Talk:2012 Communications Strategy

Please do leave your comments on the Wikimedia UK comms strategy here. Please submit your comments before the end of Friday 6 July. Thank you. --Stevie Benton (talk) 15:47, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

• I was wondering where this was! I'll add mine under the section headers of the report, which I suggest we all do, to keep it tidy, with an initial "overall" bit. It would have been better to upload the text itself I think, if only for ease of quoting. Johnbod (talk) 17:05, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Overall

• Generally I think trhis is good, & very largely good in the reccommendations. Detail points below. Johnbod (talk) 17:13, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

stakeholder map

• Top left: "For archive content" - means? Clarify or cut. Johnbod (talk) 17:05, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Channel review

WMUK wiki

• So how many views/unique vistors do we get? Same info for Twitter, Facebook, IRC chats. Johnbod (talk) 17:05, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
• "For the most part, the site navigation is easy enough". You think?? Johnbod (talk) 17:05, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
• Should be "archiving old and out of date content". Johnbod (talk) 17:05, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
• Better categorization of pages - Absolutely YES. In fact it is is often impossible to find anything, once it goes from "Recent changes", which I find the most useful navigational method. Johnbod (talk) 17:05, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Geonotices

• Clarify this applies to WMUK "corporate" announcements, like those mentioned. I don't think the board needs to approve those for GLAM events, still less meetups (which are not WMUK events - a reminder of that here might be useful). I don't think the whole board needs to approve every press release myself, & if we get a devolved system going it should apply here too. All GLAM type events with a general invite should continue to use Geonotices, so the last point seems too tight. Johnbod (talk) 17:05, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

News & Print

• Sceptical about postcards, which look a tad extravagant imo, plus rather selling the pass for an online organization. Maybe if we ever do WikiLovesMonuments. Johnbod (talk) 17:13, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
• Add to Reccomends that there should always be an online version. Johnbod (talk) 17:05, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
• Is there a case for some sort of press party to meet Wikimedians & have some light presentations? Johnbod (talk) 17:05, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
• I know it happens, but I think we should be a bit cautious about pushing ourselves as WMF-East for the media. Inter-chapter relations are not a high priority imo; you will only talk to the brass. "Support t smaller chapters" is to be treated with a certain caution - fortunately language barriers make this difficult much of the time. Johnbod (talk) 17:05, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
• I think we need a simple page & handout version explaining how WMUK fits in to the rest of the movement, & other things - open content, Wikileaks. For once, Venn diagrams would be actually useful. Johnbod (talk) 17:05, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Blogs

• Should not have be approved by board, yes. Maybe a review by one nominated trustee with a backup, if people worry. But should carry a disclaimer re views represented. Johnbod (talk) 17:13, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Communications

with donors

• Yes, more often (ie than never, as at present), but even every two months might be too oftem. I'd say offer a signup to a monthly newsletter, otherwise max 4x per year, with an opt-out to just statutory notices, Annual Report. Johnbod (talk) 17:13, 2 July 2012 (UTC)