Wikipedia
:
Wikipedia Signpost/2026-08-02/News and notes
Add languages
Add links
Project page
Talk
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Permanent link
Page information
Get shortened URL
Print/export
Download as PDF
Printable version
In other projects
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
<
Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost
|
2026-08-02
Foundation rejects voluntary recognition of union, proposed board eligibility rules sharply restrict candidates: Further: harassment allegations at Wikimania, and new RfC for Abstract Wikipedia.
← Back to Contents
View Latest Issue
2 August 2026
File:Question for Bernadette Meehan regarding the WMF's recognition of Wiki Workers United.jpg
Wikimedia Foundation
CC BY 4.0
59
0
418
News and notes
Foundation rejects voluntary recognition of union, proposed board eligibility rules sharply restrict candidates
Contribute
—
Share this
PDF download
E-mail
Mastodon
LinkedIn
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Reddit
By
Andreas Kolbe
,
Czarking0
,
Mitchsavl
and
Bri
Wikimedia Foundation refuses voluntary union recognition, hires union-busting law firm
Bernadette Meehan answers question on Wiki Workers United U.S.'s request for voluntary recognition at Wikimania in Paris
On July 20,
Wiki Workers United
U.S.
demanded
voluntary recognition as a union from the Wikimedia Foundation, following a similar request for voluntary recognition made by WWU-UK, the UK branch of WWU, in June. The request by Wiki Workers United U.S. demanded a response from the Wikimedia Foundation by Friday, July 24, i.e. during the Wikimania conference. No response was received by that date, though the topic of Wikimedia staffers unionizing was discussed at the conference (see video on the right).
On July 27, the WMF published a statement declining voluntary recognition of Wiki Workers United U.S.
The Wiki Workers United logo
The
statement
said:
[W]e believe a secret-ballot election conducted by the
National Labor Relations Board
is the appropriate path forward. This process protects individual choice and ensures that any outcome reflects the collective will of those eligible to participate.
The community response to the WMF statement has mostly been one of dismay, with fears that the Foundation will use the time gap between now and the secret ballot to discourage employees from union involvement, using
union busting
methods as described humorously in an
episode
of
Last Week Tonight with John Oliver
. A
community petition to the WMF Board to recognize the union
has been started on Meta-Wiki; as we were getting ready to publish this issue, it had passed 150 signatures. Two prior community petitions in support of the union, started in May 2026
on Meta-Wiki
and
on English Wikipedia
, have attracted well over 1,200 signatures each.
Jimmy Wales
said
on the Wikimedia-l mailing list that he had looked into the process followed by WWU, which had resulted in a supermajority of employees signing a union card, and thought it imperfect:
One of the problems with the process so far is that it was not secret and we have heard from some staff members that they felt pressured because the organizers would know how they decided. That isn't a great process and it goes against our movement's values quite badly to have people in a situation where they are pressured into something one way or the other.
It's pretty easy to see the problem if we imagine it in the other direction – imagine some company asking staff to sign pledge cards not to join a union, and keeping track of who did or didn't in order to put pressure on those who didn't. Gross. It doesn't make it better for it to be the other way around in my own personal view.
I want a process where staff are safe to deliberate in the privacy of their own minds and make the decision based on all the available evidence that makes the most sense to them. So I don't think insisting on a proper vote is process for the sake of process and I say that with my own estimate that the staff will vote to support unionization. I think we'll be in a better place if it's really clear – a clean and clear choice with no chance of pressure.
In terms of time, energy, and money – I don't think it should take very long and again speaking only for myself I hope we get it done as quickly and efficiently as we can and I hope that everyone – staff, management, board, and community can come together to celebrate the outcome. I know I will.
WWU
announced
on 28 July that they would file for a union election with the
National Labor Relations Board
. The announcement also accused the Wikimedia Foundation of being disingenuous in their public communications:
Thousands of workers across the tech and nonprofit sectors have achieved voluntary recognition through this "card check" method. Our demand of the Wikimedia Foundation was simply that they live up to their values and be the high-road employer that they purport to be. They refused.
While the Wikimedia Foundation touts to the public that they plan to take a neutral stance in our organizing efforts, they have already proven that not to be the case behind the scenes. When the Foundation rejected our request for voluntary recognition this week, they immediately sent out to employees and the public statements couched in classic union-busting rhetoric, rhetoric undoubtedly provided by outrageously expensive union-avoidance law firms. This insulting and wasteful use of Foundation resources is both an insult to Foundation employees and to the Free Knowledge Movement as a whole.
Insisting that our right to organize be adjudicated by the National Labor Relations Board is not a neutral choice; it has nothing to do with election procedures or employee choice. It has everything to do with delaying the process and stalling the vote in order to give time to the union busters to launch a potentially coercive anti-union campaign against Foundation employees.
Community members expressed concern about the fact that the Wikimedia Foundation has a business relationship with the
Jones Day
law firm, which is particularly well known in the U.S. for aggressive
union busting
. In this context, it is worth pointing out that the WMF's relationship with Jones Day dates back over a decade and that Jones Day has primarily
dealt with the Foundation's brand and trademark management
. However, it eventually
transpired
that the Foundation has chosen to be represented by the law firm
Littler Mendelson
, which has an equally strong reputation for union busting.
Relevant links:
June 24 press release
from the
Communication Workers Union
(CWU, UK)
FAQ
, Wiki Workers United
Announcements
, Wiki Workers United
July 20 press release
from
Communications Workers of America
(CWA)
July 27 WMF response
, including an FAQ
National Labor Relations Board case page (for U.S. users)
,
archive link for users outside the U.S.
Community pages:
Wiki Workers United/Solidarity Signatures
on Meta-Wiki, started 12 May 2026, over 1,250 signatures
Wikipedia:Wiki Workers United solidarity
on English Wikipedia, started 21 May 2026, over 1,200 signatures
Community petition to the WMF Board to recogniue the union
on Meta-Wiki, started 28 July, over 150 signatures
AK
Eligibility criteria for board candidates
Following the 2025 selection process for the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees, which saw two of the candidates disqualified (see previous
Signpost
special report
and
interview
as well as
2025 WMF Board reform petition
), the WMF Board decided to review the selection process of new Trustees.
On 17 July, the board
publicised
its proposed new, significantly more stringent
eligibility criteria
. The main difference is that the proposed new criteria demand considerably more board or community experience, with ordinary community members who are not already office holders unable to stand for election. The proposed new criteria are as follows:
Minimum requirements
As of [
Date of the applications opening
], candidates must
Be fluent in English
Be at least 18 years old
Have a Wikimedia account that is at least 4 years old
Be eligible to vote (
2025 voter eligibility criteria
for reference)
Have not been removed for cause or departed after inappropriate conduct as a staff or Board member of the Wikimedia Foundation, Wikimedia Endowment, or other Wikimedia affiliates
Fulfill at least one of the categories of governance or community experience
Complete the WikiLearn
WMF Board of Trustees Candidate Pre-Onboarding module
before publishing their application
Categories of Governance or Community Experience
There are several categories of community or governance experience that demonstrate knowledge of the Wikimedia projects and trust in one's ability to effectively work with other Wikimedia volunteers.
Candidates must fulfill at least one of the following criteria by having a total of at least 2 years of experience within the last 6 years, as of the [
Date of the applications opening
]:
Served as a member of the Board of the Wikimedia Foundation or Wikimedia Endowment
Served as a member of the governing board of an organization at least 10% of the size of the Wikimedia Foundation (by annual budget or staff count)
Served in one of the following positions on a
Wikimedia project
:
A member of one of the
Arbitration Committees
Global Sysop
Steward
Bureaucrat
CheckUser
Oversighter
Served in one of the following governance positions for a Wikimedia affiliate registered as a legal entity and employing
full-time
staff, that is in good standing (in compliance with grant and reporting guidelines and without any unresolved proceedings with the Affiliations Committee during the candidate's tenure):
Chairperson
A member of a Wikimedia affiliate's governing body for two consecutive terms
A member of the governing body of a recognized regional or thematic hub for two consecutive terms
Served in one of the following Wikimedia committee positions:
An advisor to one of the
Wikimedia Foundation Board Committees
(Currently: Executive, Audit, Governance, and Product & Technology) or the Wikimedia Endowment Board Committees (Currently: Finance, Community & Grantmaking, Audit, and Governance)
A member of the
Elections Committee
(EC), given that at least 18 months have elapsed since the end of their term (per the EC charter)
A member of one of the Wikimedia Movement committees (Currently:
Language Committee
,
Product & Technology Advisory Council
, the
Global Resource Distribution Committee
,
Affiliations Committee
, and
Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee
)
A member of the Wikimedia Foundation Grant Committees (
Regional
,
Conference
, Research Funds)
We welcome people's interest in becoming members of the Board of Trustees. We encourage those who do not meet the criteria to express their interest, consider leadership training and ways to gain relevant experience in order to be eligible in the future.
Feedback is invited on Meta-Wiki.
AK
,
C
Reports of sexual harassment at Wikimania events
On July 26,
Wikimedia Korea
released an
open letter calling for an investigation
after allegations a Wikimania participant experienced unsought physical contact and sexual harassment.
Several key activists from Wikimedia Korea took part in this event. I had hoped that our participants would return from this event—which brings together Wikimedians from around the world—having gained a range of valuable experiences, and that they would continue their activities with even greater vigour. However, today I heard that one of our members whilst offering well-intentioned assistance to another participant, was instead subjected to unwanted, forced physical contact and sexual harassment. We find this deeply regrettable and are deeply dismayed.
—
User:Jjw
, president of Wikimedia Korea
Wikimedia Korea/Open letter to the Wikimania community July 26
(translation)
Wikimedia Malaysia released a statement the next day, and said that one of their own members had experienced sexual harassment in a separate incident.
Their issue is not an isolated case. Earlier, one of our own community members who attended the conference in person has filed a Trust and Safety complaint to the conference team regarding a separate case of sexual harassment by another Wikimedian against another Wikimedian from a different region. Similar to the other case, this case also involved physical touch and forceful intimacy against a person who has expressed her discomfort at a breach of personal space.
—
Tofeiku
, Chair of Wikimedia CUG Malaysia, on
Wikimedia CUG Malaysia's response in support of Wikimedia Korea’s statement on Wikimania
(translation)
Vice President of the WMF Community Resilience & Sustainability team
Maggie Dennis
responded to the open letter, confirming communication with the individuals involved.
The Foundation is treating this matter seriously. You may be aware that we do not discuss Trust & Safety incidents in respect to the privacy of all individuals, but I can confirm that we are in contact with individuals involved in the reported incident and witnesses to other concerning behaviors. […] While we will not be able to update community, including Wikimedia Korea, on the outcomes according to standard Trust & Safety policies, the person who made the report to us will be told the outcome directly.
—
Maggie Dennis
at
Community Resilience & Sustainability/Response to Open letter to the Wikimania community July 26
–
M
Abstract Wikipedia is a Wikimedia wiki in Wikimedia community.
The title of this entry is from the Abstract Wikipedia
article on itself
.
A
Request for comment
has opened over on Meta Wiki about
Abstract Wikipedia
. Discussion is ongoing about whether rolling out to more languages should be paused, the project should be closed, or the Foundation should have more "transparency" about the project.
Originally approved by the Board of Trustees in 2020, the project aims to provide a way for smaller language Wikipedias to access articles in their language. The community has
raised concerns
about allowing the integration of Abstract Wikipedia into small-language Wikipedias given its current state.
The Wikimedia Foundation have
responded on Meta-Wiki
, expressing confidence in their approach to
natural language generation
and the improvement of project quality over time, and acknowledging the difficulty of navigating documentation and reporting on the project's development.
Relevant links:
Request for Comment on Abstract Wikipedia
Response from the project team to the criticism
–
M
Brief notes
New administrators
:
The Signpost
welcomes the English Wikipedia's newest administrators,
MCE89
and
Staraction
, elected through "old fashioned"
requests for adminship
. Of note, a handful of editors opposed both RfAs explaining they saw open-ended support of the Wikimedia Foundation workers' union (see
above
and
prior
Signpost
coverage
) as potentially damaging to the project.
Articles for Improvement
: This week's
Article for Improvement
is
Customer experience
, and next week's (starting 3 August) is
HDR10
. Please be bold in helping improve these articles!
←
Previous
"News and notes"
In this issue
2 August 2026
(
all comments
)
In the media
News and notes
WikiConference
In focus
Arbitration report
News from Diff
On the bright side
Traffic report
Comix
+ Add a comment
Discuss this story
To follow comments,
add the page to your watchlist
.
If your comment has not appeared here, you can try
purging the cache
.
No comments yet. Yours could be the first!
+ Add a comment
The Signpost
needs your help
putting together the next issue
.
Home
About
Archives
Newsroom
Subscribe
Suggestions
Retrieved from "
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2026-08-02/News_and_notes&oldid=1367329918
"
Category
:
Wikipedia Signpost archives 2026-08
Hidden category:
Wikipedia Signpost RSS feed
