia_Reader_Survey_November_2015.pdf
> >
> for anyone who is interested in reading it. We have also setup a section
> on the Fundraising Meta page <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fundraising#Reader_Survey_November_2015
> >
> to discuss the survey.
>
> The feedback from readers, the volunteer community and staff has been
> critical to shape the campaign. Several improvements have been made so far
> as a direct result of this input.  We have changed a few specific sentences
> of the message that were discussed heavily on meta pages and also tried a
> variety of design ideas based on comments.
>
> We also have some fresh banner ideas that came about through a recent
> workshop with staff.  We will be testing those new banner ideas in small
> runs throughout the campaign as well.  And we’re still gathering ideas! To
> see the latest version of the message and submit your ideas, please visit
> the fundraising ideas meta page <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising/2015-16_Fundraising_ideas>.
>
> Since last year, we have made improvements to our banner targeting and
> analytics systems with the goal of raising the budget, while limiting the
> number of banners and disruption for our readers. We aim to run the
> campaign for roughly two weeks at a high traffic level and then at a much
> reduced level for the rest of December.
>
> The fundraising team faces a great challenge this year: the highest
> revenue target in WMF history along with a decline in page views –
> particularly in desktop pageviews where readers are more likely to donate.
> The team has and will continue to work hard to make improvements needed to
> reach this goal.
> We cannot do this alone.  Thank you to everyone who has offered input,
> expertise, time and energy into helping make this fundraiser a success.
>
> We look forward to your ideas and questions. Since the team experiences an
> incredibly high volume of seasonal work, we will not be able to respond
> immediately to questions or feedback.  We will review feedback and bug
> reports regularly and we have dedicated time to post an update by
> mid-December and again at the end of the campaign.  Here’s how to get
> involved:
>
>-
>
>To file a bug report or technical issue, please create a phabricator
>ticket
><
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/maniphest/task/create/?template=118862>
>or email problemsdonat...@wikimedia.org
>-
>
>To see the latest news from the team, see the fundraising meta page
>
>-
>
>To suggest a banner idea, visit the test ideas meta page
>
>-
>
>To read the latest reader survey, see the
><
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Wikimedia_Reader_Survey_November_2015.pdf
> >full
>report on commons
><
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Wikimedia_Reader_Survey_November_2015.pdf
> >
>-
>
>To learn more about the fundraising pr

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update

[Peter Southwood]

Are these new improved banners available for inspection and comment?
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Megan Hernandez
Sent: Friday, 20 November 2015 10:07 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update

Hi all,


We are just a few weeks away from the launch of the December English 
fundraiser.  The end of the year is the most critical time of the year for 
Wikimedia’s fundraising: The goal this year is $25 million.  The campaign will 
launch in the US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Ireland on Giving 
Tuesday , December 1st.

In these past months of preparation, we have relied on feedback from the 
volunteer community, readers, and staff through discussion pages, feedback 
sessions, phone calls, interviews, user testing, surveys and A/B tests.
Thank you to everyone for participating! It has truly been a helpful experience 
and wonderful to hear from so many voices from all different parts of the 
movement.

In just the last two weeks, an independent research firm conducted a new survey 
of Wikipedia readers. (You may remember that we did a similar survey last 
February.) We heard from you last spring that there were some additional 
concerns that you would like us to explore with readers.  We tried to look into 
those concerns in this survey. We have uploaded the survey report on Commons 

for anyone who is interested in reading it. We have also setup a section on the 
Fundraising Meta page 

to discuss the survey.

The feedback from readers, the volunteer community and staff has been critical 
to shape the campaign. Several improvements have been made so far as a direct 
result of this input.  We have changed a few specific sentences of the message 
that were discussed heavily on meta pages and also tried a variety of design 
ideas based on comments.

We also have some fresh banner ideas that came about through a recent workshop 
with staff.  We will be testing those new banner ideas in small runs throughout 
the campaign as well.  And we’re still gathering ideas! To see the latest 
version of the message and submit your ideas, please visit the fundraising 
ideas meta page 
.

Since last year, we have made improvements to our banner targeting and 
analytics systems with the goal of raising the budget, while limiting the 
number of banners and disruption for our readers. We aim to run the campaign 
for roughly two weeks at a high traffic level and then at a much reduced level 
for the rest of December.

The fundraising team faces a great challenge this year: the highest revenue 
target in WMF history along with a decline in page views – particularly in 
desktop pageviews where readers are more likely to donate. The team has and 
will continue to work hard to make improvements needed to reach this goal.
We cannot do this alone.  Thank you to everyone who has offered input, 
expertise, time and energy into helping make this fundraiser a success.

We look forward to your ideas and questions. Since the team experiences an 
incredibly high volume of seasonal work, we will not be able to respond 
immediately to questions or feedback.  We will review feedback and bug reports 
regularly and we have dedicated time to post an update by mid-December and 
again at the end of the campaign.  Here’s how to get
involved:

   -

   To file a bug report or technical issue, please create a phabricator
   ticket
   
   or email problemsdonat...@wikimedia.org
   -

   To see the latest news from the team, see the fundraising meta page
   
   -

   To suggest a banner idea, visit the test ideas meta page
   
   -

   To read the latest reader survey, see the
   
full
   report on commons
   

   -

   To learn more about the fundraising program and last year’s campaign,
   see the 2014-15 fundraising report
   


Thank you to everyone who has contributed to the campaign preparations.
More importantly, thank you to the entire Wikimedia community for building this 
incredible project that readers love and support with their donations.  None of 
this would be possible without you.

Megan

-- 

Megan Hernandez

Director of Online Fundraising
Wikimedia Foundation
__

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising Update

[Gnangarra]

opened firefox this morning, now maybe its because the coffee kicked in
earlier today I noticed this for the first time, it reads very much like
what I've seen in previous years on Wikipedia banners, I think the
fundraising team should be aware of this because it may be a cause behind
the messages get lost in the noise, in 10 days time seeing an almost
identical banner it will be an over cooked message with no impact




On 21 November 2015 at 04:06, Megan Hernandez 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
>
> We are just a few weeks away from the launch of the December English
> fundraiser.  The end of the year is the most critical time of the year for
> Wikimedia’s fundraising: The goal this year is $25 million.  The campaign
> will launch in the US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Ireland on
> Giving
> Tuesday , December 1st.
>
> In these past months of preparation, we have relied on feedback from the
> volunteer community, readers, and staff through discussion pages, feedback
> sessions, phone calls, interviews, user testing, surveys and A/B tests.
> Thank you to everyone for participating! It has truly been a helpful
> experience and wonderful to hear from so many voices from all different
> parts of the movement.
>
> In just the last two weeks, an independent research firm conducted a new
> survey of Wikipedia readers. (You may remember that we did a similar survey
> last February.) We heard from you last spring that there were some
> additional concerns that you would like us to explore with readers.  We
> tried to look into those concerns in this survey. We have uploaded the
> survey
> report on Commons
> <
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Wikimedia_Reader_Survey_November_2015.pdf
> >
> for anyone who is interested in reading it. We have also setup a section on
> the Fundraising Meta page
> <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fundraising#Reader_Survey_November_2015
> >
> to discuss the survey.
>
> The feedback from readers, the volunteer community and staff has been
> critical to shape the campaign. Several improvements have been made so far
> as a direct result of this input.  We have changed a few specific sentences
> of the message that were discussed heavily on meta pages and also tried a
> variety of design ideas based on comments.
>
> We also have some fresh banner ideas that came about through a recent
> workshop with staff.  We will be testing those new banner ideas in small
> runs throughout the campaign as well.  And we’re still gathering ideas! To
> see the latest version of the message and submit your ideas, please visit
> the fundraising ideas meta page
> .
>
> Since last year, we have made improvements to our banner targeting and
> analytics systems with the goal of raising the budget, while limiting the
> number of banners and disruption for our readers. We aim to run the
> campaign for roughly two weeks at a high traffic level and then at a much
> reduced level for the rest of December.
>
> The fundraising team faces a great challenge this year: the highest revenue
> target in WMF history along with a decline in page views – particularly in
> desktop pageviews where readers are more likely to donate. The team has and
> will continue to work hard to make improvements needed to reach this goal.
> We cannot do this alone.  Thank you to everyone who has offered input,
> expertise, time and energy into helping make this fundraiser a success.
>
> We look forward to your ideas and questions. Since the team experiences an
> incredibly high volume of seasonal work, we will not be able to respond
> immediately to questions or feedback.  We will review feedback and bug
> reports regularly and we have dedicated time to post an update by
> mid-December and again at the end of the campaign.  Here’s how to get
> involved:
>
>-
>
>To file a bug report or technical issue, please create a phabricator
>ticket
><
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/maniphest/task/create/?template=118862>
>or email problemsdonat...@wikimedia.org
>-
>
>To see the latest news from the team, see the fundraising meta page
>
>-
>
>To suggest a banner idea, visit the test ideas meta page
>
>-
>
>To read the latest reader survey, see the
><
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Wikimedia_Reader_Survey_November_2015.pdf
> >full
>report on commons
><
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/25/Wikimedia_Reader_Survey_November_2015.pdf
> >
>-
>
>To learn more about the fundraising program and last year’s campaign,
>see the 2014-15 fundraising report
>
>
>
> Thank you to everyone who has contributed to the campaign prep