Hi, I have written a heartfelt letter for reform at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2025_WMF_Board_reform_petition. I encourage
everyone across the movement to read, translate, and share this message as
it is not just an enwiki issue but something that affects us all.
Sincerely,
Hannah Clover
Ndewo ndị oma Wikimedia!
Greetings Dear Wikimedians!
Join us in our Scholarship Session and also witness the announcement of the
Igbo Wikimedian of the Year 2025.
It’s going to be an exciting and insightful session! 💡
✅ Learn key tips on scholarship applications - when and how to apply, and
what the Scholarship Team looks for during reviews.
🏆 Be part of the unveiling of the *Igbo Wikimedian of the Year* and find
out who gets the User Group scholarship to attend *WikiIndaba 2025 in
Tanzania.*
Time: Oct 18, 2025 04:00 PM West Central Africa
Join Zoom Meeting
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/89799129309
Meeting ID: 897 9912 9309
Come, learn, and celebrate with us!
Thanks and kind regards,
Kingsley Nkem
FOR: IGBO WIKIMEDIANS USER GROUP
I am guessing many of you got the email below hours ago.
I wonder if the number of people abstaining is bigger
than the number of votes casted
ould that render the process
invalid/problematic?
Regards - Z.
p.s.
pardon if I repeat something already discussed
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: <electcom(a)wikimedia.org>
Date: Thu, Oct 16, 2025 at 7:13 PM
Subject: Your vote is missing!
To: Zblace <zBlace(a)mi2.hr>
Dear Zblace,
I wanted to remind you that you are eligible to vote in the Wikimedia
Foundation 2025 Board of Trustees election. Voting closes at 23:59 UTC
on October 22, 2025.
Go to the SecurePoll voting page and vote now!
Thank you,
This message was sent on behalf of the Elections Committee
This mail has been sent to you as you have registered your email
address with the Wikimedia Foundation. To remove yourself from future
election notifications, please add your username to the Wikimedia No
Mail List <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_nomail_list>.
Hi Z.,
Short answer: No, a high number of non-voters (or “abstentions”) does not invalidate the WMF Board election.These elections are run with SecurePoll using Single Transferable Vote (STV) and have no quorum requirement; validity depends on the process and timeline, not on a majority of all eligible accounts voting.
See: SecurePoll/Help and STV on Meta.
For context:
Recent Board elections typically see about 5–6k votes cast across ~80k+ eligible accounts; e.g., the 2024 election recorded ~6,000 voters and was duly certified. See 2024 election stats on Meta.
The 2025 cycle is again conducted via SecurePoll (STV) under the Elections Committee; timeline and info here: 2025 WMF Board election (Meta).
So while we should always encourage more participation, a larger number of non-votes doesn’t, by itself, create a procedural problem.
Best,
Andreas
—
Dr. phil. Andreas Buller
Philosophy Teacher
Website: https://andreasbuller.wixsite.com/andre?lang=de
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Dr. Phil. Andreas Buller
Philosophy Teacher
WWW https://andreasbuller.wixsite.com/andre?lang=de
Hi everyone, I'm writing on behalf of the Board of Trustees.
Since the announcement [1] of the final ballot and further [2] messages
[3], we have been closely following conversations over the past week.
We agree with the sentiments that we do not have an ideal process for
board selection, and as such, we are continuously reviewing it and
attempting improvements. This ranges from the role of various
stakeholders in the short-listing process, the timeline of the
selection, to the steps required by the Board's own bylaws, and to the
most effective way of communicating decisions to our movement.
The change we implemented this year - vetting candidates before the
vote, instead of after - was made in order to ensure that we don't ask
the community to vote for people that we will not be able to seat. This
might not have been the best choice, and we will rediscuss it for
future selections. The checks themselves, however, haven't changed:
they are the same I went through four years ago when I joined the
board, including the background check, media check and the vetting
interview.
We understand that some of you disagree with the decision we have taken
regarding individual candidates. Unfortunately, it is not something we
are able to provide more information about. Part of our duty is to
protect the users and the projects, and sometimes that means not
sharing publicly information that may harm them or the movement, even
when the community demands it, or some of the people affected demand
it. In this case, we have discussed the reasons with the candidates,
but it's not appropriate for us or them to bring them here.
I realize this is frustrating - it is also for us. Even before the
announcement, we knew that this decision would receive harsh criticism,
and we knew that we could not fully respond to it.
The Board's Governance Committee [4] (which is tasked with overseeing
the selection process) welcomes specific proposals and ideas for
reform here on this talk page [5]. We have time before the next
selection cycle (scheduled for 2027) to make both incremental
improvements and large-scale changes. The Governance Committee and the
Board will carefully consider them. We commit to work on improvements
of the selection process, and working with the communities and the
affiliates, to make this process better for all stakeholders, including
for the Board itself.
Lorenzo Losa
Chair-Elect, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
[1] announcement
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/Octo…
[2] further
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard…'s_decision_on_the_2025_final_ballot
[3] messages
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org…
[4] Board's Governance Committee
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Governance_Committee
[5] here on this talk page
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard…
Dear Wikimedians,
The *Picture of the Year 2024* results are in! After thousands of votes
from across the Wikimedia community, we’re excited to celebrate the
incredible images that have become a hot topic on Wikimedia Commons in your
attention this year.
*🥇 First Place:* https://w.wiki/Fee9
*🥈 Second Place:* https://w.wiki/FeeD
*🥉 Third Place:* https://w.wiki/FeeE
You can find the full voting results and details on the finalists here:
https://w.wiki/FeeA
A big thank you to everyone who participated, voters, photographers, and
volunteers who made this year’s contest possible. Your contributions
continue to highlight the beauty, diversity, and creativity within
Wikimedia Commons.
Congratulations to all the winners!
Best regards,
*The Picture of the Year Committee*