Talk:2012 Annual Report/Design

Please feel free to discuss any changes to the content here. --Stevie Benton (talk) 11:43, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Is the annual report not going to include summary accounts (unaudited if necessary)? --Tango (talk) 19:57, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Tango, thank you for your question. We have three versions of the annual report, one of which will include the full financial information and is provided to the Charity Commission. This version is the glossy, story-based report which is for wider consumption. --Stevie Benton (talk) 10:36, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I think a brief summary of the accounts would be useful for wide consumption. Just revenue with a couple of splits (donations, membership fees, in-kind donations), expenditure with a couple of splits (staff, admin (inc. office), grants, other programmes), and a short balance sheet. --Tango (talk) 11:34, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Tango. I take your point but the 12-pager is a review for members, donors, funders and the public. Richard and Jon are working on the financially-focused report as we speak, which will include full and comprehensive information. A part of the problem is that we won't have the final numbers available until after the deadline for the glossy report. --Stevie Benton (talk) 11:45, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Please note that any comments and suggestions not noted here are accepted and will be sent to the designer. --Stevie Benton (talk) 12:04, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Front cover image

There's been some confusion around the front cover image in that people may not make the connection between Monnow Bridge in Monmouth with our work. The points that User:The Land made are sensible. Therefore, we need to decide whether to stick with the Monnow Bridge or go with an alternative. My initial thought, for info, was to go with something like the Venus de Milo. Comments and suggestions please! --Stevie Benton (talk) 11:45, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Roger's statement

Roger's section - User:The Land suggests the most important information about what Wikimedia UK has achieved as an organisation is the 2nd half of the first paragraph. We should probably open with more of this, and then talk about Roger's personal experiences later.

I think it works quite well in terms of setting the scene and telling a story but happy to change if that's a majority view. What do others think? --Stevie Benton (talk) 12:04, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Blackout page

Some discussion about how we frame / amend the text on this page, particularly in terms of reducing the amount of the New Statesman article quoted, and also around how we explain the UK's role. If there's anyone who could provide a couple of lines on this for me to use it would be very helpful indeed. --Stevie Benton (talk) 13:07, 16 April 2012 (UTC)