On English Wikipedia there are some editors and reviewers accusing a Wikimedian in Residence of misconduct. I am not asking for any particular response from anyone, except that Wikimedians in Residence plan to support members in achieving compliance with rules and defense of misunderstandings.

The above is the minimum that anyone needs to read. What follows are details.

My own summary and perspective: Rachel Helps, Wikimedian in Residence at a university in the United States since 2016, is accused of undisclosed conflict of interest editing, biased editing, and recruiting paid and unpaid colleagues in inappropriate editing. In my opinion, this editor has done everything correctly as the Wikimedians in Residence Exchange Network recommends. I could be mistaken because the discussion and texts run for hundreds of pages, but I do not immediately identify particular problems. I posted in support of this editor in the discussion.

I do not think this accusation is easy to understand.  Note also - Wikipedia prohibits canvassing of uninterested parties to post in existing discussions and decisions, and I am not asking anyone to casually join this discussion.

See the discussion at

archived at

Regardless, WREN needs the following to prevent this in the future -
  1. clear guidance on how to be a good Wikimedian in Residence
  2. a plan for reacting to accusations, if anyone ever wants an organizational opinion on whether someone is following the rules
  3. confirmation from the wiki community that our recommendations are actually acceptable to wiki editors
I estimate that the university partner here has spent several hundred thousand dollars of its own money, without Wikimedia Foundation grant support, to develop Wikimedia content. Their particular expertise is in an irreplaceable field of religious studies. I would regret the loss of this institutional partnership, and our colleague, if there were a way to negotiate a fix to this rather than an end to the program there.


Lane Rasberry