Wikimedia Foundation elections/2025/Candidates/Maxime Baidakov
Maxime Baidakov (Baidax)
Baidax (talk • meta edits • global user summary • CA • AE)
| Candidate details | 
| |
|---|---|---|
| Candidate video statement | ||
| Total word count for the whole application (required + optional questions) is 2500 words. | ||
| Have you read the minimum candidate requirements and verified you meet the minimum qualifications and the candidate eligibility requirements? | Yes | |
| Have you read the candidate guidelines and agree to abide by the guidelines? | Yes | |
| Required questions | ||
| ||
| Why are you running for the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees? What would you contribute? What would you like to learn more about? | I have decided to run now in 2025, because I know it is time to act!
It’s the year I took the stage: for the first time, I spoke in the media about our Wikimedia projects. It’s the year I stepped into new spaces: joining the first Wikimedia Youth Conference, and finding myself the only French-speaking contributor at some key events. It’s the year I was encouraged to run for the Board: because some people in the movement saw the importance of my voice, and of the perspectives I could carry. It’s the year I do not doubt how vital it is that every part of our community be represented, with dignity, with clarity, and with purpose. And it triggered something in me: a clearer sense of responsibility, and of the role I could play. This year, Wikimedia is under pressure, from AI, from global instability, from shifting digital priorities. But it's also a moment of opportunity to be seen not just as a community project, but as a strategic actor that governments, companies and institutions should work with, not just out of goodwill, but because it makes sense. I bring the ability to communicate clearly, both inside and outside the movement. I know how to engage, how to explain, how to build trust. I’m not here to sit above decisions, but to stay connected—to take the pulse of the community and make sure what happens at the Foundation is shared in a way that’s clear, accessible, and close to everyone. What I want to learn is not how the Foundation works in theory, but where it’s going. And how we get there together. Because knowing the path ahead is how we keep our values strong, and make sure no one is left out. | |
| Please describe your Wikimedia experience (such as contributions to the Wikimedia projects, memberships in Wikimedia organizations or affiliates, activities as a Wikimedia movement organizer, or participation with a Wikimedia movement ally organization). | Wikipedia was one of the first websites I ever visited. Since then, my admiration for the Wikimedia projects has only grown, and I’ve never stopped talking about them. I created my account in 2016, but began contributing actively in 2020. My starting point was simply to contribute knowledge from my immediate surroundings. Not only because it’s accessible, but because local knowledge is the most effective way to ground Wikimedia’s mission in real communities and bridge the gap between the collective knowledge we build and the world that surrounds us.
From the beginning, I’ve been eager to support the movement in all its dimensions. My first community event was a casual picnic with other contributors; soon after, I began regularly co-hosting the Paris “wikipermanence” meetups. I quickly became a moderator on the French-speaking Wikimedia Discord server (a space where many newcomers arrive) because I strongly believe in the importance of welcoming and renewing our contributor base.  Since 2022, I’ve been actively involved in Francophone conferences, often giving talks—not as one-way presentations, but as spaces for dialogue. I’ve spoken about local knowledge, the need to systematise content around underrepresented topics, and the tools we need to make information more accessible. These exchanges constantly inspire new ideas: promoting cultural heritage on social media (Wikimonumax), joining international contest juries, or launching outreach efforts with a clear focus on impact. In 2024, I became more involved internationally, attending Wikimania Katowice and meeting many of you there. Each conversation brought fresh insight and motivation. I’m also planning to help as much as possible with the organisation of Wikimania 2026 in Paris, with the goal of making it a memorable and inclusive experience for all. On the projects themselves, I’m an administrator on French Wikipedia, and hold advanced rights on several other projects. With over 150,000 edits, I’ve contributed across a wide range of topics, always with attention to how people interact with knowledge and how content can meet their needs. Perhaps I have already told you about my hometown, but I have managed to raise Fontainebleau to a new standard to show what is possible in terms of editing. My approach has always been broad, but deeply anchored in the belief that Wikimedia is not just about content. It’s about people, places, and how we connect them through knowledge. | |
| From your perspective, what should the Wikimedia Foundation be prioritizing over the next 3-5 years, and why do you see these as the most important priorities? | Here are, from my experience, the three most urgent and strategic priorities that the Wikimedia Foundation should pursue. Each speaks to a different scale (technical, institutional, human) but they are deeply connected.
1. Fix the Technical Core and Build Shared Infrastructure Technical development must become a top strategic focus, because right now, it’s one of our greatest limitations! Too many tools are fragmented, outdated, or developed in isolation by separate communities. Instead of collaborative modules that serve us all, we often reinvent the wheel. We need a Foundation-led programme that supports real technical centralisation: shared Lua modules, standardised citation systems, simplified mobile editing tools, and more accessible multimedia features. The quiet disappearance of a single extension, like Graph, shows how fragile our ambitions for interactive and dynamic content still are. But more importantly, it reveals a structural injustice: not every community has the same technical resources, time, or skills. By improving, simplifying, and centralising, we make contribution fairer and help smaller or emerging communities thrive on equal footing. Solving these long-standing technical challenges is also what will allow us to respond to the rise of generative AI. We cannot afford to fall behind. If we want to remain relevant, usable, and trustworthy, we need the right infrastructure to build tools that integrate new technologies on our terms, and in line with our values. Fixing the technical backbone of our projects means you can focus on what matters: sharing knowledge, not fighting with templates. It means breaking from 20-year-old limitations to meet the internet where it is and shaping where it goes next. 2. Root Wikimedia in Local Institutions and Public Life Wikimedia must become more than a platform: it must be recognised as a public knowledge partner in the real world! We need a global initiative to build direct, local relationships with municipalities, public institutions, universities, and cultural actors. This means forming partnerships that are not just symbolic, but practical: connecting Wikimedia to research projects, exhibitions, educational programmes, and local heritage. These relationships should flow both ways: helping institutions use and contribute to Wikimedia, and helping our communities gain access to funding, venues, and visibility. When Wikimedia is grounded in the everyday work of cities, libraries, schools and museums, we create the conditions for long-term support, not just volunteer enthusiasm. It’s time we make this a strategic priority across the movement. 3. Recognise Individual Contributors and Make You Visible Wikimedia would be nothing without you, editors and affiliates. Recognition must be reassessed not as a vague gesture, but as a structural pillar of our ecosystem. Through local partnerships, academic collaborations, or public-facing platforms, we need to spotlight the people behind the content, especially those who are quietly doing the work in underrepresented areas, communities or languages. Too many potential contributors are more comfortable sharing their work in private circles or closed platforms simply because Wikimedia doesn’t yet offer the recognition or visibility they deserve. A dedicated programme for contributor visibility could shift this. It would help people see the value of their time and energy, attract new contributors, and make Wikimedia a more credible and rewarding platform in academic and civic life. This is not about vanity. This is about legitimacy, continuity, diversity and motivation. | |
| Please describe your experience with governing bodies of organizations (nonprofit or for-profit), mentioning the scope of your responsibilities, as well as the complexity of the organization (in terms of scale of operations, budget, number of people involved, or other meaningful measures) and the size of the board or body. | I served on the board of my secondary school, Lycée François Ier in Fontainebleau, which included around 1,200 students and over 50 staff representatives. I took part in strategic and budgetary decisions, with a focus on supporting the school’s international vision and promoting equity and diversity. I currently chair the Club Politique de Fontainebleau, a civic association of about 30 members, and also sit on the strategic boards of initiatives like La Voix aux Jeunes, which organises international public speaking competitions. | |
| Questions from the Community (required) | ||
| These questions were sourced from the community. These questions are required to consider your application complete. If this section is not complete by 23:59 AoE, July 8 (11:59 UTC, July 9), your application will not be considered. | ||
| How do you plan to ensure transparency and accountability in your decision-making processes as a member of the Board of Trustees? | By making communication simple and regular. I plan to share clear summaries (written and in short videos) after each key meeting, and open channels for you to ask questions before and after decisions, in your language. Transparency starts with being reachable. | |
| What will be the first new issue you would like to bring to the attention of the Board for discussion, and how would you approach it? | The first issue I would raise is the lack of coordination and fairness in our technical infrastructure. It directly impacts contributor experience and it leaves us unprepared in the face of AI-driven change.
To address it, I would propose launching what I call a “Special Technical Equity Plan” (STEP). Its first “step” would be a focused report, based on community input, identifying the technical blockers that most fragment or slow down contribution: duplicated Lua modules, inaccessible templates, inconsistent gadgets, lack of mobile usability. These are issues that affect productivity, retention, and equity. From that baseline, we can propose coordinated solutions: shared development, clearer priorities, and better support for under-resourced communities. It will allow us to build tools that integrate AI where it helps, push back where it harms, and keep human contributors at the centre of Wikimedia. | |
| How should decisions about trade-offs and prioritisation in Wikimedia technology or product areas be approached? Please explain what the trade-off is in your view. | The real trade-off is between visibility and utility. There’s a tendency to invest in what looks new—branding changes, sound identities, naming strategies while contributors still struggle with outdated tools and broken workflows. We risk putting image ahead of access. For me, the priority is clear: fix what blocks contribution. Focus on editability, usability, and technical stability especially for smaller wikis. Good prioritisation also means knowing how to read a community. Not just the loudest voices, but the climate as a whole. Communication should be constant, multilingual, and open—so no decision feels imposed, and no need is ignored. | |
| The number of Wikimedia affiliates has grown significantly over the past few years, but ensuring adequate resourcing can be a challenge. Given this, how might we rethink the movement ecosystem, including how affiliates are evaluated, engaged, and resourced? | The growing number of affiliates is not a problem, it’s a sign of a healthy, expanding movement. When it doesn’t come with resource fragmentation, it should be seen as a strength. We need better coordination, including shared resources at regional levels.
The real issue isn’t the number of affiliates, but the resources. We should focus on building strong partnerships with local organisations (municipalities, universities, cultural bodies) that can offer long-term support. Evaluation should reflect local impact, not just metrics: affiliates should be assessed on how they strengthen the movement where they are, through collaboration, outreach, and long-term partnerships. Therefore, the Foundation must back those who take initiative on the ground, and give them the credibility they need to secure cooperation. Our projects are a common good: others have also a role to play in sustaining them. | |
| As the Wikimedia Foundation's Chief Executive Officer (CEO) position transitions, what qualities do you believe the incoming leader should embody, and how would these contribute to the advancement of the Wikimedia movement? | The next CEO must be independent, strategic, and unshakably committed to the values of free knowledge. Wikimedia is not a platform like any other: it is a global infrastructure of trust, powered by people. Hence, to lead it, we need someone who understands that responsibility and who can defend it publicly, politically, and fearlessly.
We need a CEO with real presence, someone who can sit across the table from tech giants, lawmakers, and regulators, and speak not only with clarity, but with weight. Someone who doesn't wait for the next regulation to hit, but helps shape the future of AI governance and anticipate it, internet freedom, and access to information. A leader who joins the right conversations before Wikimedia is affected and who knows that influence begins with showing up. They must be political savvy, media-ready, and globally minded. But they must also remain deeply connected to the communities, listening before acting, and respecting the distributed nature of our movement. The CEO must act as both ambassador and defender: of our philosophy, our contributors, and our place in the world. Above all, they should see Wikimedia not just as a set of projects, but as a movement with global impact, a system that protects freedom, equity, and access. Their leadership must reflect that ambition. | |
| Optional questions - Professional Experience, Skills and Education | ||
| These questions are optional. Responses will count towards the total word limit on your application. (Reminder: You will not have other opportunities to provide this information). | ||
| Please describe your professional career experience and relevance to board work. | Alongside my studies, I’ve been working for several years in hotel administration and coordination—fields where you learn quickly how to manage pressure, respond to unexpected challenges, and keep operations running smoothly. That hands-on experience has taught me how to make calm, structured decisions, especially when timing and communication are key.
At the university, I’m immersed in the daily reality of how knowledge is produced, questioned, and shared. I see how Wikimedia’s projects are used not just as reference points, but as tools that shape the way students and researchers think and learn. Being part of that ecosystem gives me a real-time understanding of how our platforms serve the public, and how they can evolve in step with the way knowledge is consumed today. In a fast-changing world, that connection is crucial to ensuring strategic decisions stay grounded and relevant. | |
| Please describe how you handled, or advised others on, a complex problem in an organization. How did you work with others to address the situation? What was the change that resulted from your efforts? | During a group project, one member frequently interrupted another, not out of malice but habit. The other person never said anything directly, but the frustration was visible. I raised the issue gently in a group discussion, focusing on how we could make space for everyone to speak. It eased the tension immediately, and the dynamic improved from that point on. | |
| Please describe your educational background, including degrees, certificates, and courses of study finished, and their relevance to board work. | I am a student based in Paris, with a degree in History and currently pursuing a Master’s in Health Law. I am deeply interested in the fields of health and medicine, and currently focusing my academic work on neuro-law that is an emerging area dealing with new forms of fundamental rights related to neurotechnologies, where I hope to further develop my research and expertise. Therefore, I bring legal expertise and work in a field focused on shaping tomorrow’s legislation around emerging technologies. | |
| Please add any relevant links describing your professional background, experience, profile (such as LinkedIn, staff page, etc.). | Link to my LinkedIn profile. | |
| Optional questions - Leadership Experience | ||
| These questions are optional. Responses will count towards the total word limit on your application. (Reminder: You will not have other opportunities to provide this information). | ||
| Please describe ways in which you have helped to form a bridge between multiple communities (such as by working on projects outside your home wiki, or working on a collaboration between multiple affiliates). | I’m currently involved in building a youth hub in Western Europe, designed to strengthen ties between communities and encourage more young people to engage across projects and borders. | |
| Can you describe a policy, on wiki or off, that you helped to create or change? What did you learn from this experience? |  It would be presumptuous to claim authorship of any specific policy since Wikimedia rules are the result of community consensus, and that’s a principle I strongly believe in. What matters is how we apply them. I launched a discipline-based writing support initiative, with dedicated help pages aimed at avoiding common mistakes and improving clarity. It’s a way to translate encyclopaedic style principles into concrete, practical guidance bringing more rigour, consistency, and credibility to Wikipedia content. | |
| How have you been able to empower people to make their voices heard? | During a wikipermanence, I encouraged a shy participant to take the lead in welcoming visitors. It gave them the confidence to speak up and they’ve been active in the group ever since. | |
| Can you describe how you have demonstrated the ability to guide others in solving problems, adapting to change or achieving goals, particularly at a leadership or management level? | In an association I’m active in, I helped structure our long-term planning by creating a shared document where everyone could contribute ideas. I organised the input, highlighted priorities, and coordinated next steps. It brought clarity to the group and helped turn scattered intentions into a concrete, shared direction. | |
| Optional questions - Strategic Thinking | ||
| These questions are optional. Responses will count towards the total word limit on your application. (Reminder: You will not have other opportunities to provide this information). | ||
| Please describe your experience participating in or leading an organization in planning for its future. How did your work contribute to picking the right path for the organization? | When helping an organisation plan for the future, I always make it a priority to speak directly with those who hold real decision-making power (whether with elected officials or at university level). This approach has allowed me to secure authorisations quickly, build trust, and gain access to key contacts. It’s what has made it possible to shape and support long-term strategies with both ambition and realism. | |
| Verification | Identity verification performed by Wikimedia Foundation staff and eligibility verification performed by the Elections Committee | |
Eligibility:  Verified
|
Identification: Verified Verified by: – NahidSultan (WMF) (talk) 12:18, 9 July 2025 (UTC) | |