Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

Wikimedia Foundation elections/2021/Apply to be a Candidate/uk

< Wikimedia Foundation elections | 2021
This page is a translated version of the page Wikimedia Foundation elections/2021/Apply to be a Candidate and the translation is 41% complete.
Other languages:

Вибори завершились 31 серпня 2021. Голоси більше не приймаються.
Результати були оголошені 7 вересня 2021. Будь ласка, не вагайтеся залишати будь-які відгуки щодо виборів 2021 року на післявиборній сторінці.

Дякуємо кандидатам, які номінувалися на виборах до Ради повірених. Кандидати заповнили поданий шаблон кандидатури на Виборах до Ради повірених 2021. Ось приклад заповненої форми подання заявки.

Вибори Ради 2021
Головна сторінка
Кандидати
Інформація про голосування
Система єдиного перехідного голосу
Результати
Обговорення
ЧаПи
Запитання
Організація
Переклад
Документація
Цей блок: перегляд · обг. · ред.

Заявки приймалися з 00:00 9 червня 2021 (UTC) до 23:59 29 червня 2021 (UTC). Кандидати можуть змінювати свою заявку упродовж трьох днів після подачі або до закінчення терміну прийому заявок о 23:59 29 червня 2021 (UTC). Дрібні орфографічні редагування чи виправлення перекладу допускаються і поза цими часовими рамками. (Див. примітку щодо виправлень у заявках).

Для підтримки кандидатів на виборах 2021 доступні ресурси для кандидатів. Будь ласка, не вагайтеся звертатися до фасилітаторів виборів до Ради по додаткову інформацію.

Запитання від спільноти до кандидатів

З 9 по 29 червня 2021 члени руху Вікімедіа подавали на цій сторінці запитання до кандидатів у Раду повірених. Запитання можна було ставити будь-якою мовою.

На додачу до подання запитання, члени спільноти також могли підтримати чи прокоментувати запитання, поставлені іншими.

30 червня 2021 Виборча комісія збере відібрала і відредагувала запитання зі списку і представила короткий список запитань до кандидатів, на які вони мали відповісти, починаючи з 7 липня.

Цей метод використовується, щоб зробити процес більш доступним і керовним для кандидатів, перекладачів, Виборчої комісії та виборців. Ми просимо людей поважати час усіх залучених: будь ласка, не використовуйте сторінку запитань для посилання на інші сторінки з більшою кількістю запитань, а також не контактуйте з кандидатами на їхніх сторінках обговорення чи електронною поштою. Заздалегідь дякуємо за вашу повагу та люб'язність.

Кандидати

Будь ласка, не починайте відповідати на запитання до того, як Виборча комісія опублікує зведений список 2 липня 2021.

Рекомендується, щоб відповіді на питання були не довшими 1600 символів (без урахування прогалин). Будь ласка, не посилайтеся на інші сторінки з детальнішими відповідями, проте посилання на доречні сторінки з описовою метою прийнятні. Через велику кількість виборців і кандидатів, нам потрібно зберігати ці сторінки читабельними, інформативними і корисними для виборців.

Подані запитання

Дякуємо всім, хто подали запитання для кандидатів. Період подання запитань завершився. Перелік запитань, які Виборчка комісія відібрала для кандидатів, можна переглянути на сторінці Q&A кандидатів.

  1. What do candidates think about increasing the number of volunteers in Wikimedia Foundation projects and how to make it happen?
  2. Where do you personally wish to see the Board in relation to other entities of the Wikiverse (communities, affiliates, etc.) in the future (cf. e.g. Ensure Equity in Decision-making)?
  3. How will candidates connect with the community once on the Board?
  4. Explain your thoughts on transparency and communication.
    1. Endorse. --Yair rand (talk) 23:57, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5. What are your thoughts on emerging Wikimedia communities?
  6. Why do you think you would be a good candidate for a seat on the board?
    1. Endorse. --Yair rand (talk) 23:57, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Is there a connection between your professional or financial interests and the Board? If so, please describe how you can ensure this does not interfere.
  8. How should the Foundation treat foundation-run projects that incur a high amount of on-wiki opposition?
    1. Endorse. I believe this is, by far, the most serious issue the Foundation needs to resolve. Alsee (talk) 20:38, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    2. Endorse in the strongest possible terms. Seraphimblade (talk) 02:44, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    3. Endorse absolutely, "on-Wiki oppositions" and/or "over-all community disagreement"... -- টিটো দত্ত (কথা) 07:53, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    4. Endorse strongly. An important and sensitive issue. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 14:42, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    5. Endorse. --Yair rand (talk) 21:09, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    6. Endorse - Jr8825 (talk) 22:53, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Do you believe that there are limits to the scope of the Wikimedia Foundation, and if so, what are those limits?
  10. How do you envision wikis shaping the future of the internet, and how can the Wikimedia Foundation support wiki communities in order to make that vision a reality?
  11. How can we engage more experts (researchers, academia, practitioners) to join our movement?
    1. Endorse but might add "while maintaining the ability of non-experts to contribute." Smallbones (talk) 01:34, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    2. Endorse -- Llywrch (talk) 07:00, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  12. What is your opinion on the claim of autonomy by the different Wikipedia communities and the attempts that Wikimedia wants to regulate a lot now centrally?
    1. Conditional Endorse. This is a good question in itself, but I consider #8 + #41 better. If those others are included then this question may have too much overlap. Alsee (talk) 20:38, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  13. What is your opinion on the rebranding from Wikimedia to Wikipedia, which is blurring the difference?
    1. Endorse --Andreas JN466 20:21, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    2. Endorse -- টিটো দত্ত (কথা) 15:37, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    3. Endorse Alsee (talk) 20:38, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    4. Endorse -Killarnee (C•T•U) 20:44, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    5. Suggest removing "which is blurring the difference" -- that part makes this a leading question. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 00:51, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    6. Endorse with ProcrastinatingReader's suggested modification. Seraphimblade (talk) 02:44, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    7. Endorse this question in either format. -- Llywrch (talk) 07:00, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    8. Endorse – Ammarpad (talk) 08:27, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    9. Endorse strongly. EpicPupper (talk) 17:29, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  14. Do you feel the current structure of rules and processes of Wikipedia effectively prevents bias? As a community leader, what, if anything, do you think could be done to improve combatting bias?
  15. What do you think about the growing questioning that Wikimedia projects have globally and what would you do about it?
  16. There are several movement out there (especially that is founded by expert community) that have the same exact vision as we are (disseminating free knowledge on the Internet). But they decided to make their own platform (or using other platform) other than Wikipedia to reach their vision. What's your opinion about this? Should we try to "integrate" them to join Wikimedia, or just let them have their own independence.
  17. What are your thoughts on how the Wikimedia Foundation should engage more effectively with the Global South WikiCommunities in the near future (next 2 to 3 years)?
    1. Endorse, global south and/or "emerging communities". -- টিটো দত্ত (কথা) 15:41, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    2. Endorse - Jr8825 (talk) 22:53, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  18. Should the Wikimedia Projects be more involved with the UN Decade of Action (for Sustainable Development Goals, Paris Agreement, Biodiversity Convention Targets, etc...)? And what intermediary role can or should the Wikimedia Foundation play in this regard?
  19. What are your thoughts on the future of WikiSpecies, WikiNews, Wikiversity and other smaller Wikiprojects? And how can the Wikimedia Foundation support them?
    1. Endorse, absolutely, yes please. I'll add Wikisource, Wikivoyage also. These projects often do not get the required support, and I find this question very important. -- টিটো দত্ত (কথা) 07:57, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    2. Endorse (but fix the capitalization please). --Yair rand (talk) 21:09, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  20. Do you have any specific goals or outcomes you want to achieve during your tenure as a board member?
  21. What does diversity in the Wikimedia Community mean to you? And do you have a plan on how can it be tangibly or quantifiably be achieved? (Example: Reduction in Data Gaps)
  22. There has been a steady growth of Wikimedia Foundation expenses over the years. What are your thoughts on this matter? Should there be 5 year caps on spending?
    1. Something like this would be good, but I don't think the question should specifically ask about caps. --Yair rand (talk) 23:57, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  23. Коли мова йде про розподіл ресурсів фонду, як би ви пріоритизували кошти між сплатою технічного боргу і роботою над новими стратегічними ініціативами?
    1. Endorse this question. Probably the single one I would choose if only one question was asked. MarioGom (talk) 15:59, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    2. Endorse the concept but prefer wording/formulation of #50. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 00:47, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  24. What do you think about the WMF using funds for purposes not related to Wikimedia projects?
    1. Endorse. --Yair rand (talk) 21:09, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    2. Endorse - I should note that this should be interpreted as "clearly and directly", as our inherent nature means everything could be claimed to be vaguely related Nosebagbear (talk) 21:12, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  25. Do you think the WMF should take any active role in relation to undisclosed paid editing?
  26. What do you think about Wikimedia_Enterprise? Do you think its criticsm is justfied?
    1. Endorse -Killarnee (C•T•U) 20:44, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  27. Given recent comments by ex-staffers, should the new Board conduct an investigation about management misconduct at the WMF, including but not limited to bullying, union busting and discrimination based on sex, race or disabilities?
    1. Endorse. Especially given that multiple individuals raised such complaints, this needs to be investigated and resolved. Seraphimblade (talk) 02:59, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    2. Endorse -- Llywrch (talk) 07:00, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    3. (I recommend excluding the "including" part, to keep if brief.) --Yair rand (talk) 21:09, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    4. Endorse - Jr8825 (talk) 22:53, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  28. How should the 4 community board seats due to be selected in 2022 be filled?
  29. Have you, or any members of your immediate family, received any financial benefits from the WMF or a WMF affiliate in the past 5 years?
  30. How did you contribute to the Movement Strategy process, the Movement Brands Project, the UCOC process, the proposed Bylaws amendments, and the call for feeback on community board selections?
  31. Under what (if any) circumstances should the board extend the term of community-selected trustees?
  32. When should Foundation projects require explicit approval by the community and how should that approval be assessed?
    1. Conditional Endorse. This is a good question in itself, but I consider #8 + #41 better. If those others are included then this question may have too much overlap. Alsee (talk) 20:38, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  33. If you had been a Board member in 2019, would you have supported the Board's statement on the ban of Fram from the English Wikipedia? Would you have proposed any changes or additions to this statement?
  34. Allegations of a hostile workplace environment at WMF have been made by former employees here and here. What is your reaction to this and is there anything that you would do as a board member to change this?
  35. Katherine Maher recently floated the idea of paying contributors. Should the Foundation start discussions on what a model of compensation would look like?
    1. Endorse -Killarnee (C•T•U) 20:44, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  36. Given the amount of work stewards do, do you think stewards should be paid? Why (not)? If yes, how much?
  37. Should there be a waiting period between the time a Board member leaves the Board, and they take on an employee, consultant, or other paid role with the Foundation?
    1. Endorse. Chico Venancio (talk) 19:44, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    2. Endorse --Andreas JN466 20:21, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    3. Endorse -Killarnee (C•T•U) 20:44, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    4. Endorse. Seraphimblade (talk) 02:50, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    5. Endorse -- Llywrch (talk) 07:00, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    6. Endorse --RaiderAspect (talk) 12:57, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    7. Endorse -- though I'd prefer How long should be the waiting period... rather than Should there be a waiting period.... AllyD (talk) 06:07, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    8. Endorse -- B25es (talk) 16:57, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    9. Endorse - Jr8825 (talk) 23:06, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  38. To reduce the possibility of conflicts of interest or the appearance of conflict of interest do you commit to not accept any employed or remunerated position with the Foundation for at least the duration of your stay on the board and 6 months until after leaving the board?
    1. Endorse --Andreas JN466 20:21, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    2. Endorse. Seraphimblade (talk) 02:50, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    3. Endorse -- Llywrch (talk) 07:00, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    4. Endorse -- AllyD (talk) 06:07, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    5. Endorse -- B25es (talk) 16:57, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  39. Non-affiliated volunteers (i.e. volunteers who are not members of any Wikimedia affiliate) do most of the work on the wikis, yet elect only a quarter of board seats. Do you think this is right?
  40. How can WMF deal with proposed or established intermediary liability rules in different countries and safeguard the local Wikimedia volunteers from prosecution by government agencies?
  41. The Foundation rejected repeated calls to make the Movement Strategy a consensus process. I believe none of the resulting projects have an established consensus, including the Code of Conduct. Rebranding was 92% opposed,[1] and an item to undermine our core content quality policies appears to have 100% opposition.[2] I believe those running the process clearly advanced their own agenda, disregarding all opposition. Do you consider the Strategy process legitimate? Do staff have a valid mandate to impose these Strategy projects on us? (Please to not get sidetracked on the merits of any particular project, this is a process question.)
  42. Would you be in favor of hiring an outside firm to do an independent audit of board actions over the preceding two years?
  43. As a board member, would you encourage the board to evaluate the wisdom of close relationships with specific outside groups such as the Tides Foundation?
  44. What are your thoughts on how to handle the competing representation issues between giving "seats in the room" for smaller/medium projects at the expense of reducing the "per-editor" vote of large projects, such as may be a question for the Global Council? An example of a proposal along these lines can be seen here, with issues raised on the talk page.
  45. What do you think about the problem that there are arbitration committees in a few wikis, but not in all, and so the parties can transfer their conflict to other wikis in order not to be punished there, or if the conflict was already on the other wiki, there is no independent dispute resolution body at all? What do you think of a single point of contact for all wikis? Otherwise there would often only be a) abandoning the project to avoid the bullying or b) a civil lawsuit.
  46. How important is privacy for you? Are you in favor of anonymous editors not automatically publishing their IP address, or should Wikipedia continue to lag behind in terms of privacy?
  47. Several severe communication issues have been reported with the iOS and Android mobile apps and the web client, all currently in production. Do you agree with the WMF's response to these? More generally, how can the community ensure the difficulties they experience with the software are prioritised in development resource allocations?
    1. Endorse - Nosebagbear (talk) 10:01, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    2. Endorse MarioGom (talk) 16:19, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  48. Do you feel the current spending and available personnel on development issues (both on building new features and fixing bugs in existing ones) is too low, too high, or about right?
    1. Endorse but I would favor wording of #23. MarioGom (talk) 16:19, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  49. Which past Board resolutions or other actions would you vote to overturn, if any?
  50. What percentage of the WMF's annual budget should be allocated among the following categories: (1) maintaining server uptime now and in the foreseeable future, (2) clearing the phabricator backlog, (3) recruiting new participants, and (4) everything else?
    1. Conditional Endorse. Another category should be added: "Improving and modernizing the interfaces for readers and editors" not limited to the current phabricator backlog. DGG (talk) 01:56, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  51. A number of board members, as well as C-level Foundation employees, have been brought onboard who never provide any clue what their opinions or thoughts about Wikimedia's mission is or should be -- neither at the beginning of their tenure nor at any time afterwards. What thoughts do you have about requiring them to provide some statement to the volunteers on this matter? -- Llywrch (talk) 07:00, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  52. Do you believe that communication with individual editors as a Trustee is important? What are you views on how quickly, and in how much detail, Trustees should be expected to reply to individual queries by editors with regards to issues and their role (as an average across the year/term)?
  53. Do you think a community member can be an effective CEO of the WMF? Should the WMF look within the communities, rather than outside, to fill that vacancy?
  54. Do you think that a larger portion of the board seats should be directly elected by the community?
  55. Wikimedia Foundation has no dedicated accessibility team, do you think we should be doing more given both legal (Americans with Disabilities Act etc.) and ethical ramifications? Should web accessibility be a commitment by the Board of Trustees itself, like with, say, BLP policy?
  56. Name three elephants in the room. How do you propose to deal with them?
  57. From the 8 prioritized Movement Strategy initiaves (letterd A to H on Movement Strategy), the top priority is creating a Movement Charter whereby a Global Council will be created, and resposibilities will be transfered from the (Board of Trustees) of the Wikimedia Foundation to the Global Council. Please elaborate on this top priority.
  58. Should the Board wait until after the elections to choose the next CEO?
  59. What skills and qualities would you look for in the next CEO?
  60. Should the WMF fundraise in impoverished countries?
  61. Who is ultimately responsible for the Board of Trustees collective ability to follow its own procedures, policies and code of conduct?

Зведений список запитань

30 червня 2021 Виборча комісія збере усі запитання до кандидатів, на які вони матимуть відповісти, починаючи з 7 липня.

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2021/Apply_to_be_a_Candidate/uk&oldid=26511837"