(copy of this comment placed at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:India_Access_To_Knowledge/Draft_Work_plan_July_2014_-_June_2015.
We can continue discussing there)

Hi,

Thanks for the elaborate work plan.

1. The way the budget is presented at

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/India_Access_To_Knowledge/Draft_Work_plan_July_2014_-_June_2015#Budget

is misleading. A good percent of this budget will be spent on staff salary,
travel logisitics and other things which will not be there if the work is
done by the community. So, this is not the actual cost needed for the
desired output but the cost arising because of the involvement of paid
professionals.

So besides this way of presenting the budget, there should also be a
regular way of presenting budget like how the chapters are asked to submit
during FDC application. It can be noted that during the last round of FDC
funding application, WMIN faced very strict criterion regarding
infrastructure cost, staff salary cost.

2. I have an eerie feeling that the community development work in India is
getting outsourced to NGOs like CIS at the cost of crippling budding local
chapters like WMIN. The way Hindi Wikipedia seeks help for content
management (fixing Google articles) confirms my concern.

3. Where can I find WMF's open assessment of the work done by CIS-A2K in
the previous year? How is the cost for the work done justified? If the cost
if justified, then the actual communities and the content they have
developed on their on own are worth many crores of Indian rupees. But, we
face strict guidelines when applying for grants whereas NGOs like CIS don't
have that strict criterion.

Ravi
_______________________________________________
Wikimediaindia-l mailing list
Wikimediaindia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from the list / change mailing preferences visit 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaindia-l

Reply via email to