 Hi everyone. Welcome to Monthly Metrics, the Media Foundation. I'm Abby Ripstra, and I'm a design researcher here, a lead design researcher. And I've done a bunch of research, traveled a lot of the world, and learned what people need to contribute to knowledge and to learn from the free knowledge that we all support and love. So I'm your host today, and we're going to have a great presentation with, there's going to be a movement update, some information about WikiCite, about the future of this meeting, and then a strategy update from Catherine. And then we'll have some questions and discussion at the end, about 10 minutes, and then time for WikiLove to share appreciation for movement in the people. Hello. Okay, where was I? Yeah, so okay, so if you have questions, just wait for the end to that, write them down, and then people will answer questions at the end. All right, so next slide. Yeah, these are the things we're going to talk about. I just wrote. Okay, so on to a movement update. So there's now a Community Capacities Map, which is very exciting. CE launched, what, oh, thank you. Here, you can read it too. CE launched a Community Cap Capacities Map, an initiative that aims to identify needs and ways to build capacity across different Wikimedia communities, which is great. Also, the Audiences Department launched visual diffs that will the editing team. It's a new update that will allow users to visually review the changes made to Wikimedia sites without using Wikitext markup language. Makes it a lot easier to see what happened. And the annual report was launched. It's beautiful. Thanks for the work for the departments across the foundation that created that it's very engaging. I really urge you to check it out. And then we had all hands. 277 people and one puppy participated in all hands. And it was awesome. It was really fun. Next slide. And then here are some things coming up in March. We have Wiki and Daba. We have Wiki and Daba in Tunis in March 16th through 18th. Wiki and Daba is a regional conference for Africans both within Africa and in the diaspora. This year's conference aims to build capacity for African Wikimedians, foster growth on the coverage and involvement of Africa in the Wikimedia projects, and better connect African Wikimedians. And we have International Women's Day coming up on March 8th. Two affiliates, Wikimedia Sweden and Wikimedia France, are coordinating global campaigns to improve content about women on Wikipedia. Learn more about how you can get involved on these links. This will be posted on Meta. And art and feminism. Global events will take place from February through the spring as part of an annual campaign to improve coverage of cis and transgender women feminism and the arts on Wikipedia. So those are things coming up in March. All good stuff. Okay, now I'd like to introduce you to Dario Torre Borelli, who you probably know. He's going to talk about Wikisite. Hello everybody. I'm Daria with the Wikimedia Foundation's research team, and I'm going to give you a long overdue update on Wikisite. I need a clicker. Thank you, Abby. Okay, so many of us are used to thinking of Wikipedia as a destination. The final stop on a quest for information, the place we go to look up effect, to learn on any topic, to settle a bet among friends. However, for many of its readers, Wikipedia actually is a gateway. It's a gateway to knowledge representing external knowledge repositories in library collections, in digital repositories that are outside of our websites. We have extensive evidence from scientific literature that Wikipedia acts as a bridge between what we have on our own contents and these repositories by connecting students, patients, researchers, the general public to this much broader ecosystem of knowledge. And if we look at the role of Wikimedia projects from this perspective, if we ask ourselves what it means to be providing knowledge as a service, the link, the reference, stands out as the most fundamental mechanism by which we can act as a gateway towards a much broader ecosystem of knowledge. In other words, the mission of disseminating open knowledge globally and effectively goes beyond hosting content. It really means pointing readers and learners to whatever sources they need in order to be able to meet their learning goals. And so for this reason, linking and referencing is a critical part of this mission. As it turns out, though, references and links to external sources haven't really received a ton of love in the past decade or so. If you're familiar with how references are stored in Wikipedia, you'll be familiar with the citation templates, which really don't allow us to reuse information about sources, analyze this information, discussing it, and collaboratively curating this information pretty much in the same way as we do this with content. And about two years ago, we started an initiative called Wikisite, whose goal was to try and address this problem. Since 2005, there have been countless proposals under the same name to try and improve the way in which information about sources is stored in Wikipedia projects. In 2016, a group of community members supported by WMF picked up this vision of building a collaborative repository of sources to serve the sum of all human knowledge by leveraging Wikidata as its key infrastructure. The goal of Wikisite is to treat citations as first-class citizens in Wikipedia projects by creating a Wikidata entry about every single source that's cited across our Wikipedia projects. The outcome of this is to have new workflows that allow us to facilitate the way in which our volunteer communities discuss, analyze, curate, vet, and reuse information about sources across all of our projects. So we started working towards this vision in 2016 with a fairly small group of people. We didn't really know what we were about to do back then. In 2017, we hosted a much larger event, a three-day event in Vienna. We convened about 100 attendees from 22 countries. We had 16 conference presentations. We had 17 summit sessions, 38 lightning talks, 20 hackathon demos. And it's hard to say that while these communities produced exceeded by far our expectations. So today I'd like to share with you my personal selection of highlights. There's much more that these communities produced than what I'm going to present today. But these are some of the key highlights that I'm pretty excited about. So first off, not many of you may know that as of today, one out of three items in Wikidata, 33% of Wikidata, represents bibliographic metadata about sources. Books, news articles, scholarly papers. This is an example of the entry on Charles Darwin's book on the origin of species. And you can see all the information that Wikidata has about this work. And to give an example about what this coverage means in practice, 30% of items in Wikidata are about creative works, like books, news articles, scholarly papers. And to give an example about what this coverage means, we now have a really large body of curated information about scholarly journals in Wikidata. This is how Wikidata compares with the Web of Science, which represents the largest, most authoritative database about scholarly journals. So we have a larger, and I want to say probably higher quality body of information about journals than Web of Science does. We have data models made with love and hours of Wiki, labor by our communities to describe a variety of creative works. It's a diagram to represent metadata of books and their editions. And on top of storing information about sources, we're also growing a graph of links representing citations across sources. This is all stored in Wikidata. And so as of today, we have about 36 million citation links that represent how a given source sites another source, a resource that up until now didn't exist, if not in proprietary databases, which is now available to the public under CC0 through Wikidata. And of course, the value of a repository of sources doesn't just come from importing bibliographic data, but also by connecting this information to everything else that exists in Wikidata. So as of today, we have about 1.9 million statements that have been created connecting items about sources to items about their authors. And we have 1.4 million statements that connect these sources to the main topic of a source, which allows you to do something that was impossible up until now, which is filtering and discovering sources as a function of their topic, their author, the gender of the author, the geographic providence of the author, and so on and so forth. The community has built some really impressive open source applications for exploring this data, such as Skolia or Inventair. It's an example of the reports that you get from Skolia, fully driven by the Wikidata query service, a co-author graph for Skolia author, location of recipients of a Skolia award, really rich data can now be surfaced thanks to these applications. And we've also established a network of partner organizations that are helping us connect that everything exists in Wikimedia projects with this much broader ecosystem of catalogs and digital connections and external repositories of information. These are just a few of the organizations that we've been working with. Also, and most importantly, over the past three years, we've been relying on the general support of funders and affiliate organizations in the Wikimedia movement, without which none of this would have been possible. We've been presenting on this initiative at pretty much every relevant venue on the planet. Members of the Wikisite community have gone places and given talks and keynotes at more than 20 events in the past two years, including Wikimedia community events, library conferences, glam conferences, quarterly publishing events, et cetera. There is a fantastic series of blog posts and stories on Wikisites and libraries. This is one of my favorites by Katie Mika, who is a librarian at the Biodiversity Heritage Library, and spells out the role that librarians can play to contribute to this vision. And most importantly, we have a growing community that's passionate and stubborn about representing and very vocal and intensely debating data models on anything that represents sources and helping them cross-link them to the rest of the web. So this is just the beginning of a journey. And I think we have today strong support from many individual contributors in groups and organizations. But to make this vision a reality, we really needed a more concerted effort over a longer time frame, a building on the technical partnerships that I mentioned before, and engaging larger parts of the Wikimedia movement. To do so, we have submitted a proposal to our funders to sustain the initiative over a three-year time span, and we hope this is going to be successful. And of course, you can find much more than what I presented today in our annual report that we published in December and that I invite you to read. If you wish to join us, we're going to have a Wikisite sessions at the Hackathon in Barcelona at Wikimedia. The main event is going to be hosted in the fall at the location still to be identified. Or you can follow us on Meta, on Twitter, and on our mailing list. That's it for Wikisite. Thank you. Thank you, Dario. Remember, there must be questions out there, so if you have them, prepare them for the end for Dario. So, next up is Samantha, and Greg are going to talk about this meeting going Meta. So, it's actually that we're talking about this meeting that is itself going Meta. So, it turned out, we haven't actually had a conversation about this meeting in quite some time, so we thought that would be an exciting and interesting topic to do. So, first off, I'll start with introducing my name is Greg Varnum. I'm the communications strategist in the communications department. Hi, and I'm Samantha. I go by Sam. I am the comms manager at the comms department. I work a lot on media and public relations. There's probably a good chance that I've bugged you before about writing a media response together. So, I'll caveat that. But we also get to work on the metrics meetings, too. So, how do we get to this point? That's a really interesting question. The metrics meeting, actually, this is a great photo, by the way, I love this photo. It began in October 2008, not as the metrics meeting, but as the report card meeting, it was actually only for staff in the office. It was a very limited audience meeting. Over time, it expanded to other staff members, remote staff, and then, eventually, to members of internal L, and then, eventually, to the entire public, leading up to in 2012, when we started to more aggressively do the public aspect of it, actually doing recordings, putting up the page on Metawiki, and then having the live streaming. So, from 2008-2012, we had an internal focus with some increasing public elements and the transition from the report card meeting, which was literally just going over the same three or four metrics, month by month by month, and doing kind of a comparison on how we were doing with new editors, how we were doing with the reading rates, how we were doing with edit rates, things like that, to where it evolved to in 2012 to being about our activities as well. So, that brings us to 2016, where communications got involved. And I recognize there was a lot of other stuff that happened in the meeting. This was just sort of the major highlight, so this is in a detailed review. Awesome. So, as Greg said, we started, the comms team started working more closely on these meetings about a year ago. And since then, we have been experimenting with some new changes that we can make to make these meetings more closely aligned and reflective of this incredible movement that we have. We've changed a lot over the years, and so we wanted to think about how the meeting changed to also reflect that as well and make it more engaging for the folks that tune in every month and listen to it. So, I'm going to share a couple of highlights of a couple of the changes that we've made in the past year. It's not comprehensive by any means, and then Greg's going to get into some ideas for where we might go in the future and a way to get feedback from you all. So, first of all, we made some changes to the meeting format, and we've been able to experiment with that a lot over the past year. We introduced themes for some of the meetings to connect different presentations that related to a similar topic and to create a more cohesive meeting around that topic. We also changed speaking times, speaking slots. So, we experimented with other ways that we could divide the hour together with different kinds of speaking formats. So, we introduced shorter lightning talks, sometimes with slides, sometimes without slides, also more in-depth analysis of projects and tools and work that is happening across the movement. We also tried live translations thanks to a great idea by Maria Cruz for other speaker translations and also big shout out to Jorge for participating in live translation. We also experimented with guest hosting. For those of you who might have tuned in or watched the meeting after the fact, for the January meeting last month, we actually had Wikimedia Deutschland host the meeting and they facilitated and structured the entire meeting, which was actually really cool. And then lastly, we encouraged folks to present on projects or initiatives that were in progress or maybe didn't have a clear outcome to report yet. The idea being that folks in our movement could stay updated and involved throughout the process and that speakers presenting could also gather feedback and ideas from folks that were listening that they may not have thought of yet. Another change we made was we introduced more guest speakers. We had more community members join us to present their work and we invited speakers from institutions in the free knowledge ecosystem to join us. For example, we had someone from OCLC join us and the Met so that we could better understand their priorities, challenges, overlap, and ways that we might be able to collaborate within our own movement. And we started working more closely with speakers and presenters to create their presentations. So we talked about things like what would be most interesting to this audience, how much context should someone give about their presentation topics, how to present findings and lessons learned that other people might be able to use in their own work, and how to use slides as a visual tool to support your points. And we created opportunities to practice and share practical tips and experiences so that folks would feel more comfortable and hopefully want to present again in the future. So these are just a handful of some of the ways that we've been able to experiment with changes to the metrics and activities meetings. And these ideas often came from people across the foundation with a lot of support from other staff in the organization and outside the community. Big shout out to CE also for supporting us in this. And so now I will pass it back over to Greg to talk a little bit about plans for the upcoming year. So the changes over this last year, which Sam facilitated and did a great job. Let's give Sam a round of applause. He's done a great job with these meetings this last year. A lot of that was based on feedback that we received in communications about people wanting the meeting to be kind of more about the movement instead of just about the foundation. And we're curious about where that's going and where people want to see the meeting evolve in the future. I still run into the phenomenon of if I ask five people what they think metrics is and what they would like it to be, I get 15 different answers, which is an amazing math formula, but that's generally what does happen. So we're trying to kind of move that forward. What is the next evolution of this meeting going to be and how can we make it something for all of you? So those are our questions for this upcoming year and we're going to be doing more experimenting. We had somebody, it's probably the biggest question we've received since the January is clearly you guys are experimenting. You did this interesting thing with Deutschland. What other experiments do you have planned? We don't know yet actually. We know we're going to experiment. We can commit to that. What they're going to be, we haven't decided yet. And we'd like some of your help on that. So we've posted three questions that'll be up on Meadowickey. They're already up on Meadowickey or you can email us to, so you can email your answers to us as well, but they're three simple questions. Why do you attend, watch, or otherwise follow this meeting? Clearly if you're hearing these questions, you fall into that category in some way or you have amazing ESP. The second one is what do you like about this meeting? Why do you continue to show up? Why do you continue to follow it? What would you like changed about this meeting? And the third one I think in particular, we're very interested in. We'll also be adding on the Meadowickey page a place to sign up for future presentations. We recognize that a lot of times people have ideas and then by the time it comes to scheduling it, they've forgotten their ideas or weren't available anymore, so we want to try to track that a little better and we'll be moving that on to Meadowickey as well. So all of that you can find on the main Wikimedia Foundation metrics and activities page on Meadowickey. That's the main questions from us. Thanks everyone. Thank you guys. Thank you very much. All right, so next up is Catherine who will talk about strategy update. I think we're running really ahead of time too, right? Okay, this gives us lots of time for strategy. Good morning everyone. Or good afternoon or good evening depending on where you are. I was asked to come up and give a little bit of an update on what is happening next on strategy. I know everyone here at the foundation is really involved in annual planning, but outside of the foundation, folks across our movement have been aware that we said last year we were going to go through phase one of the strategic direction process. It was going to wrap up at the end of last year and then people have been waiting to hear what comes next. So I'm hoping to give a little bit of a background or update on that rather. So the good news is we have a direction. We have a strategic direction. Folks are pretty happy with it overall. We had a remarkable endorsement process that happened after Wikimania last year in October in which many of our movement organizations and individuals in our movement signed up to say, you know, they felt as though this was a good direction. This offered us something to work with. They weren't necessarily sure what exactly they were going to do to work with it or how they were going to implement against it, but they were committed to the fact that we had done this, that the process was inclusive, that the direction felt as though it was promising and that they wanted to sign up for the next phase. So that was pretty cool. Just a reminder of what the direction actually is. By 2030, Wikimedia will become the essential infrastructure of the ecosystem of free knowledge and anyone who shares in our vision will be able to join us. I think you heard a little bit about that sort of essential infrastructure for free knowledge component when Dario was speaking just now about Wikisite, for example. I think for me, at least, I interpret this as understanding we're already headed in this direction, so how do we embrace what we know we're moving towards so that we can really resource it and sort of be intentional and meaningful around it. And then, of course, anyone who shares our vision will be able to join us. I think this is really core to who we are and our vision statement, so it's just good to sort of state this as a continued principle. We, the Wikimedia contributors, communities and organizations will continue to advance our world by collecting knowledge that fully represents human diversity and by building the services and structures that enable others to do the same. So, again, that's about how do we as a community continue to do what we do, but also making that a little more expansive so that more folks can be a part of our mission. We'll carry on our mission of developing content in the past, and, of course, we're going to go further. And then knowledge is a service to serve our users. We want to be a platform that serves open knowledge to the world across different interfaces and communities. We want to build tools for allies and partners, again, that's a more expansive understanding to organize and exchange free knowledge across Wikimedia and making sure that our infrastructure that we have to do this, whether it's community infrastructure or whether it's platform infrastructure, will enable us and others to use and collect different forms of free trusted knowledge. And then knowledge equity. As a social movement, we will focus our efforts on the knowledge and communities that have been left out by structures of power and privilege. We will welcome people from every background to build a strong and diverse communities, and we're going to work to try to break down some of the social, political, and technical barriers that have excluded those who haven't been able to join us in the past. So this is what we came to as the direction, again, sort of the essential infrastructure of free knowledge, and then thinking about how do we do this in a way that's intentional and aligned with our values, thinking about knowledge as something that serves people and thinking about how we increase the equity or how do we improve knowledge equity and deepen the principle of equity in our work. So I think the question is how do we get there? What does this mean for the work that we do? What does this mean for the programmatic efforts that we undertake? What does this mean for movement organizations? What are the challenges that we might face in being able to achieve this goal? Before we take that on, I just wanted to stop to highlight what we have today to build on. We have a strategic direction with broad-based support across the movement. We have a lot of resources and research from phase one. I don't know, for those of you who haven't spent the time on it, Wikimedia 2030, 2030.wikimedia.org is a remarkable treasure trove of information, not just about the Wikimedia movement, but about the world of knowledge that we live in today. It is really fascinating, and I encourage folks to take a look at it. But what we would sort of point to is that we had and did all this research which informed the strategic direction, and yet there's probably a lot more that we can do to mine that research and all the conversations that we had to think about what does that mean for the plans that we build, how do we understand the world that we're living in, and really incorporate that into the planning that we do across the movement. A window of opportunity that is wide open right now. It was phase one. Now it's phase two. We should get going. A community are the assets that we currently have as a movement, our community, our identity, the strength of our brand, the relationships that we have in the world, and then interest and engagement from different movement groups who are already working to try to contextualize the direction in their own work. So there's some links here that talk about some of the works that other groups are doing already. Which brings us to phase two. So I just want to pause to talk about the big picture. For those of you who are at all hands, you may have seen this already. In last year, we really thought of that as a strategy year working to try to understand the direction, pull ourselves together, try to orient the movement in one, in sort of a all heading in the same direction. We're really thinking of this as a transition year, a year for us to understand what are the questions that we need to ask ourselves about how do we implement the direction, how do we understand and contextualize it, or apply it to our own work. What are the things that we need to do as movement organizations or as individuals to prepare or align ourselves or wind down things that perhaps are not as aligned. And as we're growing into the foundations work for the annual planning, I'll talk a little bit more about what that means for us. And then this is, calendar years are kind of a construct. January isn't actually a time when everything rolls over and changes. So to say that 2018 to 2019 is a transition year and 2019 to 2020 is the first year is really meant to just sort of be an indicator. It's not actually how we see this working in practice. What we understand is that this year is going to roll into starting to really align ourselves with the direction and start doing work against it. But next year will be the first year in which everything that we do from a planning perspective is fully aligned with the direction. So it's not that next year all of a sudden we're being strategic. It's more that next year is the first year in which hopefully everything that we're doing is really has some sort of connection to the strategic direction. So hopefully this year we'll start to see that transition and more and more of our work will be aligned with it. So the work ahead. I recently had the chance to go to Berlin to talk with some of our colleagues at Wikimedia Deutschlands, specifically Nicole Eber, who had been working on the phase one part with our movement organizations. And we identified some of these questions at different levels of our movement around what we need to address in the work ahead. So at every level of the movement, whether that's at the individual level or the project level or the wiki project level or in our different communities or in our movement organizations, what are the questions that we need to ask ourselves about how we evolve in a healthy way? How do we need to change or adapt or what is it that we need to move towards as we move towards this direction of an essential infrastructure for free knowledge? Across the movement, and I really think about this as like the places in which we're connected. So the space between ourselves and at the Wikimedia Foundation and folks who are doing work in the Glam community or the space between the Glam community and the chapters, for example, or the space between the chapters and the user groups, what are the critical questions that we as a movement need to address around roles, resources and responsibilities in order to effectively move forward? So one way that we've been talking about this is we have this incredible organic infrastructure that has evolved over time that supports our movement across a variety of different geographic regions and languages and sectoral expertise, but it's been really organic. And if we were to stop and take a look today at what might we actually structure this in an intentional way to be the most successful that we could be in advancing our mission, what would that look like? And so we want to ask ourselves these questions and think about what we need to change or evolve or adapt or just reinforce in order to be successful. And then at the movement organization level, so that's at the level of perhaps a user group or the foundation, you know, how do we apply this? What are the programs that we need to undertake? What are the, what's the work that we need to do in a really practical sense? How does this affect each of our work day to day? What are the first priorities that we need to take on? You know, everything is one step or one foot in front of the other and whatever goals we have 15 years from now may require sort of a first set of actions that we need to undertake in order to get there 15 years into the future. And then for projects and individuals, what are the priorities for the individual Wikimedia projects? What are the sort of the sticking points or the pain points? What do contributors need and care about? Or in other words, the layers that we've been thinking about this are sort of at the conceptual level, the structural level, the programmatic level, and the tactical level. And you can, of course, this slide will be available later, but some of the links go into things like at the bottom at the tactical level for our projects and our communities and individual contributors. We did, during the consultation last year, we got a lot of feedback about things people would like to see changed in the project or ideas for tools or ideas for sort of product developments. We put that all into a report and we said, you know, these are really tactical level changes as opposed to strategic level ideas, but they're still really valuable. And so how might we think about implementing them? So this is sort of the different layers of work that we anticipate. And there are going to be different parties responsible for working on this depending on what your role is in the movement or how you contribute or what role you play within a movement organization, for example. So what is the scope of phase two? Well, you know, as I said, we want to become the essential infrastructure for free knowledge, but we're many different pieces and groups. We are very complex. We have different strengths. So how do we move forward? And what we're seeing this as is really sort of a split into two different ways of proceeding. The first is for movement organizations and groups like the foundation. You know, we have annual plans and annual budgets and we need to move that forward. And so the first question is how do we as an institution or how do other institutions think about their work? How do individuals think about their work? How do they move that forward in a really practical sense as they seek to contextualize and apply the strategic direction? And the second is about those sort of spaces in between the infrastructure that I mentioned earlier of the movement as a whole. And we're going to be launching a phase two process around that. And so I'm going to talk about that a little bit before I talk about what this means for the foundation. So at the movement level with phase two, what's going to be the same? Well, we're probably going to have some sort of process. We're going to have a core team that is responsible for doing the heavy lifting of keeping things going on time, making sure there's documentation. We're going to assemble working groups and advisors from across the movement. We're going to conduct research. We're going to make sure all that effort is available on Wiki. We're going to consult broadly across many different languages. And we're going to use Wikimedia conference and Wikimania as opportunities to consult with our communities, get feedback. And then we're going to have some recommendations at the end to the whole movement. And we're going to see how they're adopted or interpreted. What is going to be different? Well, the foundation in Wikimedia Deutschland are working together on this. So last year in phase one, we really sort of centralized a lot of the effort out of the foundation just to keep the process moving forward. It was obviously, you know, lots of different consultative parties on it, whether it was in the committees working around designing the process or giving feedback on the direction. Many different people from across the movement participated. But nonetheless, most of the work was sort of hosted from within the foundation. This coming phase, we're working with Wikimedia Deutschland to think about how we can distribute some of those responsibilities and really embed this interpretation and these next steps across our movement so it's more broadly owned than just by one centralized body. The core team will be primarily made up of Wikimedians and people from Wikimedia organizations. So last time we brought in external consultants to help us structure and organize this. And they worked really closely with our movement partners and with folks in the foundation. But nonetheless, there was a third party. This time we're really looking to build that team out of our movement so that we can start to deepen the expertise that's involved in making this work real and make sure that there's broader ownership. And our efforts will be focused on how we can be successful against making progress against this direction rather than interpreting it or giving it new meaning. And so one of the things we said at the end of phase one when we went through the endorsement process was that we kind of have to get alignment on this direction and then we think about how to move it forward rather than, okay, we've got a direction now let's sort of open it up again for reimagining or reinterpretation. So we have a lot more clarity and sort of a narrow scope on this and we already have some initial areas of exploration from phase one. And so if you go to again the site 2030.wikimedia.org you can find some links on Meta as to what some of those initial areas of exploration might be. So here are some of those initial areas of exploration. Some potential key themes that came up were things like roles, governance and structures. How do we live up to the value of equity in our global structures? As I said at the beginning, if we were to reinterpret or reimagine or imagine afresh what it would mean to have a global movement structure. What would that look like? So those are some questions we might ask. Resources of funding and capacities. How do we rethink development, capacity building, learning and events and revenue models all of which count as resources in terms of expertise and time, but also financial resources so that they reflect our values of service and equity. And then responsibilities. We've talked a little bit about how increasingly some of different parts around the movement have increasing specialization and expertise. How might we tap into that? How might we foster and facilitate that? Certainly as we've talked about the evolution of the foundation, we know that we're not the experts in everything across our whole movement. Are there ways that we can support these emerging areas of expertise so that they can really strengthen our movement as a whole? So those are some of the questions that we'll be asking. And then you can see the themes and questions will be defined and prioritized in consultation with the movement as a whole. So these are just some examples that came out of what we talked about in phase one. And then the recommendations will be worked on by working groups. I don't have a total definition of the process yet, where we really want the core team that we're going to assemble to help us to find that process. And here is a bit of a roadmap. It goes through 2020 because the work is never done. But that doesn't mean that we're finally going to be done with the strategic direction or anything in 2020. As I said earlier, some folks are already working on this in their core work as we've been talking about annual planning. I know that there's been conversations around a cross-departmental program here at the foundation on platform evolution that we're trying to find with the strategic direction. So this is really just meant to give an indication that we really want to see this as constant interpretation and iteration in order to make sure we're really being effective from a programmatic standpoint. But we see this issue of trust in relationships as being really important, a constant evolution and change process as we move in that direction, research and data around... Oh, sorry, that's what we have already. Roles and responsibilities, then individual level, contextualizing the direction of organizations or individual groups and then the tactical stuff. And what you can see down at the bottom here is that there are going to be different layers of responsibility and support for these different efforts. So some things are going to happen at movement organization or individual levels. Some things are going to be led by this core team. Before I go into what this means for the foundation, I just wanted to add one last thing. We've been talking with Wikimedia Deutschland about organizing this core team. We've been defining some of these responsibilities. And for those who are watching either in the foundation or in the movement, what we'd like to do is make the descriptions of those responsibilities and job descriptions on the core team available. So if you're interested in being a part of that core team, that you can let Nicole or myself know and we'd really love you to join. So that's just a sort of offer to make it a broad open process for folks who are interested in being a part of this next part of the effort. So phase two for the Wikimedia Foundation. What does this mean for annual planning? What does this mean for the year to come? As I mentioned, this transition year that we're in. Oops, I want to go to the side first. The annual plan is meant to over the course of the last couple months we've been talking about as we build this annual plan really making sure that there's time for folks to think about what they need to do to start planning for the strategic direction. So the general guidance that we've been giving to C levels in the organization is to bring up about 20% of your capacity to be able to work on this and start moving things forward because we recognize that already at this organization most people are actually planned to 120% which leaves very little slack to take on additional work let alone react to the things that just happened throughout the course of the year. So we've been targeting 20% which maybe means that people get scheduled to just 100% but even that would really be a significant improvement. So be more definitive about what you plan to do in quarters one and two because that's the near term future and give yourself more flexibility in quarters three and four because as those priorities for the movement or how the strategic direction will be implemented become clearer we want you to have the flexibility to adapt your work to them. So more clarity around quarters one and two a little bit more space to be flexible in quarters three and four and that's actually okay with the flexibility. So I'm going to go back what does this timeline look like I apologize I'm not very good at building timelines kind of ugly but we are now in q3 still we're still in q3 we're still in q3 cool and as you can see we're really in this process of annual planning right now as of April 1st we reopen up the annual plan for community feedback and we get consultation on that is open to the world I mean for a lot of folks the majority of the heavy lifting on annual planning is done so what we want to then do is start training our brains around you know the first level priorities that we would want to work on as part of the strategic direction so if we say the essential infrastructure for free knowledge if we talk about knowledge equity what are the things that we would need to take on as priorities to address this and it might be hey I really need to do this thing within my own department in order to be ready to even ask these questions it might be you know we really need to address this really sort of sticky question in the platform evolution cross departmental program but what we are saying is you know we're gonna want these priorities sort of the one foot in front of the other as we go into this medium term three to five year plan that we can actually say we're going to say that these are priorities for the next three to five years and we're gonna work on them and we want to be able to put them forward to the community to make sure that they resonate with the community itself so that's kind of what we see ourselves doing in Q4 so that what we can do is at Wikimania share those priorities with the community for their feedback and I don't know exactly what those priorities are going to be I don't have great examples of it because I think that that's sort of an emergent process but we want to be able to share those first priorities with the community for their feedback at Wikimania and then get consultation on them over the course of the first quarter of next year and then what we'd like to do is to work to convert those priorities to a medium term plan so I'm going to keep using the example of platform evolution because it's kind of already in the works and that's really talking about you know what is the future for our media wiki teams and how do we want to think about sort of the next steps for for media wiki and what's that roadmap and so we could say that you know the first priority is that we just want to evolve the platform and then what we would say is hey community this is our priority what do you think we feel like this is the first step over the course of you know between now and 2030 we need to really focus on this for the next three to five years and here's you know what we think we just think this is a priority community says yes absolutely that's great we agree this is a priority converting that to a plan would then say what is the roadmap what are the milestones how long is this going to take how many additional people are we going to need to work on it who are the partners that are going to need to be involved what are the really tricky questions and how do we figure out how to address them one by one and so that process of converting things to a medium term plan will happen in Q2 and then what we'd really like to have is a three to five year medium term plan that gives us guidance and more continuity so that we have clarity over what we're trying to achieve over a medium term I think a lot of us at the foundation end up doing work that really focuses on an annual cycle but again that annual cycle is sort of an artifice some things take six months some things take nine months some things take 36 months and we really want to be able to accommodate for that so we've got more continuity and hopefully make annual planning in the future much easier because you say hey we're really working on this thing that we've already been planning for for some time and that's it I guess right so the three to five year term plan and then of course planning starts again with annual planning which we're hoping to really make more about budgeting and you can just sort of see where these sort of critical points along like movement collaborations or moments in the movement around Wikimedia conference or Wikimedia or the like I think that is it are we at time? We're at time? Perfect I was just going to say you've seen these goals really quickly for this transition year we really want to focus on a knowledge equity growing new contributors and content so if you've been working on your annual plan you know that growing new contributors and content is a priority knowledge as a service increasing reach in audiences and investing in foundational strengths so evolving our systems and structures and that is it thank you Thank you Thank you Catherine so now it's time for questions and discussion so you can come up to the mic over here James is managing any IRC questions anything on IRC yet James? Hi I've got a question from Subu for Dario which he may have already read spoilers does the Wikidata set cover everything in the Journal of Science set and as for the rest of Wikidata are they a gap in the Journal of Science set or are they not quality sources? Yeah so it's a great question so the the design of Wikidata aims to cover as a very first goal what cited across Wikimedia projects and there are major gaps even in that books stands out as a really complex problem to tame because of complexity in the data model when it comes to the scholarly literature the coverage is actually pretty good there are also data sets on Wikidata that go beyond what's already in Wikimedia projects so the the coverage the comparison with Web of Science is really at the Journal level so we have entries that represent the metadata about journals and there are reach and well articulated compared to what exists in Web of Knowledge which is also by itself a very curated database of journals there are millions of periodicals and serials that are not included in Web of Knowledge Web of Science so hopefully that clarifies the scope of yep Any other questions? I don't see any hands in the room anyone Anything else on IRC? Okay I'll do a little dance while everyone's catching up it's hard to dance without music Anne Gomez You can just use this Hi Catherine I guess this is a question for you so I'm wondering as we're talking about this being a transition year and being a time to kind of refocus and getting ready for this plan that's coming I've been kind of running into a little bit of a tension between that and the ask for growth and I'm wondering if you can just kind of speak to how you're thinking about that because it's a little bit hard to say okay then our teams are really going to be focused on preparing and maybe things that I would imagine being sunsetting and cleaning up our processes while also looking for these big KPIs So I think there's two different ways of thinking about growth One is the growth which I'm sure you saw the that has rollers on it doesn't it That's alright Thank you Thanks for having my back Cool One is the board statement on investing in the organization which was around growing the amount of resources whether staff or budget that is available to the organization for our future and if you look at the way we're thinking about growth in that sense we're really trying to do is say where are the places that have been chronically under resourced to date and how do we make sure that they have the resources that they need in order to be a little bit less chronically under resourced and so the very first thing that we saw in this was additional capacity in the SRE team formerly known as OPS because that's a team that was chronically under resourced and needed more capacity and so there's growth in that sense and so we haven't gotten to the place but I think we are going to see additional growth in some sort of core areas that historically we've wanted to do work on and just haven't had the capacity to do or areas in which we have had one person doing three people's jobs we want this to be a saner place to work for people and so that's kind of the priority there now, growth in terms of KPIs I'll be honest with you I think we should have KPIs every year whether it's a transition year or not I think that one of the things that we as an organization need to be doing is holding ourselves accountable to that work and then we can change or discontinue or move in a different direction or iterate if that work itself is proving not to be effective and so we're encouraging folks to set KPIs not necessarily because we think we're going to hit all of them out of the park this first time around but because it gives us a baseline for us to experiment around what it is that we should be doing in order to just be good at things like increasing our contributors I think we talked about this a little bit at all hands but I think there's an assumption that this is the work that we do every single year but if you actually go back and look at our annual plans and if you look at the work that we've done and our ability to measure against whether we've done that work it'd be really hard to demonstrate that we have in fact been growing contributors or that we have in fact been increasing reach and yet I think that's implicit in what our responsibility is to make a media foundation to actually do so we're encouraging people to set KPIs not necessarily because we expect everybody to reach all of them they're really meant to be sort of a tool to say hey are we doing this work you know how successful do we make it 30% of the way do we make it 80% of the way those are indicators in and of themselves did we make it 100% of the way or 150 and did we actually sandbag and didn't realize that we could be more successful to start to be just more accountable to ourselves and more accountable to our communities as to whether we're making progress here and because it's come up in a couple conversations I just want to be really clear if folks if we set these goals and we don't make them that's a learning process in and of itself and that's okay that's not a punitive outcome or that's not going to result in a punitive outcome it's just a way for us to evaluate what's working and what's not and then think about how we evolve I don't know if that answers your question maybe gives you additional perspective perhaps yeah that's okay so I think for me the thing that gets a little bit tricky around this is the language and maybe this is my different experience from yours but the language between KPIs versus targets or goals right there's something a little bit different about performance indicators as in terms of like a business performance versus things that we're using for team reflection goals and goal setting yeah that's a great point that's also super cool necklace it's a dinosaur I don't know if folks can see that that's a good point I don't have an answer for you right now because I would actually want to take a look at the specific language in the annual planning documents in order to be able to provide more reflection on that but I hear what you're saying around the targets that we set for ourselves versus this idea of like is the organization performing at the top level I think we will take a look at that as we get into the end as we at the C team look at everything over the course of evaluating all the programs and the budget and the like it's a good thing to keep top of mind thank you any other questions not on IRC I don't see any in the room how are we doing on time I can't see a clock yeah okay so now it's time for wiki love where we express our thanks and oh clicker clicker wiki love okay looks like we have Danny to express some wiki love hi hi for anybody who doesn't know me on the call whatever I'm Danny horn director of product management for the contributors team and I only became that very recently like less than a month ago I was the the community tech team which runs the community wish list every year and so starts every calendar year with 10 brand new projects to investigate and then get people working on not the most awesome time for that team for me to be able to step back from that and not be doing that and a couple of people who are very special have stepped up to run that process and run that team Trevor Bolliger back there who is the product management or the product manager for the anti-harassment tools team is now also taking charge of the community wish list as a whole and then Niharika Kohli over here is a developer who's been with the community tech team for a few years and we've been working for a little while on the goal and she has a becoming product manager full-time and right now as I've been stepping back both Trevor and Niharika have taken on the challenge of running the community tech team and doing all that investigation and getting people working on stuff they are both really remarkable for just taking that on and just rocking it so far at least I shouldn't say so far at least they are rocking it and I'm super proud and I just wanted to recognize y'all and tell you how much I love you Any other wiki love there to be expressed here comes Greg Hi, so annual planning is happening people have talked about it a few times it's kind of a stressful time it's kind of a confusing time especially for people trying to do all the work and that means everybody so I just want to thank Joel and Deb for all the support and clarity that they've given the technology team because in past years it's been I don't want to curse bad confusing but this year it's been bad and confusing but in new and different ways and I think they're helping so thank you a lot for those two Anything else? Did see a question? No? Sorry Any other wiki love to express here so I think we may unless anyone stops me conclude our meeting for the day Thanks everyone