Wikimedia Foundation Governance Wiki Babel
_-_Google_Art_Project_-_edited.png)
The Wikimedia Foundation Governance Wiki Babel serves as a place where Wikimedia volunteers can discuss this site and alert administrators as needed.
| Wikimedia Foundation Governance Wiki |
|---|
 |
|
Information |
|
Content |
|
Policies |
|
Wiki maintenance |
Can someone make a redirect on main namespace with something really short shortcuts, like TAIV policy or TAIV (or something really shorter than current redirects) to there? I miss the time I could do this myself... :P — regards, Revi 12:48, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
- @Revi C.: TAIV now exists :) RAdimer-WMF (talk) 14:26, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Message documentations in Burmese
Hi, I found a few translation documentation pages (qqq) written in Burmese. Added by ZYX2233 probably by mistake in 2024. I suggest deleting them.
- Translations:Policy:Wikimedia Foundation Access to Nonpublic Personal Data Policy/59/qqq
- Translations:Policy:Wikimedia Foundation Access to Nonpublic Personal Data Policy/61/qqq
- Translations:Policy:Wikimedia Foundation Access to Nonpublic Personal Data Policy/62/qqq
- Translations:Policy:Wikimedia Foundation Access to Nonpublic Personal Data Policy/87/qqq
- Translations:Policy:Wikimedia Foundation Access to Nonpublic Personal Data Policy/64/qqq
- Translations:Policy:Wikimedia Foundation Access to Nonpublic Personal Data Policy/65/qqq
- Translations:Policy:Wikimedia Foundation Access to Nonpublic Personal Data Policy/66/qqq
Samoasambia (talk) 18:34, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
Done - I've checked those and made sure they existed in the translated copy (one chunk transferred), and then deleted the mislocated duplicates. Thank you for mentioning. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 22:23, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
WIKIPEDIA MODERN RESTYLING AND REFRESHING
Hi Wikipedia and Wikimedia content creators and readers, I wanted to create this topic discussion, asking about a modern and refreshing restyling of Wikipedia layout, which I think its too classic. Considering we are in 2026, I think Wikipedia needs a good modern layout, like other social or news apps. Thanks a lot for your attention Andre il sommo (talk) 11:17, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
- @Andre il sommo Hello, you may submit your suggestion through the Community Wishlist. SCP-2000 (talk) 15:02, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
Like with TAIV, could someone create a shortcut for this? NDP isn't taken. lp0 on fire () 12:30, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
- Actually, it might be better to make a redirect to Resolution:Nondiscrimination since the policy page is only about employees and contractors, whereas the resolution also applies to all editors so is much more likely to be linked to. Not sure what a good redirect would be; maybe just Nondiscrimination in mainspace? lp0 on fire () 13:05, 22 February 2026 (UTC)
- What do you imagine the use cases being? The redirect would need to be to the policy. The resolution created the initial version of the policy, but it has since been updated. The UCoC addresses the community. --Gregory Varnum (Wikimedia Foundation) [he/him] (talk) 03:17, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
- Hello, it's quite possible I've misunderstood the scope of the resolution. The policy seems to apply exclusively to WMF staff and contractors, but I was under the impression that resolutions are also binding, and this resolution contains very broad statements about discriminating agains all prospective users and employees; I believe that has relevance on-wiki; for example if an admin blocks someone for discriminatory reasons that are in line with local policy, it's much easier to argue they've violated the nondiscrimination resolution than the UCoC. Forgive me if I've completely misunderstood the situation. lp0 on fire () 08:00, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
- @Lp0 on fire: The resolution is binding in that it created the first version of that policy. The resolution on the Delegation of policy-making authority allows for the CEO to make updates to policies in addition to the board's ability to make updates. As such, the update made to the policy in March 2017 by the Legal department replaces the version of the policy introduced in the initial resolution. There are a number of updates routinely made to policies for a wide range of legal or governance related reasons. Only the most recent version of any given policy takes precedence - it would be rather confusing and difficult to navigate if we had to enforce every version of every policy. So, the resolution serves as a historical document on the initial creation of the policy, but the version of the policy included within the resolution has been replaced by an updated version. That is why our policies are maintained separately from resolutions as they require updates, whereas resolutions represent a specific moment of time and not meant to be updated (beyond basic copyedit or link maintenance). I hope that helps clarify why the version of the nondiscrimination policy within that resolution is more of a historical/governance document and not the actual currently enforced version of the policy. --Gregory Varnum (Wikimedia Foundation) [he/him] (talk) 18:55, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks for clarifying. Sounds like this will be a lot less helpful than I thought. lp0 on fire () 19:14, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
- @Lp0 on fire: The resolution is binding in that it created the first version of that policy. The resolution on the Delegation of policy-making authority allows for the CEO to make updates to policies in addition to the board's ability to make updates. As such, the update made to the policy in March 2017 by the Legal department replaces the version of the policy introduced in the initial resolution. There are a number of updates routinely made to policies for a wide range of legal or governance related reasons. Only the most recent version of any given policy takes precedence - it would be rather confusing and difficult to navigate if we had to enforce every version of every policy. So, the resolution serves as a historical document on the initial creation of the policy, but the version of the policy included within the resolution has been replaced by an updated version. That is why our policies are maintained separately from resolutions as they require updates, whereas resolutions represent a specific moment of time and not meant to be updated (beyond basic copyedit or link maintenance). I hope that helps clarify why the version of the nondiscrimination policy within that resolution is more of a historical/governance document and not the actual currently enforced version of the policy. --Gregory Varnum (Wikimedia Foundation) [he/him] (talk) 18:55, 10 March 2026 (UTC)
- Hello, it's quite possible I've misunderstood the scope of the resolution. The policy seems to apply exclusively to WMF staff and contractors, but I was under the impression that resolutions are also binding, and this resolution contains very broad statements about discriminating agains all prospective users and employees; I believe that has relevance on-wiki; for example if an admin blocks someone for discriminatory reasons that are in line with local policy, it's much easier to argue they've violated the nondiscrimination resolution than the UCoC. Forgive me if I've completely misunderstood the situation. lp0 on fire () 08:00, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
- What do you imagine the use cases being? The redirect would need to be to the policy. The resolution created the initial version of the policy, but it has since been updated. The UCoC addresses the community. --Gregory Varnum (Wikimedia Foundation) [he/him] (talk) 03:17, 25 February 2026 (UTC)
Please modify that filter's conditions for performance (page_id as the first, user_rights as the last):
page_id == 0 &
!equals_to_any(page_namespace, 2, 3, 14, 1198) &
new_size < 100 &
!added_lines irlike "\{\{(?:interwiki|soft)[\s_]*redirect|#redirect" &
!contains_any(user_rights, "autoconfirmed", "edit-legal")
Thank you. Codename Noreste (talk) 02:43, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
- Ping @Martin Urbanec (WMF) to please help with this. Thank you! Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 18:26, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
- Done Thanks for the suggestion, @Codename Noreste and @Quiddity (WMF) for the ping! Martin Urbanec (WMF) (talk) 18:54, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
Forcing WMF employees to use Salesforce Inc is an ethical violation
Apparently (post deleted by the author) WMF has been, and still is, forcing WMF employees to use an enshittified non-FOSS, non-community-controlled communicator Slack owned by a 100-billion dollar US corporation Salesforce, Inc. for internal communication in relation to WMF work activities. If correct, then this is an ethical violation that is completely unacceptable. We are not here to subsidise the concentration of power in the hands of authoritarian undemocratic organisations like Salesforce Inc.
According to the current consensus in the article Salesforce, Inc., it even looks like Salesforce Inc. is supporting democratic backsliding in the United States: In October 2025, Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff declared his avid support of Donald Trump and urged him to deploy the National Guard to San Francisco ... That same month, Salesforce pitched the Trump administration on ways that Salesforce's AI tools could help Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) triple its staff to support the administration's mass deportation campaign.
Should the Wikimedia community accept that WMF employees are forced to support democratic backsliding in the United States? The answer is obvious: No!
The #TyrannyOfConvenience ("I can click without thinking and it works") is not an excuse for forcing Salesforce Inc/Slack on WMF employees. From a practical point of view, the matrix protocol, which is being switched to by the International Criminal Court via ZenDiS, is available to all French civil servants in Tchap chat and Visio videoconferencing, and is being used by the United Nations International Computing Centre, has plenty of FOSS server software and client software available, and for situations that need high levels of confidentiality, is very likely more secure than Slack, because security by obscurity is discouraged and not recommended by standards bodies. There are non-Element Creations Ltd (Q58821126)-run matrix-protocol servers listed at https://servers.joinmatrix.org, and WMF techies could quite easily run a matrix homeserver with account creation restricted to WMF Board/employees only; this would allow self-managed communication both internally to WMF and externally, just like email.
@Laurentius: and other Board members: Could you please tell us when the WMF is planning for a transition from Slack to an ethically acceptable communicator such as one using the matrix protocol? Boud (talk) 09:17, 17 May 2026 (UTC) (edit: clarify that a Fediverse post was deleted Boud (talk) 15:24, 17 May 2026 (UTC))