Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-ambassadors] Deprecating print-on-demand functionality
The new renderer should already be working in Hebrew and other RTLs. ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 2:16 PM, Itzik Edri it...@infra.co.il wrote: Any plans also to improve this module and make it work well also in Hebrew (and maybe other RTL languages)? On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 6:48 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Luca Martinelli martinellil...@gmail.com wrote: so the Book Creator will still be active, maybe under another name, maybe with another engine, but still active? Same name and functionality, just the Order a printed book feature will disappear. Erik -- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
I will probably regret saying this[1] -- but the figure we like to throw around here in fundraising tech is that a new payments gateway [2] is not even worth considering unless it is likely to make us at least 500K USD a year[3]. Or, in the case that it is not an immediate payoff, if it is strategically relevant for the future of our income stream (think our recent forays into mobile). It's also worth stating that at this time we only use four gateways (we get the hundreds of currencies through gateways that serve multiple methods and countries.) It is a significant undertaking to integrate a new gateway with our current code (think several man months of time related to coding, code review, donor services preparation, and testing; not including contract negotiation and legal review.) In addition, every gateway incurs additional maintenance, auditing, and troubleshooting costs on an ongoing basis. Because of these costs, we have only four gateways (Adyen, Amazon, GlobalCollect, and PayPal); with active plans to add another (already determined) gateway this year for common methods and regions we don't already serve. Formally the dept has not conducted a cost/benefit analysis of accepting bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency. Nor have we asked the legal dept to look into it from a compliance point of view. I have been attempting to gather data for an informal blog post on the topic and I have found no indication that if we were to conduct such a study formally that it would come out positively. I will state again the contents of our FAQ: We do, however, strive to provide as many methods of donating as possible and continue to monitor Bitcoin with interest and may revisit this position should circumstances change. I would encourage those who are put off by the Wikimedia Foundation's non acceptance of cryptocurrency donations to consider alternative methods of donation and promoting of free knowledge; namely by becoming active editors. [1] personal hat The bitcoin community should be aware that their persistent and often times aggressive, rude, and vulgar messaging towards me and my fellow coworkers is not appreciated; nor does it help their cause. If the goals of the cryptocurrency movement include shedding the world of fiscal dictators, centralized control, and autocracy; then perhaps it is time for some introspection. From my standpoint the actions of the movement (or at least the actions of a significant number who are public on the internet that I have read) are scarily similar to those whom the moment stands to replace. /personal hat [2] A payments gateway can be simply thought of as a collection of APIs, coupled into DonationInterface, our backend CRM, and financial software, that can accept payments and remit them in an auditable way to the Wikimedia Foundation in one of our working currencies. [3] This number isn't set in stone and should not be considered a formal estimate, but consider that the Wikimedia Foundation's yearly budget is ~$50M. As fundraisers ideally we want to focus effort on things that can provide a significant portion of that. We also do not wish to spend money on things that would increase our useful spending to overhead spending ratio. ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 7:05 PM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Erik for a well written overview. Would it be possible for the WMF to give an estimate on what it would cost to build and/or what the threshold of annual bitcoin donations would make it worthwhile building. Someone might be interested in donating specifically to have this built, or we could obtain pledges to donate to see if the threshold can be reached. On Jan 9, 2014 9:06 AM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.com wrote: In general, I would personally like it if the WMF avoided accepting bitcoin. Today, bitcoin isn't really a functioning currency of exchange -- it's actually used more as an investment tool to create wealth that naturally appreciates in value, like playing the stock market or buying gold. Avoiding lots of risky investments is something our very competent financial managers already steer clear of, and I see no reason to start taking on more risk now. While this is true, a more pragmatic view is that, as long as BTC has value to some people, there's no harm in accepting it and transferring it to USD the moment we receive any, provided legal/financial issues can be addressed with reasonable effort. The strongest counter-argument is that we might not actually get a donation total that makes this worth our time. The Internet Archive has a single-use Bitcoin address that's received a total of $30K at current (insanely high) exchange rates. But for me, the main reason not do this sooner is that it would have significantly fueled the Bitcoin speculative
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
That assumes that [Bitpay] are, in fact, forwarding donations at all. We have received some funds from them. ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising mysteries
I have no information on what did or did not happen on any specific days -- but I can say that the data on frdata.wikimedia.org is unfiltered -- e.g. it includes major gifts donations as well as online fundraising efforts. We used to filter out everyone above 10,000 $ USD, but I neglected to add the same filter for this data -- mostly because that really wasn't really a good filter. There are better ways to filter; but the best one I can think of off the top of my head I don't have bandwidth at this moment to implement. In and of itself not an issue, just an FYI, but I would also have to generate this and a filtered file because the filtered file would only be good for online fundraising which does not reveal the whole truth about how the WMF fundraises. ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 4:50 AM, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.ukwrote: Megan can certainly correct me if I've got the wrong end of the stick, but I think these are probably once-off payments rather than the result of a good day of banner-based fundraising. The October report estimates $2.7m fundraising through the month, but the spreadsheet data totals $3.8m. The discrepancy is around a million dollars, and the monthly report mentions a $1m grant from the Sloan Foundation, which tallies nicely. I couldn't spot a specific grant for September, but there was a provisional estimate of approximately $2m, and the data totals $2.5m. The blip on 2/9 is about half a million dollars, roughly the same as the discrepancy, and I would not be surprised if this is again a large donation/grant. Sadly, daily Sloan grants are probably not a sustainable approach... A. On 25 November 2013 11:51, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Megan, Per the attached graph of the https://frdata.wikimedia.org/yeardata-day-vs-sum.csv data, your announced October 4th fundraising test on 100% of anonymous users was anticlimactic. But what the heck did you do on September 2nd and October 22nd, and would you please do that every day? Even if it falls off at the same rate as the July test, that still means you could produce an endowment sufficient to do away with fundraising at current spending levels in less than eight months. Best regards, James Salsman ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- - Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Overloaded with CentralNotices (Tilman Bayer)
I'm not sure who to reply to in this list to grab the appropriate sections;
but some points about fundraising and new CN features that help reduce
banner blindness and annoyance.
* Fundraising banners from the WMF are presently only shown to anonymous
users. The team, as I understand it, doesn't want to display them to logged
in users unless utterly required; otherwise we consider your donation the
copious amount of time you spend on the site (with much thanks.)
* Fundraising banners have, for a while now, been using counter cookies to
limit the number of impressions seen by a user. Anyone can
include {{MediaWiki:FR2012/Resources/BannerShowHide.js}} or a similar set
of code into their banner to accomplish the same. We do this because we get
far fewer donations after the first couple of views and so it's our way of
playing nice and avoiding banner blindness.
* Fundraising has traditionally used 'blank' banners to limit the number of
slots allocated to revenue banners. Recently we released a feature called
'throttling' which accomplishes the same without blank banners.
* Every time I see a wiki that is using a site notice; I encourage them to
use a CentralNotice instead for increased coordination. We now have a
separate right for CentralNotice -- and I've been thinking for a while now
that it wouldn't be unreasonable to give everyone with admin on any wiki
the ability to use CN on meta.
* CentralNotice banners can be geotargetted more specifically than country.
Use JS to query the window.Geo variable and then dynamically show/hide your
banner.
* Right now banners are displayed in the users interface language. This
does occasionally cause problems when people think that they are targetting
a specific language variant wiki. I plan on releasing a major update to how
CN banners are distributed in January which will allow targeting of both UI
and content language.
* In general, if anyone needs help with a CentralNotice banner, I'm around
to help on IRC and email.
~Matt Walker
Wikimedia Foundation
Fundraising Technology Team
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Frans Grijzenhout fr...@wikimedia.nlwrote:
Hi everyone, this is just to point out that we organized 4 meetings with
WMNL members (july - sept) in order to get as much input as possible for
our Annual Plan and Budget 2014. We also welcomed ideas and feedback on
draft documents in our Newsletter and on the Dutch chapter's wiki.
We received lots of input, valuable ideas were raised and inserted in the
final plan. As a result of this procedure the Annual Plan 2014 and its
budget (for the larger part FDC funded) was unanimously approved during the
General Assembly of Sept 21.
Regards, Frans Grijzenhout (secretary WMNL)
2013/10/31 Tilman Bayer tba...@wikimedia.org
Hi Jane,
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 12:42 AM, Jane Darnell jane...@gmail.com
wrote:
@Sue, I understand the idea behind doing this and applaud the idea -
it would be so much easier to make strategy decisions in WMNL if we
had more input from more involved people in the Dutch Wikipedia
community. I get that it is really a conflict of interest for WMNL
insiders to be the only ones to comment and approve the funds request
made by WMNL insiders. The problem with this central sitenotice, as
Romaine pointed out, is that it is in English and points to the WMNL
fund request in English.
Actually, the banners are available in Dutch, and Romaine had said so
as well. If you see them in English, one possible reason could be that
your browser's interface language is set to English.
The main (global) FDC banner has been translated into over 70
languages, and the general community review page that it points to is
available in over 10 languages:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/FDC_portal/Proposals/Community/Review
.
Comments on the funding requests can be made in languages other than
English, too. As for the funding requests themselves, yes, they are in
English. I guess it would be too much of a burden for the either
fund-seeking organizations or volunteer translators to provide the
entire proposal form in several languages. But one idea for the future
might be to make at least the shorter overview section of each
request translatable (e.g.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FDC_portal/Proposals/2013-2014_round1/Wikimedia_Nederland/Proposal_form#Overview_of_grant_request
).
--
Tilman Bayer
Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications)
Wikimedia Foundation
IRC (Freenode): HaeB
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
--
*Frans Grijzenhout*, secretaris
fr...@wikimedia.nl
+31 6 5333 9499
Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland
Postbus 167
3500 AD Utrecht
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Overloaded with CentralNotices
As bonus I personally and other users have experienced that clicking away a banner made the banner appear again within the hour visiting other pages. I had that at least four times on a project, on several projects. Re-appeasring after being clicked away is useless and disturbing. I'm not sure what happened here; a banner should not reappear after you click hide (at least not until two weeks have elapsed). Also it is annoying that I need to click the same banners away on each project I visit, many users visit Wikipedia, but also work on Commons, Wikidata, etc. Bug 16821 addresses this issue. I have submitted a patch [2] today that will enable this. I am coordinating with Greg G; but will probably deploy the patch (and another one that will make CentralNotice use mobile URLs on the mobile site) tomorrow in the Lighting Deploy window at 1600 PST. [1] https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16821 [2] https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/92777/ ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dillon gallery?
To quickly respond such that people are not terribly confused -- our major gifts team is hosting a fundraising event at the Dillon Gallery in NY sometime in the future. I don't have any further details myself (not my area of what we do); but I'll direct the attention of that team to this thread/question. ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Dan Collins en.wp.s...@gmail.com wrote: What are you talking about? A quick Google reveals no evidence that the Wikimedia Foundation and the Dillon Gallery have any association, apart from we have a wiki page on them. Who is the mail from - WMF or a chapter? Do you often receive snail mail from them? If not, do you have any evidence that you haven't fallen victim to an elaborate scam? What is an invitation(?) and how does it differ from an invitation? To borrow your TL;DR, In short: huh??? On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Renata St renataw...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, so I got this snail mail with an invitation(?) to an event(?) at Dillon Gallery on Oct 1 for a suggested(?) donation of $500... and it left me confused more than anything else. What's the event about? I can't find anything anywhere else (not that I looked very hard). I understand it's a fundraising function, but besides that? If I go there, what am I going to get (other than Cocktails Hors d'oeuvres)? What if I don't do the suggested donation? On a whole different level, since when does Wikimedia do fundraising events? I thought it was a policy to abandon attempts to gain major donors and to focus on the $10 donations? When did that change? In short: huh??? R. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] An idea that may improve Wikipedia's fundraising
Technology limitations aside, there are two things we throw around in the team a lot; that we should not give the impression that a user *must* pay to use a WMF property, and that we will never ever do gift premiums. This sounds a bit like Fundraising principles or similar. Are these documented anywhere (e.g. on Meta-Wiki)? If not, I think it'd be great to start a page. :-) In the past days there's been discussion internal to the fundraising team -- it appears that the 'fundraising principles' I thought we held are not uniformly held by others. In this particular instance it seems that gift premiums are not entirely off the table. I've been told that the reason we have not done them in the past is mostly due to technical limitations. The current view is that we should keep our options open to future experimentation if the situation allows. personal hat At this I'll take off my foundation hat and state that I remain firmly opposed to gift premiums being used as a donation incitement. I hope that if we do, at some point, press forward and experiment with premiums that, before this happens, ... - We show reasonable evidence that the gain in monetary income will fully offset the new cost in managing gifts. - We either have some method to ship worldwide without subsidy; or we communicate beforehand that we will not be able to do this in some regions *and* that we understand and have a plan for the fallout that will probably cause. - We have premiums that actually mean something to the movement; e.g. you do not donate $100 and get a t-shirt. - We show reasonable evidence that if the experiment doesn't work that we will not have hurt our future donation prospects. (E.g. will people always expect premiums if we offer them once?) - That we have a solid communications plan in place to immediately offset any possible suggestion that you are 'buying' a piece of the foundation with your donation. Just my two cents. /personal hat ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 11:50 AM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Matthew Walker wrote: Technology limitations aside, there are two things we throw around in the team a lot; that we should not give the impression that a user *must* pay to use a WMF property, and that we will never ever do gift premiums. Hi Matt. This sounds a bit like Fundraising principles or similar. Are these documented anywhere (e.g. on Meta-Wiki)? If not, I think it'd be great to start a page. :-) MZMcBride ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] An idea that may improve Wikipedia's fundraising
Ziyuan, Thanks for the idea! :) Technology limitations aside, there are two things we throw around in the team a lot; that we should not give the impression that a user *must* pay to use a WMF property, and that we will never ever do gift premiums. From my perspective buying a DVD set sounds scarily close to having to pay for the content and even if it doesn't fall under that category that it would fall under the shadow of gift premiums. In addition what use would giving a donor a DVD set serve? They clearly already have access to the site -- with the caveat that some countries have restricted use restrictions from the local government. If instead we are talking about donating them for the purposes of expanding our reach into countries where we presently have limited participation; it seems the current strategy is to convince local mobile carriers to support Wikimedia Zero. Taking into account technology -- I am unsure that spending the money to develop the infrastructure would be offset by the amount of interest we would have. Think also that although the shop will ship something for 15 USD, that's actually a subsidized rate for most international destinations. My guess is that we would be looking at more than 50$ a set, just for production and shipping, before getting anywhere near breaking even. ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 9:52 AM, Kevin Wayne Williams kwwilli...@kwwilliams.com wrote: Op 2013/08/06 9:40, Ziyuan Yao schreef: The key point in my original idea is that you make buyers believe that they're not just giving money away, but also getting some solid value in return. A Wikipedia DVD is a kind of solid value. More like a complete set of Wikipedia Blu-Rays. I forget the actual byte count of Wikipedia these days, but it's well over anything you would want to try to store on DVDs. KWW __**_ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-lhttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@**lists.wikimedia.orgwikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org ?subject=**unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] NSA
What surprises me is that anyone is surprised by any of this information. It's one thing to have suspicions and theories about it; but if the third party is constantly denying the allegations and with no recourse there's no point in getting angry. Now that we have reasonable doubt, I hesitate to call it proof, we can start making tremendous amounts of noise. ~Matt Walker ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] xkcd collecting donations for WMF?
Campaign unfuckingknown, with the medium being spontaneous. The amusing entries are either people fuzzing us; or us testing. There's very little validation of the campaign tracking fields. What comes into the system goes out of the system. We probably should clean the data up a little better though. :) I see that there is a special campaign reference in the donation link but how can it fetch the amount? As stated previously in this thread, the data comes from Samarium; Fundraising's new data proxy. We're slowly going to be adding more and more data to this box as we figure out how to sanitize and redact the data we have. This should help the chapters because part of the data we're going to be releasing as soon as we figure out how to do it will be the banner and landing page impression counts. ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] xkcd collecting donations for WMF?
On an unrelated note; I can't make head nor tails of some of those csv files... Are we really collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars daily??? Depends on the day :p We had a 2 million dollar day when we opened the floodgates in the US, UK, CA, AU, and NZ (We had five; I think NZ was the fifth.) Keep this in mind though; if the fundraiser is expected to raise ~35M that's ~100k a day we need to raise! And the amount we're expected to raise keeps going up. ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote: Not uncommon for Xkcd :p Although the article being used is changing so rapidly that it's unlikely to cause much disruption. On an unrelated note; I can't make head nor tails of some of those csv files... Are we really collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars daily??? :s Tom On Monday, April 1, 2013, Deryck Chan wrote: As a side note, the first panel of the comic also openly calls its readers to edit war over certain articles. On 1 April 2013 20:22, Manuel Schneider manuel.schnei...@wikimedia.ch javascript:; wrote: Did you see this April's Fool Day comic on xkcd, with an interactivly growing dog: The dog gains a pound for every $10 donated to the Wikimedia Foundation via this link. http://xkcd.org/ Is this real? How can it tell how much has been donated to WMF through this comic? I see that there is a special campaign reference in the donation link but how can it fetch the amount? Has there been any cooperation / negotiation between Randall Munroe and the WMF beforehand? /Manuel -- Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Lausanne, +41 (21) 34066-22 - www.wikimedia.ch ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] xkcd collecting donations for WMF?
Hi, is there any directory or file or whatever with the codes for campaigns? Nope; not yet. I'll have to get Zack and Megan to write something up. I see only codes without sense. I feel there's a matrix joke here that I don't want to make. ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Dennis Tobar dennis.to...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, is there any directory or file or whatever with the codes of campaigns?, I see only codes without sense. Regards... Dennis Tobar Calderón El 01/04/2013 18:46, Matthew Walker mwal...@wikimedia.org escribió: On an unrelated note; I can't make head nor tails of some of those csv files... Are we really collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars daily??? Depends on the day :p We had a 2 million dollar day when we opened the floodgates in the US, UK, CA, AU, and NZ (We had five; I think NZ was the fifth.) Keep this in mind though; if the fundraiser is expected to raise ~35M that's ~100k a day we need to raise! And the amount we're expected to raise keeps going up. ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote: Not uncommon for Xkcd :p Although the article being used is changing so rapidly that it's unlikely to cause much disruption. On an unrelated note; I can't make head nor tails of some of those csv files... Are we really collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars daily??? :s Tom On Monday, April 1, 2013, Deryck Chan wrote: As a side note, the first panel of the comic also openly calls its readers to edit war over certain articles. On 1 April 2013 20:22, Manuel Schneider manuel.schnei...@wikimedia.ch javascript:; wrote: Did you see this April's Fool Day comic on xkcd, with an interactivly growing dog: The dog gains a pound for every $10 donated to the Wikimedia Foundation via this link. http://xkcd.org/ Is this real? How can it tell how much has been donated to WMF through this comic? I see that there is a special campaign reference in the donation link but how can it fetch the amount? Has there been any cooperation / negotiation between Randall Munroe and the WMF beforehand? /Manuel -- Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Lausanne, +41 (21) 34066-22 - www.wikimedia.ch ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising testing
James, And why has 2012 been deleted from http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:FundraiserStatistics ? It hasn't been deleted; it's just broken and we haven't had time to fix it. If you'd like I can provide a dump of the aggregated data that went into creating it. Ideally we would be providing the data via Limn, but that hasn't happened yet due to where the data lives. ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 5:24 PM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote: Where are the results of the current fundraiser testing? And why has 2012 been deleted from http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:FundraiserStatistics ? ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikivoyage launch: why no blog post or press release?
I think we should all just use TAI. None of this nonsense about leap days, or pesky little quibbles about leap seconds. God forbid the notion of daylight savings. On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.ukwrote: On 15 January 2013 21:15, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: There's a timezone other than UTC? Only in summer. HTH. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- ~Matt Walker ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
[Wikimedia-l] Multivariate Fundraising Tests (Re: compromise?)
James, On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 2:11 PM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote: I mean as in the tests done May 16, September 20, and October 9 reported at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2012/We_Need_A_Breakthrough without adjusting the best performing pull-down delivery combined banner/landing page from the beginning of this month I obviously cannot speak for what Zack will end up doing but let's talk shop for a moment on how this would be implemented. The tests you indicated play banner, landing page impressions, and donation amount against each other. It appears that everyone saw a collection of random banners (ie: the test was not bucketed.) Are these the same variables you want to test? Regardless of the answer to the above; how do you propose we normalize our tests across time of day, day of week, and day of month factors - we've seen evidence that these all play a role. I don't know how many banner variations we actually have to test but it's likely we won't be able to test them all at the same time (In fact with the current weighting setup we can only test 30 banners at a time). Do we just take each group as it stands -- find the best performers in the group and then test the winners against each other? An additional considering is that we have four buckets to play with; buckets are independent so we could potentially test 120 banners at a time to four different groups. Presumably if we did this we would want a couple of control banners in each to normalize with? An additional something to consider is how long do we have to run these tests to gain statistical significance? At least a day I'm guessing. Are we going to account for banner fatigue at all? IE: show banners during only the first 10 visits like we just did with this most recent campaign? -- ~Matt Walker ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] deliberately lowered fundraising growth rate (was: Fundraising updates?)
James, the Chief Revenue Officer reported that significant increases in fundraising would be very difficult I cannot speak for what Zack was thinking -- but I can tell you - as a member of the fundraising technology team - that I was shocked, utterly amazed, and astounded at how successful this years fundraiser was. There's a couple of reasons for this. One -- banner impressions were down! Yes the report card says page views went up; but did you know that when looking at only at the number of HTML pages served to the top five deskop browsers that they actually went down a couple percent from the same time last year? See [1] but you'll have to do the maths yourself. This also serves the point that next year we do need to get fundraising working on mobile devices. Two -- The tests that Zack and Megan did in the months up to the official launch showed that our old 'Sad Jimmy' banners were not pulling in anywhere as near as much money as they used to. There's a reason the test results page [2] is titled We need a breakthrough. We were persistent and lucky and got one. I strongly feel that it was extremely prudent to not gamble on an unknown. Three -- let's take a look at the numbers ceteris paribus. I'm going to assume that fundraising numbers taken straight from [3] can be modeled as an exponential because it'll make a bigger number, I've not normalized my data for the length of the fundraisers (which was 50 days last year), nor accounted for the state of the economy, nor taken out big donations, nor for the loss in number of desktop browsers all of which will reduce the number in actuality. Doing so I get ~50M raised from fundraising this year. As an engineer I was trained to over-engineer to about 20% -- that turns that number into ~40M. As you state, expected revenue from the plan would be 46.1M -- that falls in the middle of my two numbers. If Zack did reduce the expected revenue number it would be because he took a similar back of the hand model and said look how unrealistic that is -- that's just silly. Which is what I would expect from someone using reasonable judgement. Why should donors who believed they were giving to fund the Strategic Plan in line with the growth of the actual utilization of Foundation services not feel betrayed by this? I could be wrong because I wasn't a member of the foundation last year and didn't read all the banners - but I did donate my 20$ and thought I was helping support the site's programmers and servers. I was not, I recall with some clarity, donating because I'd read the strategic plan and agreed with it. I don't feel betrayed at all. Why should donors who expect the Foundation to prepare for contingency not feel betrayed by the abandonment of fundraising in the last week of December, which has over the past several years produced two to four times as much funding per day than a typical fundraising day? My opinion would be that - it's laudable the board looked at what they a considered reasonable sustainable growth curve and then held themselves too it. Anything else would be corporate greed. On one hand, we have anecdotal reports of a handful of opinion pieces complaining about fundraising. That's a fair point and I thank you for holding me accountable to my statement. I will inject here, however, that my point was not about current sentiment but about a potential growth of the vocal minority causing the majority to think again about donating in the future. In any case I routinely perform the following experiment as a small part of what I consider my job. I search google for 'wikimedia fundraising' and limit the time period to a month. I did so again this evening. In the first 20 twenty results I had 4 positive, 2 negative, and 4 neutral sites. (The other ten were Foundation pages or by foundation employees.) In them, I had a small majority of positive comments, but with some very loud naysayers in the background, the rest were fairly neutral. Your results may vary. Mine do over time -- it seems that yes people are happy with the current campaign. Possibly because we bugged them less? But in the lead up to it my fuzzy memory recalls seeing a lot more negativity. Once again, I simply state we need to be careful with public sentiment -- it's not a resource to squander lightly. ~Matt Walker [1] http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportRequests.htmnormalized by http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportClients.htm [2] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2012/We_Need_A_Breakthrough [3] http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:FundraiserStatistics see also http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2012/FundStatScraper.py to get the raw numbers ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
