The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees attended Wikimania 2026 in Paris this year. We said farewell to Raju Narisetti, a Board-selected trustee, who stepped off the Board at the end of July after 9 years of service. He is departing in his last term, having served three consecutive terms as allowed in the bylaws. Raju informed Board Chair, Lorenzo Losa that he would be stepping down a few months early as part of a planned transition. The Board opened a search for a new trustee in May. Raju provided these departing thoughts:
“It has been a privilege to play a small part in stewarding an institution that matters so deeply to the world. After serving three terms, I formally stepped down as a Trustee following the July board meeting, as part of a long-planned transition, one which also lets the Board have a robust succession plan for my appointed seat. I take with me a lifetime of learning and admiration for our mission, and the remarkable people who sustain free knowledge for the world.”
Mayree Clark was appointed an interim Vice Chair in place of Raju.
We see Wikimania and regional Wikimedia conferences as important opportunities to engage directly with people from across the movement, listen to their experiences, and better understand the issues that matter to our communities.
We applaud the event organisers, as well as the Wikimedia Foundation staff who worked alongside them, for delivering a thoughtful and well-run event that addressed important questions for the volunteers, the Foundation, the Board, and the wider Wikimedia movement.
Board members greatly appreciated the feedback shared during the various Foundation sessions, including discussions on Board elections Reform, A Seat at the Table, Around the puzzle globe, the Fireside Chat, the Wikimedia ecosystem, and Neutral Point of View. We also benefited from the many informal conversations that took place in hallways, over meals, and in small groups.
Particularly, the many sessions and conversations about artificial intelligence further reinforced the importance of working together to navigate Wikimedia’s future in a rapidly changing environment. This is already a major focus for both the Board and the Foundation, as reflected in the Annual Plan and in our longer-term planning for the years ahead.
We are now reflecting on and digesting this feedback. It will help inform our next steps, and you will hear more from us as this work develops.
Five Board of Trustees Reflections on Wikimania 2026
The Board is listening
1. The new CEO’s first Wikimania opened a new chapter, and expectations are high
Wikimania 2026 was Bernadette Meehan’s first Wikimania as CEO. Her participation provided an early opportunity for the global community to hear her priorities and for her to encounter the extraordinary diversity and complexity of the Wikimedia Movement.
A new CEO inevitably brings a moment of possibility. There is an opportunity to reset relationships, clarify priorities, improve organisational and financial discipline, and establish a more constructive partnership between the Foundation and communities. At the same time, the CEO enters the organisation facing significant external pressures: AI, changing patterns of internet use, political attacks, regulation, financial pressures, and questions about the long-term sustainability of volunteer contribution.
While our revenue exceeded targets last fiscal year, this year we are facing significantly higher hardware and infrastructure costs. This year is also the first test of our revenue model since we have faced significant page view declines. Ensuring this new leadership has the space and support that is needed to tackle these pressures will translate into clearer choices that help sustain the projects for the long term, increased connection with the movement, and a shared understanding of what the Foundation is uniquely responsible for delivering.
2. AI has moved from a specialist topic to the central strategic question
Artificial intelligence was present in almost every major conversation, whether the subject was technology, readership, reliability, fundraising, copyright, or the future of editing. The question is no longer whether AI will affect Wikimedia, but what role Wikimedia wants to play in shaping the emerging information ecosystem.
Wikipedia is one of the foundations on which generative AI is being built, but this relationship is not necessarily reciprocal. AI companies benefit enormously from Wikimedia content, while fewer users may visit Wikimedia projects directly, encounter their communities, or become contributors. The Movement therefore needs a clearer position on attribution, value exchange, machine access, and the protection of human-created knowledge.
At the same time, Wikimania demonstrated that Wikimedia should not define itself merely in opposition to AI. We should explore how carefully designed tools can support contributors, minority-language communities, moderation, translation, and knowledge discovery—while preserving human judgement, transparency, and community control.
3. The affiliate strategy is still a draft
The affiliate strategy presented at Wikimania that caused a lot of discussion is a draft, not a final decision. Its purpose is to stimulate discussion, test assumptions, and identify concerns before any framework is agreed.
The conversations at Wikimania showed that affiliates and community members have important questions about recognition, responsibilities, funding, accountability, regional representation, and the relationship between affiliates and editing communities, with the impact assessment being the most contentious issue. The Foundation is listening carefully to this feedback, including suggestions to improve both the substance of the draft and the consultation process itself.
To allow more communities, particularly those that were unable to participate fully at Wikimania, to contribute meaningfully, the consultation deadline will be extended. The next version should reflect what we hear, explain which proposals have changed, and be transparent about areas where views remain divided.
There is also a misconception that the new affiliate strategy is intended to reduce funding, particularly for affiliates in the Global South. That is not its purpose. The aim is to ensure that Movement resources are directed towards active, accountable, and impactful organisations, while addressing cases where recognised affiliates have become inactive or no longer fulfil their responsibilities. By removing outdated structures and clarifying expectations, the strategy should create more opportunities to support emerging and effective affiliates, especially in regions that have historically received less funding and institutional support.
At a time when AI is causing the loss of visibility for our projects and a consequent decline in readers, donors, and editors, we cannot afford to perpetuate the sunk costs fallacy.
4. Trustee selection criteria are evolving
Wikimania also raised important questions about how trustees are selected and what experience the Board will need in the coming years. The current criteria reflect an effort to balance community legitimacy, professional expertise, geographic diversity, and an understanding of the Wikimedia Movement. However, the challenges facing Wikimedia are changing rapidly, and the selection process may need to change with them.
Future trustee profiles may need to place greater emphasis on strategic judgement, technology and AI, organisational governance, financial oversight, public policy, and the ability to work effectively across cultures and constituencies. At the same time, we must preserve meaningful community representation and avoid creating criteria that favour only candidates with conventional corporate or institutional backgrounds.
The aim should be to make the expectations clearer and ensure that the Board collectively has the skills, experience, independence, and Movement understanding required for the next stage of Wikimedia’s development. Any changes to the selection criteria should be transparent, carefully consulted, and designed to strengthen both the competence and legitimacy of the Board.
5. The unionisation
We also saw volunteer support for Wikimedia Foundation staff in the US and UK on the ground at Wikimania. Many had questions for Foundation leadership on recognising the union and the approach taken that came from a place of care for staff and the important role they play in the movement. At the same time, we regret to observe the amount of tension around unionisation, and hope that we can all lean into our Movement principle of assuming good faith. It is vital to us to tackle external challenges together.
The Board – the Affiliate and Community members of which are elected via a secret ballot and the Board-selected trustees via a direct vote – support the election process for staff unionisation. The vote date for eligible US staff at the Wikimedia Foundation has now been set, with ballots counted on Sept. 3. In the UK, the discussions around a union with staff working for the Wikimedia Foundation, employed by Safeguard Global, are proceeding through a process agreed by the union and Safeguard. The Foundation team is working hard to ensure all staff voices are heard as part of a democratic process and that it is being conducted according to our values. The Board is continuing to follow these matters closely.
Wikimania showed both the unity and diversity of opinions in the Movement
Wikimania remains one of the few spaces where volunteers, foundation staff, affiliate staff, trustees, researchers, developers, and external partners can meet as parts of a single global Movement. The Paris conference demonstrated the energy, creativity, linguistic diversity, and personal commitment that continue to sustain Wikimedia after 25 years.
The conference also revealed a diversity of opinions and approaches. Different groups often discuss the same challenges—AI, sustainability, equity, governance, contributor decline—from separate institutional perspectives. We share a mission, but we do not always share priorities, language, incentives, or an understanding of who is responsible for acting. That is ok; after all, we are a movement that is rooted in open debate, and when it works right, it creates something as beautiful as Wikipedia.
Can you help us translate this article?
In order for this article to reach as many people as possible we would like your help. Can you translate this article to get the message out?
Start translation