Is there no public notice or rationale given when grant applications are
declined?  The only update on the status of your grant that I can see was
by you: <

On Sat, Jun 18, 2022 at 6:37 PM James Heilman <> wrote:

> I have not found getting funding from the WMF for projects easy. VideoWiki
> for example has mostly been funded by WikiProjectMed / personally funded.
> Our first grant application since fully taking on the effort was declined
> <> and
> our programmer working on the project has thus moved on. Our experience has
> been similar regarding our collaboration with Our World in Data. We have
> gotten the interactive graphs working on our own site
> <> and offered to work on
> doing the same for Wikipedia (plus making them multilingual). Jumping
> through hoops to meet WMF requirements will; however, cost about 1,000 USD.
> WikiProjectMed has never received funding from the WMF and as a much much
> smaller NGO cannot cover these programming expenses for the movement.
> James
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2022 at 3:49 PM Samuel Klein <> wrote:
>> We face the paradox <>
>> of choice <>, the lull of peace,
>> and the fog of distributed bureaucracy.
>> ~ With great possibility comes disfocus. (and a few things with focus!)
>> ~ With no clear challenge or adversary, we've become comfortable fussing
>> over small changes... Even as the world moves on to new frontiers and
>> companies race to enclose derivatives of our work. This peace is coming to
>> an end.
>> ~ Our central overhead costs are quite high. So high^ that it seems to
>> baffle everyone involved, each believing the bureaucracy must be caused by
>> some other part of the system, outside of their or their org's control.
>> Our projects are already a global standard for multimodal collaboration
>> at scale, we should embrace that and rise to meet it.  Building some of the
>> world's best free, mulitilingual, accessible tools for is within our remit,
>> experience, and budget.
>>   [Discourse raised a *total *of $20M over its lifetime. we could
>> support + spin out free-knowledge free-software layers like that every
>> year.]
>> Let's practice working together, focusing on a few things each year that
>> can change not only our projects but the world, honoring existing work and
>> aggressively shedding anything we are doing that others are alreay doing
>> almost as well.
>> SJ
>> *^* Up to 10-to-1 in some areas, plus delays of years inserted into
>> otherwise continuous processes.  This ratio can slip into the negative if
>> one includes opportunity cost, or funded work that displaces or drives out
>> comparable voluntary work; or that demands thousands of hours of input for
>> little result.
>> 🌍🌏🌎🌑
>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 8:45 AM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <
>>> wrote:
>>> Or, maybe, just making Wikimedia a non-obsolete environment. I'm sure
>>> the money can go to that effort.
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *From:* Felipe Schenone <>
>>> *Sent:* Friday, June 17, 2022 12:51 PM
>>> *To:* Wikimedia Mailing List <>
>>> *Subject:* [Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikimedia Foundation Inc. design staff
>>> I agree with the diagnosis, but maybe not with the solution. If
>>> Wikimedia is getting "overfunding" and doesn't quite know what to so with
>>> it, there's probably plenty of good things to do. We could start a
>>> community process to decide it, because as you say, reducing funding
>>> efforts or saving indefinitely for the future isn't likely to happen or
>>> even desirable, considering the alternatives.
>>> Here are some ideas:
>>> * Investing in clean energy sources for Wikimedia servers.
>>> * Funding of external developers and libraries on which MediaWiki
>>> depends.
>>> * Funding of open knowledge projects beyond Wikimedia, to not stray too
>>> far the original intentions of donors and volunteers.
>>> * Funding of other non-knowledge altruistic projects (like buying land
>>> for a natural reserve). I'm sure the funding team could rethink and
>>> generalize the campaign to justify this use for future donations.
>>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2022, 4:47 AM <> wrote:
>>> The question of you is important. The Wikimedia Foundation hired a lot
>>> of people in the last years and I do not see so big change in the output.
>>> It is a question that is from my point of view relevant for different areas
>>> at the Wikimedia Foundation. I dont support a too big focus on efficiency
>>> that needs a lot of metrics to measure and to create these metrics needs
>>> then a lot of staff. What is needed and what not is not easy to measure.
>>> With increasing available resources the staff will probably increase. This
>>> is an usual behaviour of humans that they try to use resources if available
>>> and do not only allocate them for the future or say no and try to reduce
>>> the needed resources if not neccessary. From my point of view the Wikimedia
>>> Foundation should reduce the Fundraising acitivities and try to reduce in
>>> the next years the yearly expenses or pay at least attention that they do
>>> not increase further. The salaries at the Wikimedia Foundation are
>>> currently from my point of view in relation to Germany based NGOs high. I
>>> think interesting documents to get an overview about the work of the
>>> Wikimedia Foundation are the quaterly tuning sessions.
>>> Hogü-456
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list --, guidelines
>>> at: and
>>> Public archives at
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list --, guidelines
>>> at: and
>>> Public archives at
>>> To unsubscribe send an email to
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list --, guidelines
>> at: and
>> Public archives at
>> To unsubscribe send an email to
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list --, guidelines
> at: and
> Public archives at
> To unsubscribe send an email to
Wikimedia-l mailing list --, guidelines at: and
Public archives at
To unsubscribe send an email to

Reply via email to