Talk:Wikimedia Foundation elections/2025

Proposed rules

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

More languages • Please help translate to your language

Dear all,

You are invited to review and comment on the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees selection rules from now until May 15, 2025 at 23:59 AoE. The selection rules were updated based on previous versions by the Elections Committee and will be used in the 2025 Board of Trustees selection - where two seats will be filled.

Minor changes have been made to:

• the candidate guidelines
• the voter eligibility criteria
• the protocol for the call for community questions

The Wikimedia Foundation staff is supporting this community comment period so the Elections Committee can receive comments and concerns in advance of the Board selection process and adapt the rules as appropriate.

Visit the Meta-wiki talk page to provide your comments now and invite people you know to do so as well. Your comments will help the Elections Committee provide a better Board selection process.

Best,

Abhishek Suryawanshi

Chair of the Elections Committee

Voter eligibility criteria

I feel that eligibility should be increasing over time, and the time range over which people should have contributed should also, as external pressure on the projects increases. (Because we should be proportionately more worried about people contributing primarily to be able to stuff ballots in future elections.) It is also getting easier to contribute many small edits with automated tools now than it used to be, especially to Wikidata. Possibly updating the language towards something like 500 edits before 60 days in the past, and 50 over the preceding year. –SJ talk  18:43, 12 May 2025 (UTC)

Salut je me nomme BOKOBA veroly bénévole je viens de vote BOKOBA veroly (talk) 00:42, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

sur quatre candidat j'ai choisie bobby BOKOBA veroly (talk) 00:44, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Questions for candidates guidelines

"individual Wikimedians may endorse or express support for a certain question to be selected by the EC" Does "Individual Wikimedians" mean all users, or only those users who meet the voter eligibility criteria? Thanks. SCP-2000 17:05, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Other feedback

Text revision proposal: Current text: “In each selection process, the community has the opportunity to submit questions for the Board of Trustees candidates to answer. The Election Committee selects questions from the list developed by the community for the candidates to answer. Candidates are only required to answer these selected questions.”

Proposed text: “In each selection process, the community has the opportunity to submit questions for the Board of Trustees candidates to answer. The Election Committee selects questions from the list developed by the community for the candidates to answer. Candidates must answer all the required questions in the application in order to be eligible; otherwise their application will be disqualified.” — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chefsunilkumar (talk) 23:15, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Transcripts of candidate statements:

I suggest that each candidate's statement should also be presented as a transcript. I have neither the time nor the interest to watch videos. Patrickwooldridge (talk) 19:54, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Extend timeline, please

The timeline for this election feels short, with many other things taking people's attention. There are also no incumbents running, increasing the value of depth in the candidate pool. Please extend the timeline for candidacy submission another two weeks. –SJ talk  18:33, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Extension of the call for candidates period

reposting from Wikimedia-L

Hi all,

The Elections Committee, in consultation with the Governance Committee, has decided to extend the call for candidates period for the 2025 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees selection until Tuesday, July 8, 23:59 AoE (Wednesday, July 9, 11:59 UTC), from the original deadline of Tuesday, July 1, 23:59 AoE (Wednesday, July 2, 11:59 UTC).

This decision was based on the fact that the application process this year is more complex for prospective candidates, particularly with the inclusion of community-sourced questions within the candidate form, and feedback from members of the Wikimedia project communities and affiliates. With this extension, prospective candidates will have more time to fill out their candidacy applications and submit their proof of identity.

Please find more information about the call for candidates on Meta-wiki, including the link to submit your candidacy application.

On behalf of the Elections Committee and Governance Committee,
Abhishek Suryawanshi
Chair, Elections Committee
02:07, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Linking to Wikimedia Projects

The rules are vocal to not circumvent the 2500 words limit with linking to external pages, mentioning blogs and other documents. On the other hand, Wikimedia projects are explicitly allowed.

To be on the safe side, I removed a reference to the Movement Charter subpage I would like to recall and bring to the BoT table. Considering it is quite short (and my answers are far from 2500 words), it's pretty relevant and probably forgotten by most of the audience - can I reinstate the link?

Otherwise, I'd like to ask for a brief time to put the relevant content into the main body of the application. aegis maelstrom δ 13:01, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

Noting that the Elections Committee also received this request via email and has communicated its decision to Michal. For the ElectCom, RamzyM (WMF) (talk) 15:46, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees 2025 - Candidates and shortlisting process

reposting from Wikimedia-L

Hello all,

The Call for Candidates for the 2025 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees selection is now closed. After verification by the Elections Committee and the Wikimedia Foundation, 12 (twelve) candidates are eligible. In order to be eligible, all candidates had to complete the required questions in the candidate application and meet the eligibility criteria.

See the list of the all eligible candidates on this meta-wiki page and learn more about the experience, diversity, and expertise they hope to bring to the Board.

As we have more than 10 eligible candidates, a shortlisting process will take place. Representatives of Wikimedia movement affiliates that are currently compliant with their reporting obligations (list of all Affiliates currently compliant) will soon receive a communication detailing how they can participate in the shortlisting process.

Key dates of the next steps:

• July 15 – 28: Shortlisting process

• By July 29: Announcement of the final list of 6 (six) shortlisted candidates
• July 29 – August 26: Campaigning period
• August 27 – September 10: Voting period

Learn more about the full timeline on this meta-wiki page.

On behalf of the Elections Committee,

Abhishek Suryawanshi

01:08, 15 July 2025 (UTC)

Required candidate sessions

@RamzyM (WMF): Ramzy sent out the following email Friday 18 July, announcing for the first time and requiring attendance at particular events.

I am writing to request the option to satisfy attendance requirements by watching recordings of these sessions. The short notice of this is putting me in schedule conflicts.

Here is the message. I presume that sharing it is compatible with copyright notice {{WMF-staff-upload}} as there is nothing sensitive here about a group schedule.

---

Candidate onboarding [July-August 2025] Candidates are expected to participate in a pre-onboarding process, including two virtual sessions, which are required.

The first session is a 60-minute virtual workshop with all verified candidates and members of the Wikimedia Foundation Board. It will cover the processes of the Board and the Foundation, including what responsibilities the Board does and does not have and how the Board and Foundation staff work together. This session will be held Friday, July 25, 14:00–15:00 UTC and will be recorded. You will receive a calendar invitation from Margo Lee.

The second onboarding session is a leadership strategy workshop focused on the role of the Board held Saturday, August 9, 0500–0700 UTC, held as part of Wikimania. If you are attending Wikimania in person, please let Margo Lee know. Candidates can participate in-person or virtually, depending on their availability. All candidates are welcome to participate, regardless of the outcome of the shortlisting process. This is a leadership development opportunity and there will be other members of the Wikimedia community present.

---

Thanks for a speedy reply. Bluerasberry (talk) 16:15, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello Bluerasberry,

I have sent an email to candidates with more information, but we will record the July 25 onboarding session for those who are not able to attend. For August 9, due to the uncomfortable time slot for some attendees, we will not make this session mandatory. The presenters discussed it and we think recording will be difficult because of the participatory nature of the session.

Regards,

Margo MLee (WMF) (talk) 21:03, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Resolved.

Thanks Bluerasberry (talk) 21:16, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Videos on candidate pages

I was the only candidate to post a video to my candidate page - Wikimedia Foundation elections/2025/Candidates/Lane Rasberry.

@Xeno (WMF): You removed my video in edit special:diff/28985563/28985584.

I am writing to ask if either I can have the video put back, or otherwise if I can request a photo be put.

This year as with the past election, the process requires that candidates produce a 3-minute video as their only option for campaigning at Wikimania, our international conference. The Wikimedia Foundation is organizing a special session at Wikimania in which these videos will be shown.

The same Friday 18 July email I referenced above also set the deadline for candidates to submit videos to be 30 July. Here is that message -

---

All candidates are asked to pre-record their statement and submit by July 30. We are asking all candidates to prepare this video, regardless of the shortlisting outcome so everyone is prepared. To ensure equal treatment, we do not anticipate a formal Q&A session during Wikimania. Staff will send more information about where to upload separately.

---

I appreciate elections committee approving my eligibility for candidacy, if that was ever in question, and I only am imagining that my video was removed to get me in compliance with eligibility somehow. That said, I never imagined that video would be a problem, as we are in an age of online people making videos, and videos were requested last year, and it seemed compatible with the rules. Now videos are requested this year, and mine is compliant.

Last year, there was no option to share videos, and none of them appeared on candidate pages. This year and going forward, I think it would be great if candidates had the option to share their video on their candidate pages, as I had done. With the 30 July deadline, everyone should be able to submit their video if they like.

So, my questions -

1. Can I have either a video or an image restored to my candidate page?
2. On behalf of all candidates, can I request that the candidate pages be changed to include an option for everyone to add their required videos?

Thanks. Bluerasberry (talk) 16:28, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

We've sent you an email some days ago and just now a second one because we got no response.

We asked you to name a photo that we could include instead of the photo as the page is protected and you can no longer do it yourself. Der-Wir-Ing ("DWI") talk 23:28, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

@Der-Wir-Ing: Thanks for granting forgiveness of my error. I do not see the first email, but I see the second one. Here is an image and caption.

---

|image = Lane Rasberry 2024-02-28 9.jpg
|image caption = Lane Rasberry, Wikimedian in Residence at the School of Data Science at the University of Virginia

---

I will submit the video I have into the designated channel for videos for Wikimania, and I hope that it is accessible in that way. Bluerasberry (talk) 15:27, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks Lane, this was done. Best, RamzyM (WMF) (talk) 15:47, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

@Der-Wir-Ing: Thanks for changing the election format to include candidate videos, as in special:diff/29082731/29156559. Previously when I inserted the video you said that "Therefore, the committee found that your insertion of the video runs contrary to the letter and spirit of the candidate guidelines." and I understand the tension of trying to keep the election fair while also updating processes to allow for new technology. For next time, consider inviting videos as part of the application process, instead of only as part of the later campaigning process as with this year and the previous election.

I am very pleased with this change! Bluerasberry (talk) 14:50, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Form expired before the deadline

Hi @RamzyM (WMF):,

Flagging here that the voting form has expired before the deadline. As a result, I have submitted the votes of Wikimedia Ukraine by email. Please acknowledge that you have received them and added to the form. Thanks — NickK (talk) 23:02, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I encountered the same issue and responded by email to Ramzy, electcom and WMF CST. Perhaps someone got DST the wrong way around. I trust WBUG's nominations will be considered. GreenReaper (talk) 23:27, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

Confirming that we have received WBUG's ballot. Thanks! RamzyM (WMF) (talk) 00:33, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

NickK: If you are still around, please try to load the survey again. It seems there was indeed a timezone mixup. Xeno (WMF) (talk) 23:48, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

@Xeno (WMF): I have sent you an email, unfortunately I read this a few minutes late — NickK (talk) 00:07, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

NickK: received and entry added to the voting list. Thank you! Xeno (WMF) (talk) 00:29, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees selection 2025 - Shortlisting process results

Hello everyone,

The candidates' shortlisting process for the 2025 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees selection has concluded. The 6 (six) candidates who received the highest number of votes from affiliates and will advance to the next phase are listed below (in alphabetical order):

1. Bobby Shabangu (Bobbyshabangu)
2. James Alexander (Jamesofur)
3. Lane Rasberry (Bluerasberry)
4. Michał Buczyński (Aegis Maelstrom)
5. Ravan J Al-Taie (Ravan)
6. Wojciech Pędzich (Wojciech Pędzich)

For more details about the results, please visit this page on Meta-wiki.

Candidates’ Lightning Talks at Wikimania

If you’re attending Wikimania this year—either onsite or online—join us in Room Nyeri on Wednesday, August 6th, from 11:45 AM to 12:40 PM Nairobi time. Hear directly from the candidates about the skills and expertise they hope to bring to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.

Next steps of the selection process

• Campaign period: July 29–August 26
• Voting launches: August 27, 00:00 UTC
• Voting closes: September 10, 23:59 UTC
• Announcement of preliminary results: October 2025

Please reach out with any questions you may have.

--

On behalf of the Elections Committee,

Abhishek Suryawanshi

Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee

21:01, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

A request for more community interactions

Reading through all the BoT candidates, I find that there is not enough interaction from the community, or a way for us to get to know the candidates before we have to vote.

There are around 10 community questions that were not "selected", some of which ask crucial questions. Would any of the candidates be willing to answer some more of them? Last year, only Nadzik had voluntarily answered all of them.

Alternatively, I hope there's some way the communities at large can interact with and understand the candidates, than just the pages on meta.

Tagging the six candidates - Bobbyshabangu Jamesofur Bluerasberry Aegis Maelstrom Ravan Wojciech Pędzich

Soni (talk) 11:21, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@Soni: I answered all the questions too! I know that Nadzik said that they were the only candidate to do so but actually the situation is just that there is no obvious central forum for voters and candidates to talk, so it is hard to communicate.

• Questions from Wikimedia Foundation 2024 board election
• Questions from Wikimedia Foundation 2022 board election

I have answers to this year's questions, but I have not posted them yet. @Leaderboard: you asked candidates to take your quiz and I did, and I got half of the questions correct I think.

If anyone wants me to talk about something on video then request it! The above videos are long but I make 1-3 minute videos also!

Bluerasberry (talk) 11:33, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

I haven't see the video, but I will note that a score of 50% easily meets my bar (which was set at ~38% this year). The goal of my putting this question was to ensure that the members have a baseline level of foundation; there was no expectation beyond that. Leaderboard (talk) 11:45, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Dear @Soni: - thanks for raising this. For me especially, the interactions with the communities before the actual voting starts would mean a lot, since I wish to represent the editing communities' interests on the Board and let's face it - each chance to interact with the editing folk means more insights, more possibilities. So far, the Elections Committee has not proposed a call or a similar activity, and we are under obligations of the campaigning guidelines not to engage in election-related online meetings unless approved by the Committee. For all it's worth, my story of a Wikimedian journey together with some insights as to the Board function can be found in the August 12 episode of Between the Brackets, happy to give you a chance to learn more. And again, would be happy to join any organised call under the approval of the Elections Committee. Wojciech Pędzich Talk 17:28, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

@Soni: Thanks, agree it would be good to interact more outside of the meta pages and the videos we made for Wikimania. It's tough given language barriers (the meta pages will be translated and I think the captions on the 3 minute videos as well) but never good to let perfect be the enemy of good etc. Happy to do more and will see what else can be raised proactively. Regarding the other extra community questions, happy to answer those and I have a couple of the optional questions on the main application that I didn't answer earlier because of character limits (decided it was better to be more complete on the earlier questions which I thought would be read by more people) and can answer those as well. Will take a day or two but will start on a user subpage and link here but open to other good spots to post as well. It's probably time to update my user pages so maybe time to clean that up over the weekend and include links to election materials at least temporarily. Jamesofur (talk) 07:35, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees selection 2025 - Change to the order of the selection process

More languages • Please help translate to your language

Dear all,

The Governance Committee and the Elections Committee are changing the order of the Board selection process to conduct the background checks and media checks and Governance Committee interviews for all six shortlisted candidates now rather than after the close of the vote. In order to permit those checks to occur, the voting period for the upcoming Board selection process will now open October 8 and close October 23. The campaigning period will be extended as well.

This is based on best practices, increased scrutiny the board faces and to reduce uncertainty around candidate eligibility before community members vote. This change will ensure that all candidates in the voting roster are able to be seated. It also means that the community does not go through a voting process where the Board is then unable to implement the outcome. The final two candidates will still need to be appointed by the Board in a vote, which requires an executive session meeting of the Board.

New board members will still be seated in the December Board meeting as originally planned.

If it is determined that a candidate cannot be seated based on the outcome of these processes, the candidate will be informed before the election. Candidates will have the opportunity to withdraw before the voting begins or before being formally disqualified, for this or other reasons.

On behalf of the Elections Committee and the Governance Committee,

Abhishek Suryawanshi

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:04, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

A section of the selection FAQ regarding this announcement is also available. On behalf of the ElectCom, RamzyM (WMF) (talk) 16:44, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Encouraged and discouraged campaigning behavior

Can you please some examples of encouraged and discouraged campaigning behavior? Perhaps 3 of each?

Here are the rules - Wikimedia Foundation elections/2025/Candidate guidelines

I have recently gotten 2 emails saying not to attend Board of Trustees election-oriented community meet-ups without prior approval from the Elections Committee. What is that about? Bluerasberry (talk) 18:44, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

@Bluerasberry:: Thank you for your inquiry. The Elections Committee reviews reports of campaign rules violations on a case-by-case basis by evaluating the facts presented. Therefore, it would be premature and against the spirit of the rules enforcement for the committee to predetermine encouraged and discouraged campaign behaviors.

On behalf of the Elections Committee,
--Mervat (talk) 20:08, 29 August 2025 (UTC)

Lane removed from the ballot

Thanks everyone for your support for my campaign. The Wikimedia Foundation has removed me from the ballot due to my not being suitable for the board at this time. They invited me to campaign again in two years at the next election, and they offered support to train and help me resolved the conflicts they identified.

I am very scared that to be removed from the ballot so late, right before the election, has the appearance of me being in the worst kind of scandal, sex offense, fraud, or violent act. Normally when a Wikipedian is removed from a process like this so suddenly, it is never for less than that.

I have requested that the Wikimedia Foundation be maximally transparent in stating their reasoning for removing me from the ballot, because at this point of the process and because I know how Wikipedians think, it looks really bad for me. I feel obligated and compelled to come forward before there is suspicion. Please I beg the Election Committee to plan to have whatever resources you need to be able to speak independently, plan this election, and eliminate candidates who are not suitable much earlier in the process. The situation that I am in is very bad and I am very scared that for years, people whom I asked to support me will look at the seriousness of this and have much less trust in me. No one should be removed suddenly in an unplanned process for incompatibility which could have been detected sooner. I am very scared.

I have more info on my English Wikipedia talk page and on the talk page of The Signpost newspaper. I sometimes submit articles to this Wikipedia newspaper, and the board named my participation there as the leading conflict from which they did not think I was prepared to untangle myself. I am involved in other media too, and my need to separate from it was the major reason for removal from the ballot.

• en:User_talk:Bluerasberry
• en:Wikipedia_talk:Wikipedia_Signpost#Lane_not_on_ballot_for_WMF_board_of_trustees

Thanks, I am communicating as best as I can. With more time I wish that I could have planned this statement better and not left the ballot like this. Bluerasberry (talk) 20:00, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Lane is not the only wholly suitable candidate to be thrown out leaving a very short final line up. While running the danger of accusations of being a conspiracy theorist, the way this entire election has been organised evokes the manner of show elections in one-party totalitarian states. The community has responded in greater depth on a Meta page HERE. Kudpung (talk) 01:41, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

This reflect poorly on the WMF. I know the board has historically wanted the board to speak with only one voice and for members to silence their own positions. Bluerasberry has already made it through a round of voting. Removal at this point is disrespectful of those who voted. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:19, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Good Evening Lane, if it helps please be assured that to my reading of the original message, the reasons for both of you seemed to be rather current and removable in time. If anything truly grave had been found, your whole eight would not have been invited to consider candidating in the future, and actually different steps would have been probably taken. This message has been repeated recently by Nataliia.

From a candidate perspective, I do agree with the statement from Risker: vetting before the popular vote is a step in the right direction, and it would feel good if it could happen even earlier (before the shortlisting by the affiliates) if the capacity allows. aegis maelstrom δ 23:19, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Some additional context: Learning from events and reactions surrounding the removal of Lane Rasberry from the 2025 Board Elections candidate shortlist. Hexatekin (talk) 16:39, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

Lane should have no reason to fear, firstly he has an extensive reputation for his work over the years, and secondly the Foundation is known to have a great capacity (as we probably all do) for messing up with the best of intentions. Rich Farmbrough. 20:26, 20 October 2025 (UTC).

Proposed questions from community members

Traditionally not all the community questions can make it to the official list, and in the past some candidates were providing answers to all or some community questions. Despite the discussion above, I think eventually no additional subpage was done for that this time.

I would not to flood the talk page but as I had some words left in my statement, I'd first take on #7 What are the current shortcomings in the technical support provided by WMF to the community? Which Wikimedia technology area or product should be prioritized most? from @Steven Sun:, and #9 If a Wikimedia fairy granted you a single wish for the Wikimedia movement—a wish unburdened by limits of resources, time, or people—what would you ask for and why? from @Superzerocool:.

Very briefly: we have many shortcomings: from multimedia and non-scaling images (hardcoding px) to missed AI/ML opportunities, and prioritizing them should be an ongoing process and discussion among the WMF Product&Tech, Research, external experts and obviously communities. Often omitted opportunity is moving references to Wikidata like we did with interwiki. Central references would greatly help out with translations and article maintainance - but also their repository would be a great project by itself. Happy to discuss!

For #13 moving more software development elsewhere by @GPSLeo:, I wrote we can't afford wasting time. If hubs / centres of excellence are the way forward to scale up, let's discuss specifics. aegis maelstrom δ 23:59, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Vote invalidation request

I found no way to submit an empty or invalid vote in response to Bluerasberry's removal from the list of candidates, so please manually strikethrough/invalidate my vote. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:12, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Furthermore, the voting page differs significantly from the example given at Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2025#For_voters.

I believe that the rules of the election, as written, must allow empty votes. But if they do not, the vote page must explicitly specify the correct format and the expectation that at least one candidate must be listed.

Pinging ElectCom members - User:ThadeusOfNazereth User:AbhiSuryawanshi User:Der-Wir-Ing. Soni (talk) 04:22, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Logging that this has been seen and relayed to the full committee. ThadeusOfNazereth (talk) 12:01, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

@Soni: thanks for the feedback. I've updated the relevant section at the FAQ to better reflect the voting guidance. I've also removed the 2024 ballot example to avoid further confusion. Best, RamzyM (WMF) (talk) 08:29, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

@RamzyM (WMF) I think it would be a good idea to allow the submission of a blank ballot as a protest. Since you can do that in a paper election, there's zero reason, really none at all, to restrict it online. Cremastra (talk) 02:26, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

+1, indeed, we want to protest vote Isderion (talk) 21:59, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Same for me. I demand that my vote be logged as "spoilt" as I had been misled while casting it. I self quote from my longer comment at Talk:Wikimedia Foundation Board noticeboard/October 2025 update#Value of an election where candidates are vetted for unanimity :

I cast my ballot having only scanned the ("allowed") candidates' statements and having known some etc. Only later I have realized that something (someone actually) is amiss and thus days later I have landed also here. ... Gleichschaltung and Nomenklatura are apt terms for what has been done here. I also wish [to] change my ballot to a spoilt or empty vote, but the vote designers seem to have preempted it too [so I am manually demanding it here].

The whole vote is now undemocratic, tainted, for the reasons stated at that link, so I also beseech the current "graciously allowed by the powers that be" (literally: nomenklatura, "new class") candidates to do the honorable and withdraw en masse. Zezen (talk) 12:18, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I would want this too. I cast a vote for only two candidates because I wanted to write in or protest vote. ~2025-29576-55 (talk) 12:58, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

I will also vote in protest by submitting no vote. I appreciate the board taking the time to review its candidates a priori, but it is clear to me that is not a viable path if it comes after a shortlisting to 6 by affiliates who quite clearly seem to have selected primarily for experience being a part of an affiliate and not for experience being a member of the movement. Izno (talk) 03:00, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I also consider myself deceived. My vote should not be taken as endorsing a sham election from which candidates the WMF dislikes had been quietly removed. Shame on you. Certes (talk) 22:34, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Bewildering procedure

It took med five minutes before I understood how to actually do the voting. The interfaces otherwise are much clearer this year and easier with just four candidate even if I would have preferred something like six (to have no females on the ballot seems discriminating). But I did not understand I should use drag och drop and it is not explained on the main voting page and nowhere on the supporting ones Yger (talk) 05:16, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Optimization for the future

Concerning this question: Why is there pre-onboarding for candidates? - This page and the answer don't explain what "pre-onboarding" is in the first place. It may be useful to explain what it is, when it happens, and only then explain why it is needed. - Fuzheado (talk) 14:05, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

An anti-democratic system for an anti-democratic organization

Face it, this is a lame pseudo-ratification process for a self-selected slate of insiders. We don't even have the "right" to undervote the Officially Designated Candidates in this bureaucratic nightmare the insiders have constructed. Fuck the WMF. Carrite (talk) 20:03, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Context: Learning from events and reactions surrounding the removal of Lane Rasberry from the 2025 Board Elections candidate shortlist. Hexatekin (talk) 16:37, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

WMF is not the membership body that was originally discussed, but was not practicable under Florida state law. Therefore it is by no means a democratic organization. Any attempt to insert democracy into board appointments has to be tempered by the legal and ethical duties of the board. Rich Farmbrough. 20:31, 20 October 2025 (UTC).

Voting ends at 23:59, 10 September 2025 (should be 22 October)

I’ve just received an email from Meta-Wiki telling me that 'voting has begun in the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees elections' and that 'voting ends at 23:59, 10 September 2025 (UTC)'. I know I’m in a different time zone but not *that* different. Perhaps it ought to be corrected? — Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:40, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

@RamzyM (WMF): think this is your item. — xaosflux ^Talk 00:45, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

I received the same email a moment ago: Voting ends at 23:59, 10 September 2025 (UTC). --Taweethaも (talk) 00:50, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

Likewise. As an old guy, I remember way back in the olden times, when proofreading was a thing. Anastrophe (talk) 03:05, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi all, thanks for flagging and apologies for the oversight. The English version of the message had the September closing date in it; it somehow missed the backport for this patch. All other languages for which there were translations had the October date in them. We are working to make sure the next round of Echo pings aligned with the current election timeline. Best, RamzyM (WMF) (talk) 08:38, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

So when does voting end? I couldn’t find this information anywhere, not in the FAQ, nowhere. If the voting end date is unknown, or might be adjusted, then perhaps that should be said somewhere. It takes a long time to inform oneself before voting, so a deadline would be helpful. Kaicarver (talk) 10:38, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

@Kaicarver: I hadn’t noticed it initially either when I first opened the Meta-Wiki page from the notification. I later found it in the notes section at the bottom of the page linked from the Meta-Wiki email. The election timeline is mentioned in the Timeline section on Wikimedia Foundation elections/2025.- ❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 12:09, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

[from the above page]: October 22nd. –SJ talk  17:31, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you to both of you! Now I can procrastinate another 10 days with an easy conscience. Kaicarver (talk) 19:27, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

"All other languages for which there were translations had the October date in them" — Why do you say that when it's not true? I got it in German and it also says "endet am 10. September" (you guess what that means). — User:MFH 19:58, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Confusing

I know there are complexities in conducting such a vote, but they don't all have to be thrown at potential voters. With all the text, I could not find anything explaining HOW TO VOTE. There should have been a simple guide telling people to click and drag candidates in order of preference from the "not ranked" box into the rankede box. It is not at all intuitive that that is how we are supposed to vote. Kdammers (talk) 04:28, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

@Kdammers: thanks for the feedback, we've updated the relevant section at the FAQ to better reflect the voting guidance. Please let me know if you encounter further difficulties. Best, RamzyM (WMF) (talk) 08:30, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

Candidates' questions and answers

In the sidebar there is a link to "Candidates' questions and answers" but it goes to https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2025/Questions_for_candidates which only contains questions. Where are the answers? — Omegatron (talk) 15:34, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi, all candidates answered the five questions as part of their respective candidate applications. RamzyM (WMF) (talk) 15:46, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

Spoiling ballot

There is no way to spoil my ballot in protest is there? Pointless. CNC (talk) 22:06, 11 October 2025 (UTC)

Not at this time. See phabricator:T316442. Emufarmers (talk) 20:29, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

thanks, that uh... what is it, a feature request? seems like a good idea.

⚓ T316442 Allow blank votes / spoiled ballots Kaicarver (talk) 20:08, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Why are there no women included?

As the title.~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 11:33, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

Because: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/October_2025_update#Value_of_an_election_where_candidates_are_vetted_for_unanimity : the only woman was literally non Politically Correct one. Zezen (talk) 12:25, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

So is the absence of women politically correct, or are women a low priority? What has the WM movement been working on recently? Isn't it all about eliminating gender differences? Where is our women's working group or organization? I think there is one, Come over quickly! ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 22:47, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

I was alarmed to see that Ravan J Al-Taie was (apparently) removed from the ballot because of supposedly "anti-Israel" sentiment of some kind. This, in a year when literally 99% of the world has been criticizing Israel. Why can this stand? And why can't I write in Ravan as my choice? From what I have seen of videos and statements and such of the other candidates, I think they are great, but why not allow those voting to actually choose from the semi-final slate instead of winnowing out two for completely unclear reasons (Lane) and for apparently political reasons (Ravan)? Meerkat77 (talk) 03:49, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. Some members of the management seem to deeply understand the notion that "silence is golden." They could have been much more transparent by offering explanations and communicating, in other words just say something, but they didn't. This was also the case in the recent ambush regarding the "public consultation on shutting down Wiki News." Why not communicate more instead of leaving volunteers to speculate and argue? ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 11:50, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼 ~2025-29576-55 (talk) 12:52, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Write-in ballot

As the board can apparently ignore the community's votes, I will ignore the board and election committee's "shortlisting" and "pre-vetting" processes. With no disrespect to the candidates still running, I vote for Jonathan Cardy and Fram. Kusma (talk) 12:42, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

Alright I'll vote one for you. Then I'll follow you with the remaining two votes. I actually don't know anyone anyway. ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 22:51, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

(and The fourth position is reserved for myself of course)~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 22:52, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Can I show my vote?

Today I voted in this election, so can I show which candidates I voted for? JPPEDRA2 (talk) 14:03, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for voting. Can you clarify what do you mean by showing your vote? SecurePoll will not publish your ballot choices publicly. RamzyM (WMF) (talk) 00:59, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

I asked if I can show the candidates I voted for. JPPEDRA2 (talk) 09:56, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Real deadline

Today, I was reminded to vote. I shall have some spacetime for considerations and parhaps for asking questions to the candidates on 2025-10-19. Is my vote valid, if I vote as late as then?--Ulamm (User talk:Ulamm|talk) 16:54, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi -- yes, voting closes on 00:00, 23 October 2025. If you vote by 19 October, your vote would still be valid. Best, RamzyM (WMF) (talk) 01:00, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

seems like this should be a lot easier to do...

Instructions could be as simple as these 3 steps:

1. Here are the candidates: link

2. Here's where you vote: link

3. Deadline for voting is: 00:00, 23 October 2025

Instead we are presented with a dizzying amount of complicated and mostly irrelevant or out of date information, amid which some people (like me!) have a hard time finding answers.

Sorry to criticize, but I hope it can help make voting easier next time! Kaicarver (talk) 20:15, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Nehmt mich bitte raus aus den Massenbenachrichtigungsmaillisten

Ich will nicht bei der Wahl, auch nicht zukünftig, teilnehmen. Erstens kenne ich keine, zweitens will ich nicht dass es einen falschen erwischt. Ich mag z.B. keine Ja-Sager die irgendwelchen Leuten in den Arsch kriechen und auch vorneherum den netten verständnisvollen Kollegen geben und hintenherum insgeheim das Gegenteil denken oder mit jemanden anderen darüber tratschen. Oder welche die durch ihr Handeln Klugscheißertum verbreiten, das ist wie die beiden vorhergehenden Varianten ebenso ein großes Greuel. Ich kenne z. B. nur 2 Administratoren denen ich das zutrauen würde, die sind aber mit Sicherheit nicht dabei: Aka (Wikipedia.de) und Achimm55 (Wikimedia-Commons). Also lässt mich mit euren Benachrichtigungen und und Wahl-Banner in frieden, das gilt auch für jede andere Wahl innerhalb des Wikimedia-Universum. Grüße Ricardalovesmonuments (talk) 17:02, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Where are women?

Among remaining eligible 4 candidates, there are 4 men. I will vote only when there are two women, i.e. one of these next years, let's hope! Bibliorock (talk) 21:41, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

👍🏼👍🏼 ~2025-29576-55 (talk) 12:56, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

More data on the shortlisting please

According to the shortlisting process "After the community voting, the data about how many Affiliates participated in the shortlisting process and for which candidates they voted for will be shared publicly." As the community voting has now happened, it would be good to have the data as to which chapters voted and how the 12 were ranked by them. I have a personal interest in wanting to know how close I was to making the final 6, and I suspect a lot of people would be interested to know how high Lane and Ravan were among the final 6 in the shortlisting process. By the way I think it is good that this info isn't published before the community vote as it should put all 6 members of the shortlist on an equal footing for the actual election. So please could someone add a link to where this has been published or explain when it will happen. WereSpielChequers (talk) 09:59, 22 November 2025 (UTC)

Support. ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 10:33, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

Support as well. Pinging @Ajraddatz: & @RamzyM (WMF): Isderion (talk) 19:34, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Logging that a reply was sent to WSC directly over the email list a few days ago and that the logistics of this was discussed at our most recent meeting. We will hopefully be able to post more details soon(ish). ThadeusOfNazereth (talk) 01:49, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

I did receive an email a week ago saying that the elections committee was going to hold a meeting in a few days. Thankyou for telling us that the meeting I was told was going to happen has now happened. I appreciate that my question is not the most urgent issue any of us are facing, but I would appreciate a reply to my question rather than just two acknowledgments that I have asked my question. WereSpielChequers (talk) 08:53, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

Committees are always so slow to respond. Sorry for that. If one is on a committee, one is usually waiting for someone to do their job and if not, it's them pressing you to be faster. Der-Wir-Ing ("DWI") talk 14:37, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your messages and for sharing your interest in the shortlisting results. The affiliate input into the shortlist is now available here. AbhiSuryawanshi (talk) 16:07, 17 December 2025 (UTC)