Requests for information

± Wikimedia Foundation Transparency Reports

All transparency reports

Privacy-related WMF Policies

Contact Us

This page keeps track of transparency requests for information from within the Wikimedia Foundation, Board of Trustees, committees and chapters.

Please sign and date your requests, and close the section when the information has been supplied.

Non-disclosure agreements[edit]

This is a request that the WMF publish the boilerplate non-disclosure agreements that its employees are asked to sign. This issue was discussed last month by several staffers and volunteers. [1] Many thanks, SarahSV ^talk 03:51, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is some relevant information at non-disclosure agreements, apparently published in 2013. It doesn't make very clear what NDA(s) employees are required to sign, but it appears to be a strong step in that direction. -Pete F (talk) 20:37, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Related page from around that time: legal docs. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:17, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Non-disparagement clauses[edit]

I request that the WMF publish all currently effective non-disparagement clauses binding present and former personnel, board members, and contractors. EllenCT (talk) 16:25, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was a temporary contractor a while ago. I would love to share the NDA and non disparagement clause they had me sign. It made me do some things I didn't like. Anyway, I think it was more stricter (or covered more) back then that it is now, or maybe they make certain people sign one or the other. Mike was the general counsel back then. Theo10011 (talk) 17:56, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note Luis Villa's post on the Wikimedia-l mailing list:

There was not [a non-disparagement clause] when I joined three years ago. There is still one in the severance agreement I was offered, which is why I didn't sign it - under the circumstances, I didn't feel like I could continue to participate in community processes (strategy, budget, etc.) while signing that clause.

See also following posts in that discussion. --Andreas JN466 11:10, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reader browsing history NDAs[edit]

I request that the WMF publish the non-disclosure agreements referred to at Research:Characterizing Wikipedia Reader Behaviour#Research terms. EllenCT (talk) 15:29, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Counts of complaints of harassment against WMF staff[edit]

Sometimes Wikimedia community members make complaints about harassment to them by WMF staff. I would like some data reported on this matter.

Right now the public face of WMF/community relations is that there are 0 complaints by community about staff. What actually happens is that for safety and other reasons, there is no system in place for tracking problems. There is an imbalance of power in which community members can complain about real issues, and there is no follow up or acknowledgement of the problem no matter how serious it is. Of course it is a liability in many ways for the WMF to acknowledge the existence of a complaint. I am not ready to say at this time that the WMF should develop infrastructure to manage or respond to such complaints, but at the least, I want data reported about yearly to count how often there are harassment complaints directed by volunteers to WMF staff, and I want that count made public without further comment.

If there are any archival records anywhere to count all such complaints in the past, I request also that a number counting those also be made public.

It is unhelpful to suppress knowledge of the existence of complaints. It makes for a bitter volunteer base to not have a channel to be heard in some small way, even if that small way is merely to be counted. It is also unfair to position volunteers in a way that their options are to drop or escalate the issue, when a private, safe reporting channel is what they really need. I wish to establish the reporting of counts of complaints as the minimum standard for what we would do. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:38, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest in reader log research[edit]

I have asked that the Foundation identify the personnel responsible for decisions about Research:Characterizing Wikipedia Reader Behaviour who are affiliated with Stanford University, the institution sponsoring and benefiting from it. EllenCT (talk) 23:29, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Legal docs[edit]

I endorse User:MZMcBride's requests at Legal docs. Should they be copied into separate sections here? EllenCT (talk) 01:56, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Endowment[edit]

I request substantive answers from the WMF to the questions asked at Talk:Wikimedia Endowment#How should we select members of the Wikimedia Endowment Advisory board?.

For background, see User:Guy Macon/Wikipedia has Cancer and Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2017-02-27/Op-ed. --Guy Macon (talk) 10:42, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(...Sound of Crickets...) --Guy Macon (talk) 03:57, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Guy Macon. Thank you for your interest in the workings of the Wikimedia Endowment. Lisa Seitz Gruwell replied to your question on March 29th on the Wikimedia Endowment talk page in several posts. [2] ,[3]. Cheers, SPoore (WMF) (talk) 15:22, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The response did not actually answer the question I asked, and my followup request for clarification has been sitting unanswered for five days so far. I am having trouble reconciling this behavior with the WMF's claims of having a "commitment to openness, transparency, and bilateral engagement with the Wikimedia community".[4][5] --Guy Macon (talk) 21:05, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(...Chirp...) --Guy Macon (talk) 17:49, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Answered on 19 April 2017 -Guy Macon (talk) 11:56, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]