Dear Wikimedia Community Ireland User Group,
I am reaching out to offer up the space for you to contribute to our community’s decision on whether or not to exercise our vote in the upcoming Board Election.
As you may be aware, there has been much discussion surrounding the Board’s decision to remove certain candidates from the ballot. Within the global community, there is currently a movement towards boycotting the vote, for reasons discussed in this thread and summarised below.
I am reaching out not to sway your opinion in any way, but rather to equip you with some helpful information that you can use to make up your own mind and have your say. Your opinions on this are important, and we will vote on this as a group to decide the best course of action for Wikimedia Community Ireland to take.
So far, we have discerned the following options:
We abstain from voting in this election
We vote, with an accompanying comment that raises our concerns and alignment with the misgivings raised by the boycott
We vote as normal
We will be discussing and voting on this at our Community Meeting next week next Tuesday the 21st of October at 6 pm online.
I understand that not everyone can make the community meeting, so in this case, I urge you to reach out to me via email (sophiefitzpatrick@wikimediacommunity.com) with your opinion and vote on the course of action (abstain, vote with comment or vote) you think we should take for the election on October 22nd.
Before making your decision, please familiarise yourself with the situation by taking a look through the links offered below and considering the summary of reasons this boycott effort has come about and the Wikimedia Foundation’s response.
Reasoning for the Boycott and Concerns Raised by Community Members
Wikimedians have raised concerns about the disqualification of 2 candidates and the vetting process that occurred (one of whom was the only female candidate and one who was the only openly queer candidate in the election)
The lack of credible explanation, public justification and transparency for these disqualifications amidst misgivings amongst community members in regards to political bias, thus underemining the legitimacy of the selection process.
Concerns surrounding these actions being incompatible with the Foundation's commitment to the values of inclusion and diversity as outlined in the 2030 Strategy’s guiding principles.
Concerns surrounding the incompatibility of certain viewpoints, namely, pro-Palestinian and pro-transparency, are incompatible with Board membership.
Concerns that these actions will set a dangerous precedent for democracy within Wikimedia governance.
Wikimedians are calling for the investigation or suspension of the election.
The Wikimedia Foundation's Response
The Board considers a wide range of criteria in evaluating eligible candidates and future leaders. That is why the process includes many inputs, such as background checks, media checks, reference checks, and interviews with the candidates, as we have done in past years. Consistent with the values of our movement, the board has always been committed to free expression, diverse viewpoints, and a range of perspectives, backgrounds and experiences. The Board has always had members – historic and current – who have been critics of the Foundation and of the Board itself. This is the nature of our governance system, and this will not change.
The criteria for candidate assessment is subjective e.g. a candidate's judgment, discernment, discretion, and ability to engage in the duties and requirements of being a Trustee, some of which can be complex and difficult to measure.
They highlighted that conversations with potential candidates covered topics like conflicts of interest, fiduciary obligations of Trustees, a track record of commitment to Wikimedia's core principles and values (e.g., upholding NPOV, managing COIs, etc.), as well as a candidate's understanding of the Board's Code of Conduct and other governance policies, and what these policies require of Trustees.
The Chair has also offered the explanation for the disqualification that after the background checks were completed and the interviews were conducted, each candidate received a communication from the Board which outlined the concerns and was given an opportunity to answer and comment before the Board made the final decision. The candidates have each been provided a summary and an explanation of the Board’s decision, along with the reasons for not providing these summaries publicly. The Foundation has explained that they also communicated that there are no reasons discovered that would stop the candidates in question from running again (the next elections are scheduled for 2027 for 4 seats), after they work on the issues communicated.
Further information
Objections to the 2025 WMF Board election removals, including links to rejected candidates' statements:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Objections_to_the_2025_WMF_Board_election_removals
Q&A issued by the WMF about the Board’s decision on the 2025 final Ballot:
Timeline of Events:
Mailing list thread where current discussions are taking place: https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/thread/Q2I6XYSINHJ2CVVXSPWID4LC7O52ZLCE/#Q2I6XYSINHJ2CVVXSPWID4LC7O52ZLCE
Current Candidates: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2025/Candidates
Current Board Members:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation/Board_of_Trustees#Current_members
Reform Petition Page:
Please note that these points are a summary of issues raised by the global Wikimedia community and are not designed to align with any course of action, but weigh up both sides. I addition, they rely solely on the information that is publicly available. All opinions and votes are welcome. Along with any other suggestions about what our course of action should be.
I wholeheartedly invite you to have your say and participate as a member of Wikimedia Community Ireland.
Kind regards,