 Hello, all right. Hello. Welcome to the metrics meeting today. I'm Joe Sutherland. I'm on the support and safety team in the community engagement department. I'll be facilitating James F on the RC. So yeah, today, the theme is the future of open in terms of open internet and open knowledge and the role that Wikimedia and the movement plays in that. Lots to get through today. So I'm going to be super speedy. We'll be doing the welcomes and I've just done the theme introduction, a bit of the movement updates, the Met Museum's open access policy with Richard Nipel, the Wikimedia Foundation values with, I can't remember which one Nicole is doing with Nicole is on the line as well, from Wikimedia Deutschland, movement strategy update and questions at the end for James. So I'll welcome new people to the foundation. We have Trevor Bolliger in the product. We have contractors in terms of volunteers. We have Aaron Vesanth, Clarissa Young, Nick Gross and Andy Merchkowski. Merchkowski. I had to email him to ask him how to pronounce that and I still put you there. Some anniversaries as well. We have Tony Lee, who's been here six years now. John Robson and Mark Holmquist, five years each. Four years, Ed Sanders, Greg Grossmire and Amy Vossbrink. Three years each for Leila, Rachel Stallman and Karen Spicker. Two years for Joseph Alamandu, Eric Evans and Yum. Oh, sorry, no. Tyler Sifriani is the one I missed. And one year each for Yom Ledere, Jaime Villegobes, Sereroth and Ricardo Cacioli. Fantastic. Moving update. I forget what happens in this bit. Sam? Pass it to Maria. Maria Cruz, everybody. Hi, I'm Maria Cruz. I'm the award alchemist in the sector 7G. And I'm here to share a few, thank you. Thanks. The Simpsons, yeah. I'm here to share a few stories of what the communities have been up to lately. WikiVillages of Cameroon was a writing contest organized in the French Wikipedia and the English Wikipedia. Took up to the rich cultural heritage of Cameroon on Wikipedia. And the results were published in January 20 or so. So that's why it's coming in here, although it took place last year. What I think is interesting about this story is that it was organized by a collective development group of professional farmers who see open access to information as key to local development. And it's amazing the results that they got on French Wikipedia. And there are already three spin-off projects after this contest. Two Wiki projects and more intense work on Villages on Wikipedia. And you can find out more over there. Yeah, what Casey is saying is that this group is completely new to Wikipedia. They saw us as allies in their work and it's amazing the results they got being new to Wikipedia and everything. So if you can visit, this is the page on English Wikipedia, but you can go to the French Wikipedia page of the same contest and you will see how much information there is there. It's really amazing. Yay. Only one ref got the second edition of this campaign, which seeks to engage librarians on Wikipedia and the challenge is to add citations to Wikipedia articles. And in this second edition, they increased, they have three times more contributions and two times more languages involved. This is a campaign hosted by the Wikipedia library in collaboration with many community leaders over the world. So amazing results. They still have a lot of lessons learned and things they want to grow in. And you can learn more about that in the link. The Stuart selection is going on through the end of this month. Stuart are a group of about 30 volunteers who serve the global community focusing on user rights and cross wiki fight against spam, vandalism and abuse. It's a very noble dedication to the wikis. The voting is open through February 28 and you can find out more information on meta wiki media. There are new members to the affiliations committee. The committee is responsible for guiding volunteers and establishing new wiki media chapters groups, user groups and thematic organizations. They had a call for candidates through the end of last year and now Kirill was elected for a second term. So Deep Jill and Camilla are two newly elected members. And Joe, if you can move so I can read the names, that would be awesome. Thank you. Ting Chen, Manu, Schneider, Ganesh, Anirud and Emily Temple would have finished their terms and I wanted to take the time to name them all as a way to thank them for their service. Foundation highlights, Project Grants has an open call until March 14th. The new grants will be announced on May 19th and this first in June. There is a new transparency report. The legal team has announced the publication of a new report, revealing 187 requests to remove or alter content. The URL is very easy so you can find out more there. And there's an inspired campaign, developing knowledge collaboration with non-movement partners. You can submit an idea until February 28th as well. Coming up is the wiki media conference in Berlin at the end of March. The movement strategy, cycle one discussions. Wiki starts to point zero design. We have around two and annual planning. Yay! And over to Richard, who is online. Hi, I'm Richard Nipel, a user pharaohs on English Wikipedia and many other projects. You may know me from my activities with Wikimedia New York City chapter. Right now I'm active as a meeting residence at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. You may have heard of it. It's a big museum in New York, encyclopedic museum. Next slide. Is that how it works? Here it is. You can see the small part of the pediment. Metropolitan Museum of Art, it's the largest museum in New York. It's encyclopedic museum. The mission of our project at the Met is to wikify the Met and metify the wiki to bring together the complementary strengths and make the Met a little bit more like Wikimedia projects and make the wiki a little bit more like the Met and similar museums by having more institutional and expert knowledge. As part of this residence, the main goal is to focus on the artworks themselves. They are doing a release under CC0 of all public domain artworks in the museum, including photographs of the two-dimensional and three-dimensional artworks, all of them. This is, you know, huge swathes of the museum, except for the small part that's devoted to modern art. And they're also dedicated to including information on wiki data for all of the works in the museum, including copyrighted works, of course. Next slide. So I wanted to share our first, the first upload I made, the Churikwi Frog Pendant. It's a nice little frog from Costa Rica. One of the things I noticed when I uploaded it is that it's from a culture that doesn't have any article on English Wikipedia. In fact, it only has an article on Polish Wikipedia so far. If there are any Polish speakers around, Flonophones, this is your big chance. We'd love to have this beautiful image on English Wikipedia, but we need an article in the culture first. Next slide, please. I wanted to show off a new article that I started as part of this project. The armor, or the first of the Holy Roman Empire. It's actually the second article on an individual suit of armor we've ever had on English Wikipedia at least. There might be some on German who knows. It's part of the Wiki3 project, which we have highlighted three. So highlight works of the collection that we're working on in depth. So one is the Ferdinand, the first armor. Another one is the marode altarpiece, religious altarpiece from the. And the third is the Benin pendant mask, which is quite an interesting piece of work from an African kingdom from the 16th century, which I've worked on the last couple of days. So we need to promote a little bit as part of Black Wiki History Month. Next slide, please. So this is a very important that the Mac considers itself an encyclopedic museum. They aim to cover every aspect of world art history. That's part of their remit they very proudly present. I didn't have to prompt them to do this part of their whole stick as they present themselves as a as a as a museum as an encyclopedic museum. There are a few large museums that are dedicated to every every culture ever, including like, you know, the British Museum and the Louvre and some others like that. But we want one of the goals of the Glenn Wiki program here is to bridge art and historical topics because even though the focus of the med is on artwork. A lot of these artworks have great historical significance and interact with a lot of other topics. And having good illustrations of them encourages community creation on a lot of these topics, including some undercover topics. So these are the overall goals for the project. We expect to put 375,000 images on Wikimedia Commons. You know, including both the paintings and the sculptures. We expect to have at least 400,000 images on Wikidata, hopefully, and the number of images will, you know, go up as time goes on they basically they have a whole set of CC zero licensed images, and they want to include them all. And more every week, apparently. So we have to figure out some sort of system for that. One of the more interesting things I'd like to do is work on new genres of articles that are missing from Wikipedia. I just mentioned that we only have a second suit of armor ever on Wikipedia, ever on English Wikipedia, at least. I like to have more suits of armor. I like to have more masks. I'd like to have more representations of non Western art forms, which are maybe under covered a little bit. And some of our focus in recent history has been that some of all paintings project, which is great, but it's mostly focused on paintings and on European paintings and two dimensional artwork, and that obviously that is only one form of art. So hopefully we can expand that. Next slide please. Lessons learned so I was asked to share a little bit about the path that led to this engagement and and collaboration. And the overall path over, you know, that made this possible. So I would say that, you know, in terms of the experience of Wikipedia New York City and myself, focusing on a community of practice has been viable. And, you know, finding people that are willing to work with you on these topics and even focus on provincialism. It's not a popular idea, but I am very dedicated to the New York community. And I'm interested in what people are dedicated to their local communities and I think that by working with institutions in one particular community and building up the strength of your local Wikipedia community, and your local academic community, and your local museum slash library community, you can believe a lot. And it's good to embrace the diversity of institutions in New York we've had collaborations with probably dozens of institutions, and they each have their own strengths, their weaknesses and their own paths along the ways to, to more openness. For example, MoMA has been museum modern art has been very good for holding events in Edithons. We have a large 300 person art plus feminism event there every year. And then other events throughout the year other one other events at other places are it's harder to hold places in person, we're going to hold one in person to met but probably won't be happening on a very regular basis. But, you know, you can find different strength different weaknesses I did I did some project with the Guggenheim below before this and they had their own, you know, own strengths and own, own, own advantages. Each one is a little bit different and it's good to work things out and find where the value is. Next slide please. Yeah, so I wanted to share some upcoming activities and how to get involved. So we are having one, at least one in person event which is an image editathon at the hopefully at the Watson Library at the Met where we're going to encourage people to take some of these images that we've uploaded or uploading and get them on the relevant with the PDF articles, including replacing some of the handmade images, which are not always super high quality. And, you know, hopefully, you know, write more about some of these artworks. And we will we'd really like to do. And for people in the national community who are listening or people just active online, have more collaborations in online with thematic online groups such as women in red. I'm hoping to maybe do something with the officially with the art and feminism events coming up, the Asian and African campaigns, obviously there's a lot of Asian and African art, and of course European art and other kinds of art there's a lot of American art as well. And maybe, you know, work more on large numbers of articles on a lot of these things. So one thing, for example, is, I want to encourage this weekend, we have been focused on African diaspora topics is maybe getting the beneath pending article, the beneath pending mask article up to good quality status, and then encouraging its translation into a number of different languages, including African languages. So I invite everyone to join us at wiki project met it's a page on English Wikipedia but you know you're welcome to join whatever language become a member and participate in discussions. And I wouldn't mention that for the more tech inclined among you, both in the WMF and outside of it, we could use your tech help with look on with media commons on wiki data and in playing with wiki data games. I would like to have a system where we can identify the existing met images on on the different wiki media sites and see if they're sub par and if they are sub par replace them, or at least have suggestions of where to replace them. I would like to have better systems of editing say wiki data so we can say what each artworks depict. And eventually I would like to be able to create create sort of boilerplate articles from from some of the metadata, so we can have a lot of high quality articles from the works in the collection. I'm not sure how much time I have left, but. So if you want to reach me out for more information you can reach me out on on Wikipedia or wiki media or you can reach me at my, my many mail address which they gave me special permission to have, even though I'm a contractor. I've said this before when I was introducing you but your username is Feros, F-P-H-A-R-O-S. All right, I think it's Anna next. Fantastic. Or values. Hi everybody. I always get kind of freaked out when I have to speak up here. It's very weird. Thank you. So I wanted to talk to you today about the work that was done on values and where we are in the process. I was really excited about this work stream, pretty much a highlight of my professional career working with my colleagues on this. So just to start out, our recommendations are really sort of indivisible from the process that we went through. So I'm going to spend some time, probably about a thousand feet level, a thousand foot view of what we did so that you can understand where we arrived. First I want to brag about the team. Gosh, actually. This is just such a dream team. They so exceeded my expectations. I can't tell you. Originally I asked Guillaume, because when I first started this, I don't know, like summer. Sometimes Guillaume had written so much in so many places on so many things. So I reached out to him and tried to talk him into partnering. And at first he was really quite hesitant, but then he came back and was really excited. And I asked him to sort of intellectually frame the conversation. You can find that on Meta. And he did just a beautiful piece of intellectual work there that I really enjoyed. And then all of us got together and decided how we were going to facilitate these conversations and hammered it out. And then everybody went out and facilitated. And then we had a whole process of deliberation and debate. And it was really marvelous to watch. I mean Angel was bringing in like past quotes from law professors and hammering us with the law. And Arthur was talking like he just walked out of the cathedral and the bazaar. And Christian was facilitating the whole thing and adding such a great sense of humor and pushing us all along. And there were just a lot of moments of poetry. I got to say it was lovely. I can't gush enough. I just felt lucky to watch it. So the questions, what were the questions we were trying to answer? So keep in mind that we don't have to say everything with our values. We have other foundational documents to guide our decisions. We have our vision statement. We have our mission and our guiding principles. So we really tried to separate out what question are we trying to answer here. And each the vision, the mission, the guiding principles, we saw those as each as answering a unique question. So our vision, where are we headed? Our mission, what do we do to get there? Our guiding principles we decided were how we behave along the way. And for our values, we took a slightly different track, which is why are we even going there in the first place? So here's a lovely quote from Guillaume's initial framing, which you can see on META, is identifying the organization's values comes from identifying the underlying motivation for changing human lives the way we do. The effect that the Wikimedia Foundation has on human lives is through our mission. Our values are the deeply held beliefs that explain why we do it. So we set out in search of the why. And here's the process that unfolded. It's such a delight. So we said we would arrive at five values anymore and no one can remember them. If you've ever been in organizations with like 12 values, no one knows what they are. And their use in decision making grows really complicated because you're trying to balance so many different perspectives to make a single decision. And they're difficult to embed in the culture. So that was our reasoning for the number of values. And our process was precise and open by design. We publicly announced our intentions and process on META and the lists. We hosted 25 live facilitated conversations, 109 people participated. I would say that originally we had scheduled 36 conversations, but not all of them filled. So there were opportunities for more people to participate. They just did not do so. So it wasn't a capacity issue. And we engaged with staff, volunteers and board members. They all joined the conversations. We had a dedicated scribe in each conversation, Guillaume or myself. My main role is as a scribe. And we published all the anonymized transcripts on META. Here you can just see a screenshot of one conversation. Yeah, so it's pretty impressive. And you know, if you want to see a truly beautiful act of documentation, I would go to the META page. So we had eight themes emerge and you can see these on META as well. This is just one theme. And when we say emerged, it was not a gut feel. It was an elaborately documented distillation process. So check this stuff out. Each theme was composed of statements referenced from our transcripts. See all these little blue things? You click it and it tags back to the anonymized notes that we published. So all of these statements are something that one of you said or a volunteer or... And this is just one theme and we're not even at the bottom of it here. Check it out on META. It's just wild. It just opened my mind of what someone could do with documentation. Guillaume kind of just blew us all away on that account. So here are the original, here are some of the themes that emerged. Take a look. Let's go to the recommendations. So the core team met in person for two days. The picture Guillaume took of some quesadillas I made because there was a fire alarm here. So we all went to my house. I don't know why that's there. And what we were thinking about was really which values would support our work and a sense of belonging going forward. And how would they work together? Because even though we'd all seen individual perspectives of something that somebody was really attached to, what happens when you add it all up? Does it make any kind of sense or is it fighting itself? And how could we make them sing? So we found that three of the themes and this was really coincidental. We were nervous about the distillation process. How were we really going to integrate your guys' voice and do something coherent? Because sometimes they're at odds. But these themes, we had three themes that were really about the how more than the why and that were already covered by the guiding principles, which are going nowhere. So that left us with five themes. And we'd like to talk to these little walls in my house. We moved all the furniture. I'd like to walk you through some of them. So here's the first one. Take a read of some of these quotes. They're quite touching. We had a lot of conversations about wisdom, about critical thinking, about how to think through a problem rather than a knee-jerk reaction. How to do something excellent that was worthy of our mission. And this is what we spit out. We had a long debate about striving for excellence and excellence. Excellent sound of really lame and kind of corporate to us. But striving for it sounded interesting, you know? Okay, our next theme. This one was all about pluralism, openness, inclusiveness, and diversity. And amazingly in every conversation, this came up, every single one. And here's what it's morphed into. I can't remember who, I think it was Guillaume. I can't remember, but when we got to the welcome and cherish our differences, that hit about the right tone on all of our hearts. Welcoming hosts, caring neighbors, and equitable allies. I love it. And if I'm going too fast through any of this, you can also just go see it on Meta. Here's the next one. Cooperation, hospitality, community, collaboration, and togetherness. The only thing I wanted to debate was collaboration leaves fewer bodies on the ground. I wasn't sure about that. Having been a lifelong collaborator. And here's what it became. The next one. Take a look at what people had to say. Here's where we currently are on this one. Since everyone's just reading their email, I'll go ahead. The last one. Fun, playfulness, enthusiasm, curiosity, and awe. And here's what this one became. So here's the top line on all of them, but none of them can really be separate from the text that accompanies them. And let me just walk you through what the next round of steps are here. So I was ahead of myself. This synthesis is up on Meta. Please go check it out. It was posted on Valentine's Day, which I thought was delightful. And the conversation will close on March 4th. Since really so much of what was arrived at or the themes that emerged came from the process itself, one person's perspective likely can't sway the whole thing, right? So we probably won't change the top lines of anything, but we're probably willing to negotiate on some of the copy. Maybe even some of the top lines, but it'll be open for a few more weeks if you want to comment. We'd love to hear from you. And then probably late Q3, I've inherited a little bit of work recently, but late Q3 will explore how to embed these values throughout our culture and the employee lifecycle, bring together another group of volunteers, some people from talent and culture as well. And we'll work in the open, probably on Meta, with a similar degree of precision about how we might make these live in our day-to-day work. But I just want to thank you all for coming and sharing ideas, debating about social goods, and offering yourselves in conversation. It was really just such a delight. Thanks. Thank you, Anna. Oh, I'm going to get back up here. Movement strategy update now with, I think with Nicole, who's on the line. Catherine on the line, not on the line, in here. In the flesh. It's time for them. Hello. Hello. Ah, yes. Okay. I am very excited to give you a movement strategy update. And like Anna, I always get a little bit nervous up here too. I have not rehearsed this one, so bear with me. This is where we are today. We are at the beginning of January, a couple months ago, I stood up in front of you and I presented this timeline, which goes all the way until January, 2019, which is why it had that telescoping effect of looking as though Wikimania is tomorrow. That is not in fact the case. Wikimania is a few months away. So travel, take a deep breath. Thank you. But in terms of the timeline of what we're looking at for a movement strategy, we really are looking at a sort of two year cycle of planning and engagement with our community and then moving into implementation. So last time I stood in front of you, we were here in process planning. There was a board meeting in November in which the board said this seems like a good way to move forward. And now we are here at the end of it's February, right? At the end of February with Wikimania coming up, annual planning in the works. And then we're going to close that all off around July. And then we're going to start implementing and implementing is going to be great. All the way through strategic execution and a new annual plan. I can't believe I'm saying this, 2018 to 2019, a whole year away from now in which we're going to be implementing against strategy. So this is a long timeline. Over the course of the past few weeks and months really at this point, we've been having a lot of conversations with folks here in this room, with folks in our community and ultimately come to a few goals for movement strategy. And I just want to review those quickly. So it says project because this is very much a project. The first is to identify a cohesive or coherent direction that aligns us all and inspires us around what it is that we might do. So that in 15 years time, when we look back, we say, gosh, look at this incredible thing we've accomplished as Wikipedia and the Wikimedia movement turns 30 instead of 15 or 16 as we were this year. The second, which I think is just as important is to build trust, goodwill and alignment within our movement. Part of the process, part of the outcome is the process itself. It's having conversations across different communities, across different projects and understanding what matters to each of us and how we have a collective coming together, participating in a legitimate and transparent and open process that's based on shared power as opposed to hierarchy. Better understanding the people and institutions that make up our movement, those that we are not yet reaching and how those needs may change over the next 15 years. So the needs of the communities that we serve today, the needs of the readers and users that we serve today may be different in the future and we certainly don't know very much about the people that we're not reaching and so there's an obligation and almost a mandate for us to learn more there. Build a shared understanding of what it means to be a movement. We use that word a lot but I'm not sure that we all have the same definition of it. If I were to look out into this room or onto IRC or out to whomever is watching, I'm sure everybody would come with their own perspective of what that is. So perhaps we can have some sort of common definition. And then building relationships that expand and enrich our movement over time. Feeling as though these next few months of consultation is really an investment not just in the relationships we already have, although certainly an opportunity to deepen and improve those, but also an opportunity to invest in the relationships that we've always wanted to build. To identify those partners that we really wish to work with. I was thinking a little bit earlier of Richard's presentation about the Met. How cool is that that they consider us a partner now? Who else would we want to partner with? And so to that end I'm going to introduce some pretty cool people who are going to be shepherding this process through. So between now in Wikimania and then from Wikimania to the end of the year, we have some awesome folks on board. Audience tracks, I should probably pause to introduce those. As we've been talking about how to engage in a process that really brings all of us together, that understands the different needs that folks have about how to participate, but also thinks about how do we bring people who aren't in the conversation in and moves beyond the sort of anecdotal experience we each have as community members or in the roles that we play into understanding a broader based understanding based on surveys and audience research and data and what we know about the world, we thought that we should really think about how we separate these out and how we reach these audiences in different ways. And so we came up with these four loose or structured, I'm going to let the audience leads tell you about how loose or structured they are, audience tracks, the first being organized groups. And that looks around our movement and says, our movement's really good at self-organizing. It's organized into committees, it's organized into affiliates, it's organized into chapters, it's organized into co-lab groups. How do we reach those organized groups? Because they have different needs than individual contributors, but they're not all of our movement. In fact, most of our movement is individual contributors and they speak in different ways and they communicate on different platforms. We often look to META as the primary place, but that's not totally true. Different communities talk on different platforms, they use different languages, they engage at their village pumps or in other forums, so how do we reach them? Again, there's the folks that we partner with, folks who are using us, our readers in places where Wikipedia is well-known and well-used. We're calling this our high-reach markets. What does that mean? It means that a lot of people like us, a lot of people know us, a lot of people use us, and a lot of people partner with us in these places. And then we've got our low-reach markets. And those are places where we want to be, but we're not fully there yet. It doesn't mean that we don't have readers and it doesn't mean that we don't have partners, it just means that we're not reaching as many people as we want to reach. And so we've got those two as separate tracks. And the really cool thing is the leaders of these tracks, and I'm going to hand it over to them to talk a little bit more about it. I'm delighted to announce that Nicole Abert from Wikimedia Deutschland has agreed to join us to be the lead for Track A, which is our organized groups track. Welcome, Nicole. And she's going to talk a little bit about what her approach is going to be and the community she's going to pull together to make this happen. Track B is being led by our own Jamie Anstee. She's already doing a fantastic job. She's going to tell you a little bit about that. Track C is going to be led by Juliette Barbara. And she's going to tell you about the team that she's putting together. And then Track D is already underway and being led by Adele Verrana. And so she's going to talk a little bit about that. So I'm going to get off the stage and I'm going to hand it over to Nicole who's not actually on the stage, but is going to join us via Hangout. And then we're going to hear from the other leads. And then we're going to move into questions and then I'm going to go away. Yeah, thank you, Catherine, for the introduction. And I'm very excited to being part of this, to joining this team. And can someone click one slide for that, please? And I think this is a, yeah, okay, thanks a lot. So as Catherine said, my audience or the audience of Track A will be organized groups which consist of different, of affiliates and different other organized groups. And we will be working toward, as Catherine also just said, the strategic direction and priorities. And what I think is very special or very important here in this track is that we create the consensus between the, or among the peace stakeholders and build and also rebuild trust and the partnership relation among these organized groups, but also with the Wikimedia Foundation. And the things that I will be starting with, I will be starting like really kicking this off next week, is first of all to create an advisory council to really make sure that all voices are heard in this process. So that we have members in this advisory council from different groups, from different regions, from different genders, and also from different sizes and types of organized groups. And we will be reaching out to all these groups. We will ask them to designate a contact person who will then coordinate the conversations and discussions in this group. And we have been drafting a toolkit to guide these conversations to help people with how they can set up meetings and also have online conversations with their stakeholders. And of course, the Wikimedia conference that is coming up in, at the end of next month in Berlin, this will be kind of the main platform for the Track A conversation. And I'm also looking very much forward to working together with CE, who will support me in this process. So thanks a lot. And I'm handing now over to Jamie. Thanks, Nicole. So importantly, Track A and Track B are going to be really tightly intertwined. And while we flashed on the sort of flow diagram, we didn't actually present that the slide before this. So maybe we can look back at that really quickly. So here you can see Track A and Track B highly integrated. For both Track A and Track B, the Community Engagement Department has supporting teams, where our staff are actually on board to be supporting both of those tracks. Of course, you can see also here we have a mix of types of conversations and channels for conversations identified that we'll be pursuing partly through Track A and partly through Track B. Without spending more time, we can skip ahead too now. Okay. So importantly, Track B is the individual contributors looking at editors, very active, active, just barely they came around. We're trying to get at all of those editors. We're also trying to capture our volunteer developers and curators. Importantly, to do this, we know we can't just do a conversation on meta. We know we can't just do a conversation on meta in a survey run by the foundation. We know through Track A we can coordinate through our organized groups. Track B is going to try some different approaches for this. The Sport and Safety team has been being led actually by Maggie as well as some other parts of our support team to quickly hire and search for three meta coordinators and 17 different language coordinators from priority languages that are not English. So in addition to our English actions, we will also be hitting all of these 17 languages hopefully. These liaisons will work both with people on the ground who want to coordinate a discussion from Track A as well as to reach out and host those conversations and find discussion coordinators in those areas with the same toolkit that Nicole was talking about. Importantly, the Track A and Track B will go through three different cycles where each cycle we're iterating and bringing back first our most broad ideas, refining, getting to the top three to five strategic directions, really understanding what those are in that third cycle in order to arrive at a shared direction at Wikimania. So importantly, we're really excited in community engagement and I'm being supported by, of course, our chief, Maggie Dennis, to be able to deliver our usual support for consultations but also super reinforced by these extra hires and really grateful for the next slide. Community process steering committee that helped us to design this. So importantly, Track A and Track B were not our design. Yes, if we could get great applause. We had 11 different community members at the last minute. We reached out to these folks just after the holidays. Some people still in holidays time actually and they signed up and almost every single person we asked said, yes, I will do this. Not only did they show up, they have been amazing, like provocative thinkers and inputters to this process and have really challenged us to go beyond the normal channels to use a WhatsApp and things like that and other social media outlets as well. So thank you so much to all these folks who not only did their original four-week commitment but most of them were actually able to stay on for two weeks longer to help us further with the toolkit iteration. So thank you all. This is now to Juliet. All right. So as Catherine said, Track C focuses on what we're calling high-reach markets. These are places where we are well-known. Readers and partners use us, know us, work with us. Countries like the U.S., Canada, many countries in Western Europe, Russia and Japan. We know that we are big in Japan. So I'm working very closely with Caitlin Virtue from Major Gifts on this and also consulting with Toby throughout the process. As we develop the research and engagements that we're going to be doing, we're also going to be working with people in the project and I'm sorry, the product team and other teams in the foundation and also reaching out to community members to get ideas on who we should be talking to. So there are two components to this work. One is a research-based component which will involve understanding the key trends that are going to impact our movement over the next 15 years. So that will be technological trends, demographic trends, social, and we'll do that through doing some desk research but also looking at available demographic research and doing generative research in the high-reach markets that we're focusing on. The second phase is what we're calling consultant convene and the goal of that is to build an ecosystem of potential partners and allies and deepen relationships with people we already work with as well as learn from them what they see as the key trends that will impact our movement. And we're going to do that through a series of events. Some will be salons in different countries. We're also going to do that through a number of one-on-one interviews. So I'll be reaching out to many of you, Caitlin and I will, to get your ideas on who we need to talk to. I also want to say that this track is going to be very closely coordinated with Adele and Track B and we're going to be making sure that we're reaching a very representative set of people among all markets and also coordinating on the research that we collect so we can create some global benchmarks. Thank you, Juliette, and welcome, Nicole. So I think we already heard a little bit about the Track D and C and how both relate. But the most important for me here is really to talk about the voice of the people that are not in the conversation yet. And if we're thinking about the next 15 years and where we want to be in 2030 we need to add those voices to this conversation. So the main outcome for Track D is really to ensure the representation of this audience to where we're going, right? What is our strategic direction? And really make sure that we understand that this audience relationship with knowledge and what are the barriers that are keeping them away? So if they're not here now and yet, why? We need to understand that. And we're going to use the same methodology that Juliette just explained. There will be a research portion of that. We have already done that for new readers, right? We have already done that in Nigeria, India, and Mexico. We will keep doing that because that has proven really to bring great results for how we understand our users and we need to do more. We also will be talking to experts and thought leaders. And this is really important because our partnership team already does that. The global reach team already does that. We have been gathering a lot of feedback that comes from product to community on how we could be doing more and working more in these geographies. So we need to intensify these conversations and talk to the thought leaders and experts. And we are choosing some priority markets because those regions are big regions. So in terms of countries that we are going to be focusing on, we are going to be doing that with the new readers' countries. So again, Nigeria, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Brazil, and Mexico. Some of those have already been covered for the new readers' design research. So we're not going to repeat the research in Mexico, Nigeria, and India, but we will do a new round of ethnographic research in Indonesia, Brazil, and Egypt. And the same astraxie doing events and salons and bringing those experts together. We are really interested in bringing social impact organizations to the table in these geographies and learn from them where they are going the next 15 years and how we can collaborate. And I'm really, really excited to be doing that, especially thinking about the partnerships potential. We all have the urge to know who we want to talk, who we want to partner with in the next 15 years, and I really think this process is going to be key for that. That's it. Thank you. Hello again. So I'll just open it up for questions and discussions. We have nine minutes. James. Hi there. So the first question I've got from IRC is from Tillman to Anna, I guess, around the value process, which is, can you give an overview of how the new values differ from the previous ones and the guiding principles? What are the new themes that emerged or are now emphasized more highly? What was dropped or de-emphasized? And in particular, he highlighted the transparency as a term we'll see what's going on. Does anyone else on the team want to take this one? No, I mean, I'm happy to take it, but I don't need to. Yeah. Oh, you're saying me. Okay, great. Can you repeat the question, sir? Sure. What changed with the values? Let me start with that one. So actually, there were actually two sets of values that were on the Wikis, and people didn't know which one they were referring to. And there was not, it was not a broad-based conversation that arrived, that they used to arrive at those values, which is amazing because it was totally appropriate for the time that it was created. So one of the reasons was there was two sets. Nobody knew which one they were referring to. And it wasn't a broad-based conversation that was current. So I think that's kind of the first major difference. I don't know if that answers Tillman's question, but... And then the second part was... Kind of the relationship to other parts, like the guiding principles. Yes. Or transparency, which is in the guiding principles, but not in these new values. What does that mean? Yes. Very good question. I'll give you my answer, but it's not like I'm coming down the mountain with some tablets and have all the answers right now. If we found that if a value or a principle was already covered in how we were to do something, that it didn't need to be duplicated. And furthermore, we had a long question about was a value an end in itself, or was it a means to another value? Long debates about that. And we felt that transparency was a means, was a how, and that it should remain and that we should value it as a guiding principle and that we should never abandon it in any way whatsoever, but that it was already covered by the guiding principles. I don't have any further questions from Marcy at this time. Are there any in the room? The microphone is over there next to the board. I was going to describe the board, but it's just a board. Dario approaching the mic. Hello. Thanks for the update on the strategy process. I have a question about the timeline. So we've been talking a lot about the head of the process. So let me hear you now. We've been talking a lot about the tail of the process because that affects our planning right now, but not so much about the head and tail of the process. And I'm curious about what's going to happen after week minimum. So I read that there's going to be a three to six month period for planning execution and I'm curious to hear more. I'll give it my best shot. I think the honest answer, Dario, is that we're building out the process even as we go. So when we were looking at what we could achieve by Wikimania, given the degree of consultation, we realized that we would not actually get to the place of having a full strategy. So to my mind, a full strategy is not just the goals that we want to achieve, but it's like, how are we going to do it? Who's going to be responsible? What sort of structures do we need? What sort of resource allocation? And the process of conversation, but for Wikimania feels as though that's going to take up that entire time. And then the conversation about what's the actual execution looks like won't really have the opportunity to happen then. And so the way that we've been thinking about this is have the broad consultation, understand what themes are coming out, understand what's resonating with folks, start to narrow that down into something that starts to look like a plan for the future in the sense of the goals, the direction, the objectives, what are the principles that we agree on around what we want to achieve, and then post-Wikimania use that time to actually start planning. What do we need to do to get there? I think when we were looking at the retrospective on past strategy processes, what we found was that we were really good at setting goals and less good about talking about what the implementation would actually look like. So there's an element of implementation between now and the end of the year. The idea being that by the time we start into the next annual planning cycle, we'll have clarity on that and can actually plan against that. Does that answer the question, or please feel free to follow up. I understand what you're saying. Is that primarily informing the annual plan for the next fiscal, not so much about planning the entire strategy in the next ten years? No, sorry. Thank you. I appreciate that clarification. The idea would be to have enough information to plan an annual plan for the next fiscal, and as we've been talking about in some venues, moving beyond just annual planning into 18 to 24-month cycles because annual planning itself is a very limited window of 12-month planning. So moving away from strict 12-month cycles of annual planning, looking at that more like annual budgeting and having planning cycles that actually last longer, that take projects out of 12-month buckets into cycles that actually make sense for those projects that we're working on. The idea is that we would have that direction by Wikimania that it wouldn't be a big reveal at Wikimania because ideally we've had all these conversations on Wiki and everyone sort of knows where we're going and then we use the period after Wikimania to actually talk about how do we think about these resourcing, but that is again with a longer-term perspective into the future. My guess is that we're really looking at sort of like maybe it is five-three-year-type plans or three-five-year-type plans and then we do annual budgeting on an annualized basis, but really starting to move towards longer-term horizons for planning because that's really what we should be doing overall. Thank you. Other questions? No? It's a quiet group today. It's a big group. I've got another question from ILC. To what level are individual contributors currently aware of the current strategy process? Ah, that is a great question. Well, I can't answer with any sort of degree of certainty as to what level individual contributors are aware. We know that we've been sending out weekly updates on Wikimedia L. I know that the communications team has recently done a fairly large update to a number of different sources and lists and I'm looking for Greg Farnham, are you in the room? Greg, do you want to give an answer to where we've been communicating that and what your perspective is on how aware folks are at this point in time and what we've been thinking about? I'm concerned that not enough folks know but I think it's an escalating approach towards getting folks involved. So we are trying a number of different ideas to reach as many audiences as possible. Some of these tactics you've seen before like during elections when we will use mass message and we will to the village pumps and to the affiliate pages and then we go to the project mailing lists. This time we decided to go a step further and in addition to going to the project mailing lists we went to all of the language mailing lists as well as the regional mailing lists so as we generally will send a big announcement to about 10 lists we did it to about 100 lists this time. So this was an experiment for us, moderators if you're a list moderator and you haven't seen it you can check your queue and it should be in the queue. So that's one thing we tried we also are creating a list of people who can sign up for updates, we're sending it out to there and we're looking at other ideas like social media, IRC and any channel that exists within the community we are identifying a method of at least getting these monthly updates out there and then the weekly updates will continue to go out to the main WML but if people have ideas of other places or if there are other pages please feel free to email the communications team we would love to hear your ideas and we can add other pages very very easily or other village pumps very very easily and just so folks know we recognize that we immediately put them up for translation and try to make them available in as many languages as we can. We haven't done central notice yet I think one of the next steps that's going to happen will be sort of a large announcement and that one we will also have on the blog we may do central notice and a few other things so if people have ideas definitely let us know but the plan right now is to try to get it out to as many channels as possible I should also note that I really appreciate that we didn't get a lot of pushback on sending out to that many mailing lists we were mildly nervous about that and everyone was very respectful and respectful and understanding and I personally appreciated that a great deal because it prevented my inbox from getting filled up. Thanks Greg. I think we're in planning mode right now as you heard from folks the information is up on wiki we definitely encourage comments and feedback we've already gotten some really great comments and engaged in a number of discussions so that information begins which is coming up really soon I expect that will be the time at which we'll start putting up things like central notice to make sure folks are aware and as you heard from Jamie we have folks now engaged in translation in 17 languages is that right? So that should also address some of the concerns Greg just raised about being in English and making sure information is available Other questions? I think we're over time now we I mean we briefly have wiki love but I'm not sure how much that we can get through because we are now at 12 oh that ain't me I can't skip the slide anyway for some reason so alright I think that's us so thank you very much for joining us today oh we have one very quick piece of wiki love head sorry not wiki love it's actually can we actually have the translation people all year? all the translation people all here? just have translators to help us out for translation as a whole it's a nice call for translators on the line but thanks a lot