Wikimedia Foundation elections/2022/Affiliates regional distribution for the Analysis Committee/North America

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

This page supports North American affiliate participation in the 2022 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees elections Analysis Committee.

The Movement Strategy and Governance team is available to support this process.

Facilitators for this region include Xeno and Mahuton.


The affiliate organizations voted in this election in July to shortlist six candidates from the candidate pool. Each affiliate organization was allowed one vote. This selection used the Single Transferable Vote method. Affiliate organizations discussed the candidates the affiliate organization wanted to select. Candidates ranked candidates in order of preference.

The Affiliate Representatives were able to ask questions for the candidates to answer. Candidates published answers starting on June 24.

To assist with this selection process, an Analysis Committee was be formed.

Analysis Committee[edit]

For regional distribution of the Affiliates and facilitators who will be supporting it, see Affiliates regional distribution for the Analysis Committee

The Analysis Committee was formed from the affiliates during late April and May. The Analysis Committee was planned to be composed of 9 representatives of affiliates (including all chapters, user groups, and thematic groups) from regions across the movement. One each from:

  • CEE (Central & Eastern Europe);
  • ESEAP (East and Southeast Asia, and the Pacific region);
  • Sub-saharan Africa;
  • Latin America and the Caribbean;
  • MENA (Middle East and North Africa);
  • North America (USA and Canada);
  • Northern and Western Europe;
  • South Asia;
  • plus one for thematic affiliates.

There was no representative from the Northern and Western Europe or South Asia.

The selection process to form the Analysis Committee was defined by the affiliates, with support of the Elections Committee and the Movement Strategy and Governance team as needed.

The Analysis Committee evaluated the candidates against the skills and diversity, equity and inclusion criteria shared by the Board of Trustees. The Analysis Committee used the statements the candidates answered on their application to rate the candidates. The Analysis Committee rated candidates with a gold/silver/bronze framework. This rating was used to provide input to the affiliate organizations when they planned their vote. The details of the evaluation of each candidate will not be shared.

After the six candidates were selected during the affiliate organization voting process, the ratings of each selected candidate were published to inform the community vote. This process aims to find the best balance between sharing useful information and minimizing unnecessary exposure of candidates.

Selected committee members[edit]

Members of the Analysis Committee
Region Representative
CEE (Central & Eastern Europe) Mehman97 (talk meta edits global user summary CA)
ESEAP (East, Southeast Asia, and the Pacific) GDHFang (talk meta edits global user summary CA)
Sub-Saharan Africa Dnshitobu (talk meta edits global user summary CA)
Latin America and the Caribbean Superzerocool (talk meta edits global user summary CA)
MENA (Middle East and North Africa) علاء (talk meta edits global user summary CA)
North America Megs (talk meta edits global user summary CA)
Western & Northern Europe
SAARC (South Asia)
Thematic Affiliates Joalpe (talk meta edits global user summary CA)


The Analysis Committee worked from late May to mid-June. Details of their meetings and process can be found on the Analysis Committee Discussions.

The Board Selection Task Force and the Elections Committee developed a set of evaluation criteria for the Analysis Committee to evaluate candidates against. The Analysis Committee members assessed candidates individually. Only two Movement Strategy and Governance facilitators who supported the process had access to these individual scores.

Procedure for determining the committee member[edit]

Similar to a previous regional process, the procedure should be defined by the affiliates in the table below.

This page was created to assist the affiliate coordination and should be edited collaboratively.

During that discussion, User:Megs was chosen by North American affiliates to sit on the analysis committee.

Region affiliates[edit]

Endorsements were confidentially tallied in a live call.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Affiliate Affiliate representative Comments Endorsement
Wikimedia Canada
Wikimedia District of Columbia econterms
Wikimedia New York City Megs
WikiConference North America
Wikimedians of North American Indigenous Languages User Group Amqui
Cascadia Wikimedians User Group Peaceray I do not find this an easy choice to make. I think Sky Harbor, Geraldshields11, Neal McBurnett, or Megs would be excellent choices. I could support any of them. All have participated in affiliates. Today, my criteria is to look for the representative with the broadest experience across projects & responsibilities. Sky Harbor
Wikimedians of Chicago User Group
Wikimedians of Colorado User Group Buaidh
Georgia Piedmont Wikimedians User Group
Wikimedians of Los Angeles User Group Julie Farman
New England Wikimedians A new committee feels unnecessary.
North Carolina Wikipedians User Group Sodapopinski7
Ohio Wikimedians User Group SuperHamster
San Diego Wikimedians User Group RightCowLeftCoast I will communicate ongoing of this process to other members of the Usergroup/affiliate.

Users willing to be an Analysis Committee member[edit]

(Self nominations or nominated by others with nominee accepting)