Talk:Wikimedia Foundation
Add topic| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wikimedia Foundation article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 28 days |
| This article is often edited by people who work for the Wikimedia Foundation or who serve on its Board of Trustees. Please review any changes by these individuals particularly carefully. |
| This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Readd layoffs and union busting
[edit]Hi @Jeremy1231233 you reverted my edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Foundation&diff=prev&oldid=1356368489 due to source issues. While I see the medium article is just by one random person AFAIK, I think the Wiki citations are valid. They are citations of the source matter, it is about Wikipedia and the discussion happing on Wikipedia forums after all. They are this a primary source. (Also, the article already has a lot of wiki citations so the argument "it's not a reliable" source does not count here.)
I could not find other news articles/outlets covering the topic for now, likely because it is quite new. rugk (talk) 09:56, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
- I don't remember any of this? The only edit I've made to the Wikimedia Foundation article was adding something to a list. Jeremy1231233 (talk) 11:23, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
- @Rugk: I am the person who reverted your three edits. I still stand by what I did, but after reading this post and absorbing its point, I feel that it does need less WP:ABOUTSELF. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 13:15, 27 May 2026 (UTC)
- Support wikilinking directly to the petition in question. It is very obviously relevant, and it is referenced in coverage by The Verge, etc. ~2026-30415-19 (talk) 04:06, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
- Sorry, I still don't understand what's going on. Like I said, the only edit I have made to this article was adding something to a list. I don't understand why you're dragging me to this. Jeremy1231233 (talk) 04:50, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
- You were obviously pinged by mistake. ~2026-30415-19 (talk) 04:57, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
- Yes sorry. But back to topic here is the verge source: https://www.theverge.com/report/939442/wikipedia-editors-protest-wikimedia-layoffs-strike
- Anyway, it's now included in the article. rugk (talk) 22:43, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
- You were obviously pinged by mistake. ~2026-30415-19 (talk) 04:57, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
- Sorry, I still don't understand what's going on. Like I said, the only edit I have made to this article was adding something to a list. I don't understand why you're dragging me to this. Jeremy1231233 (talk) 04:50, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
AI-generated content
[edit]Wikimedia Foundation#Present department structure is definitely AI-generated; the bullet points in bold are a dead giveaway. Should we rewrite this entirely per WP:NEWLLM? 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 (𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨) -⃝⃤ (they/he) In solidarity. 10:00, 5 June 2026 (UTC)
- Agreed. I have cut it from the article as I believe even if it was written by a human editor, it does not provide significant value to the article. Gato1260 (talk) 09:36, 12 June 2026 (UTC)
- Pinging Jayen466, who added that list according to a WikiBlame search for the addition of the words "Present department structure". Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 09:46, 12 June 2026 (UTC)
- @Whyiseverythingalreadyused Thanks. That was definitely not an AI edit.
I followed the WMF staff and contractors page, as it was then, and the department headings it had at the time. Andreas JN466 11:45, 12 June 2026 (UTC)
- My bad; sorry, @Jayen466! That was on me. Although I would like to point out that using boldface as you were is kind of against the Manual of Style, as boldface should only be used in pretty specific contexts; see MOS:BOLD. Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 (𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨) -⃝⃤ (they/he) In solidarity. 23:29, 12 June 2026 (UTC)
- @Shadestar474 You're quite right about the use of bold of course, but that got added later by User:Sj, who is also not an AI user. "It was a human error."
Andreas JN466 04:50, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. Thanks for clarifying! Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 (𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨) -⃝⃤ (they/he) In solidarity. 07:44, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
- @Shadestar474 You're quite right about the use of bold of course, but that got added later by User:Sj, who is also not an AI user. "It was a human error."
- My bad; sorry, @Jayen466! That was on me. Although I would like to point out that using boldface as you were is kind of against the Manual of Style, as boldface should only be used in pretty specific contexts; see MOS:BOLD. Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 (𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨) -⃝⃤ (they/he) In solidarity. 23:29, 12 June 2026 (UTC)
- @Whyiseverythingalreadyused Thanks. That was definitely not an AI edit.
- Pinging Jayen466, who added that list according to a WikiBlame search for the addition of the words "Present department structure". Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 09:46, 12 June 2026 (UTC)
Edit request 12 June 2026
[edit]This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
| − | * [[Wikinews]] – [[online newspaper]]; has been closed | + | * [[Wikinews]] – [[online newspaper]]; has been closed since 2026 |
~2026-32426-72 (talk) 09:40, 12 June 2026 (UTC)
Partly done: changed to "closed in 2026" instead of "has been closed since 2026". Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 09:47, 12 June 2026 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 2 September 2026
[edit]This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change "It is structured as a charitable institution. Plus, it also functions independently of advertising and paywalls, relying on millions of individual donations." to "It is structured as a charitable institution. It also functions independently of advertising and paywalls, relying on millions of individual donations." to preserve a neutral point of view. ConsoleCoder (talk) 17:12, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
Done I just removed those sentences, as that information is already in the first and third paragraphs. Thanks! ;; Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 17:59, 2 September 2026 (UTC)
- B-Class Wikipedia articles
- Top-importance Wikipedia articles
- WikiProject Wikipedia articles
- B-Class organization articles
- Low-importance organization articles
- WikiProject Organizations articles
- B-Class California articles
- Low-importance California articles
- B-Class San Francisco Bay Area articles
- Mid-importance San Francisco Bay Area articles
- San Francisco Bay Area task force articles
- WikiProject California articles
