Changes

One of the growing pains that organizations experience is that paid staff can be hired and perhaps perform their job duties well, but their off-duty conduct brings discredit to their employer.  This is particularly challenging for the WMF, who hired staff from the pool of Wikipedia volunteers, with many staff continuing to edit Wikipedia outside their regular WMF job duties.

One of the growing pains that organizations experience is that paid staff can be hired and perhaps perform their job duties well, but their off-duty conduct brings discredit to their employer.  This is particularly challenging for the WMF, who hired staff from the pool of Wikipedia volunteers, with many staff continuing to edit Wikipedia outside their regular WMF job duties.

In January 2014,  Sarah Stierch was discovered to have written Wikipedia articles for hire while being a full time WMF employee. The WMF promptly announced her departure as an employee without any official explanation.<ref> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-January/129466.html</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-01-08/News_and_notes|work=Wikimedia Signpost|date=January 8, 2014|title=WMF employee forced out over "paid advocacy editing"|accessdate=March 12, 2014}}</ref>

In January 2014,  Sarah Stierch was discovered to have written Wikipedia articles for hire while being a full time WMF employee. The WMF promptly announced her departure as an employee without any official explanation.<ref>http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-January/129466.html</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-01-08/News_and_notes|work=Wikimedia Signpost|date=January 8, 2014|title=WMF employee forced out over "paid advocacy editing"|accessdate=March 12, 2014}}</ref>

In March 2014,  Ryan Kaldari, who has been working for the WMF for almost four years and is a Wikipedia administrator, got into an editing battle with another editor. Kaldari then made complaining comments about that editor under a second assumed name.  For that policy violation, Kaldari lost his administrator privileges.  However, the dispute caused Wikipedia users to research Kaldari's background and discovered that for years he has been the owner and operator of several other websites including "Snuffster.com", which was intended as a parody of Friendster, but soon became a haven for Internet trolls to mock murdered children and to glorify the butchering and burning of women.  Kaldari has been paying for the site for 10 years and has actively added comments to various threads on the site that evidence poor moral character, to say the least.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.examiner.com/article/wikimedia-foundation-employee-caught-sockpuppeting-and-loses-admin-rights|first=Gregory|last=Kohs|title=Wikimedia Foundation employee caught sockpuppeting and loses admin rights |date=March 8, 204|accessdate=March 12, 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.dailydot.com/news/wikipedia-sockpuppet-ryan-kaldari/|title=Wikipedia staffer at center of latest sockpuppet scandal|first=Rob|last=Price|work=Daily Dot|date= March 12, 2014|accessdate=March 16, 2014}}</ref>  Kaldari poor judgment in owning and operating this site was called to the attention of Jimbo Wales, who dismissed it out of hand.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=599304349</ref>

In March 2014,  Ryan Kaldari, who has been working for the WMF for almost four years and is a Wikipedia administrator, got into an editing battle with another editor. Kaldari then made complaining comments about that editor under a second assumed name.  For that policy violation, Kaldari lost his administrator privileges.  However, the dispute caused Wikipedia users to research Kaldari's background and discovered that for years he has been the owner and operator of several other websites including "Snuffster.com", which was intended as a parody of Friendster, but soon became a haven for Internet trolls to mock murdered children and to glorify the butchering and burning of women.  Kaldari has been paying for the site for 10 years and has actively added comments to various threads on the site that evidence poor moral character, to say the least.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.examiner.com/article/wikimedia-foundation-employee-caught-sockpuppeting-and-loses-admin-rights|first=Gregory|last=Kohs|title=Wikimedia Foundation employee caught sockpuppeting and loses admin rights |date=March 8, 204|accessdate=March 12, 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.dailydot.com/news/wikipedia-sockpuppet-ryan-kaldari/|title=Wikipedia staffer at center of latest sockpuppet scandal|first=Rob|last=Price|work=Daily Dot|date= March 12, 2014|accessdate=March 16, 2014}}</ref>  Kaldari poor judgment in owning and operating this site was called to the attention of Jimbo Wales, who dismissed it out of hand.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=599304349</ref>

In 2015, Tretikov reorganized the staff and launched a secret project to develop a "Knowledge Engine" which some planning documents said would compete with [[Google]] as a means of searching sources beyond the WMF projects.  Tretikov applied for a grant of $2 million per year over three years from the Knight Foundation, but only received a one-time $250,000 grant to explore the concept.  In July 2015, James Heilman, MD was elected to the WMF Board by the editing community. Heilman brought staff dissatisfaction with Tretikov's leadership to the Board and pressed for more information on the Knowledge Engine and the Knight Foundation grant.  In November 2015, the WMF Board reaffirmed its support of Tretikov's leadership and retained a management consultant to mentor her.  On December 28, 2015, on the eve of two members leaving the Board, the Board held an emergency meeting and removed Heilman from the WMF Board by a vote of 8 to 2.  The Community responded to his dismissal by pressing for the release of the Knowledge Engine grant application resulting in a public apology from Tretikov for pushing the project without first gaining consensus.  In addition, a number of senior WMF staff (including Deputy Director Erik Möller) departed, some making critical public remarks as they left.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikipediocracy.com/2016/02/26/unicorns-are-a-myth-lila-tretikov-resigns-as-wikimedia-foundation-executive-director/#comment-44801|title=Unicorns are a Myth: Lila Tretikov resigns as Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director|date=Feb. 26, 2016|accessdate=Feb. 26, 2016}}</ref>

In 2015, Tretikov reorganized the staff and launched a secret project to develop a "Knowledge Engine" which some planning documents said would compete with [[Google]] as a means of searching sources beyond the WMF projects.  Tretikov applied for a grant of $2 million per year over three years from the Knight Foundation, but only received a one-time $250,000 grant to explore the concept.  In July 2015, James Heilman, MD was elected to the WMF Board by the editing community. Heilman brought staff dissatisfaction with Tretikov's leadership to the Board and pressed for more information on the Knowledge Engine and the Knight Foundation grant.  In November 2015, the WMF Board reaffirmed its support of Tretikov's leadership and retained a management consultant to mentor her.  On December 28, 2015, on the eve of two members leaving the Board, the Board held an emergency meeting and removed Heilman from the WMF Board by a vote of 8 to 2.  The Community responded to his dismissal by pressing for the release of the Knowledge Engine grant application resulting in a public apology from Tretikov for pushing the project without first gaining consensus.  In addition, a number of senior WMF staff (including Deputy Director Erik Möller) departed, some making critical public remarks as they left.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikipediocracy.com/2016/02/26/unicorns-are-a-myth-lila-tretikov-resigns-as-wikimedia-foundation-executive-director/#comment-44801|title=Unicorns are a Myth: Lila Tretikov resigns as Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director|date=Feb. 26, 2016|accessdate=Feb. 26, 2016}}</ref>

The WMF Board appointed two new people to fill outside Board slots effective January 1, one of which was a Google executive, Arnnon Geshuri who was a central figure in an antitrust case.  Community outrage over this improperly vetted appointment resulted in his resignation from the WMF Board.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/01/editors-demand-ouster-of-wikimedia-board-member-involved-in-no-poach-deal/|title= Law & Disorder / Civilization & Discontents

The WMF Board appointed two new people to fill outside Board slots effective January 1, one of which was a Google executive, Arnnon Geshuri who was a central figure in an antitrust case.  Community outrage over this improperly vetted appointment resulted in his resignation from the WMF Board.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/01/editors-demand-ouster-of-wikimedia-board-member-involved-in-no-poach-deal/|title= Law & Disorder / Civilization & Discontents Wikipedia editors revolt, vote "no confidence" in newest board member|date=Jan. 25, 2016|accessdate=Feb. 25, 2016}}</ref>  On February 25, 2016, Tretikov announced her resignation as the Wikimedia Foundation's Executive Director.<ref name=ltresign/> She will continue until March 31. An interim ED will be announced in the meantime, and a full search will be conducted by the WMF Board.<ref name=ltresign>{{cite web|url=https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-February/082472.html|title=Executive transition planning|date=February 25, 2016|accessdate=February 25, 2016}}</ref>

Wikipedia editors revolt, vote “no confidence” in newest board member|date=Jan. 25, 2016|accessdate=Feb. 25, 2016}}</ref>  On February 25, 2016, Tretikov announced her resignation as the Wikimedia Foundation's Executive Director.<ref name=ltresign/> She will continue until March 31. An interim ED will be announced in the meantime, and a full search will be conducted by the WMF Board.<ref name=ltresign>{{cite web|url=https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-February/082472.html|title=Executive transition planning|date=February 25, 2016|accessdate=February 25, 2016}}</ref>

==Site shut downs==

==Site shut downs==

On October 4 through 6, 2011, the WMF redirected all pages on the Italian language version of Wikipedia redirected to a statement opposing the proposed legislation.<ref>[http://www.businessinsider.com/italy-wikipedia-wiretapping-2011-10 "Wikipedia Shuts Down Italian Site In Response To Berlusconi's New Wiretap Act"], Adam Taylor, ''Business Insider'', 4 October 2011</ref>  This was true for all users, not just those IP addresses based in Italy. On October 7, the Italian Wikipedia pages were again available, but a notice about the proposed legislation was still displayed at the top of pages.

On October 4 through 6, 2011, the WMF redirected all pages on the Italian language version of Wikipedia redirected to a statement opposing the proposed legislation.<ref>[http://www.businessinsider.com/italy-wikipedia-wiretapping-2011-10 "Wikipedia Shuts Down Italian Site In Response To Berlusconi's New Wiretap Act"], Adam Taylor, ''Business Insider'', 4 October 2011</ref>  This was true for all users, not just those IP addresses based in Italy. On October 7, the Italian Wikipedia pages were again available, but a notice about the proposed legislation was still displayed at the top of pages.

The success of the Italian shut down whetted the appetite of people seeking to influence legislation in the United States. In December 2011,  Wikipedia co-founder [[Jimmy Wales]] discussed a possible coordinated blackout by Wikipedia and other United States websites to protest anti-piracy two bills pending before the United States Congress: [[SOPA]] and [[PIPA]]. After committing the WMF to join a larger boycott, Wales initiated discussion with editors about his plan. Editors and others<ref>Charlie Osborne, [http://www.zdnet.com/blog/igeneration/would-a-wikipedia-blackout-be-such-a-bad-thing/13726 "Would a Wikipedia blackout be such a bad thing?"], ''iGeneration'' on [[ZDNet]], December 13, 2011, 11:04&nbsp;am PST. Retrieved September 18, 2012.</ref> debated the alternatives of completely interrupting service for one or more days, or alternatively presenting site visitors with a blanked page directing them to further information before permitting them to complete searches.<ref>{{cite news |url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/jimmy-wales/8953273/Wikipedia-co-founder-threatens-blackout-over-anti-piracy-law.html |title=Wikipedia co-founder threatens blackout over anti-piracy law |work=The Telegraph |date=December 13, 2011 |author=Christopher Williams |accessdate=September 18, 2012 |location=London}}</ref><ref name="itnews wikipedia mulls blackout">{{cite news |url=http://www.itnews.com.au/News/284285,wikipedia-mulls-blackout-to-protest-sopa.aspx |title=Wikipedia mulls blackout to protest SOPA |publisher=itnews |date=December 13, 2011 |accessdate=September 18, 2012 |author=Brett Winterford |quote=Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has threatened a knowledge "blackout" of the online encyclopedia to protest a US anti-piracy bill that could have serious ramifications for online service providers.}}</ref> On January 16, the [[Wikimedia Foundation]] announced that the English-language Wikipedia would be blacked out for 24 hours on January 18.<ref>{{cite news |title=Wikipedia to go dark in piracy protest |date=January 17, 2012 |work=[[Australian Broadcasting Corporation]] |url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-17/wiki-to-go-dark-in-piracy-protest/3778452 |accessdate=September 18, 2012}}</ref>  The Simple English Wikipedia voted to continue full service and did not join the blackout.<ref>https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Simple_talk/Archive_97#Potential_black-out_of_Simple_English_Wikipedia_in_the_US</ref>  Many editors complained that the blackout decision was not made in a democratic fashion and undercut Wikipedia's objectivity and non-political mission.<ref>{{cite news | url = http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/wikipedia-editors-question-sites-planned-blackout-15381673 | title =  Wikipedia Editors Question Site's Planned Blackout | first = Peter | last = Svensson | date = January 17, 2012 | accessdate = September 18, 2012| agency = Associated Press }}</ref>

The success of the Italian shut down whetted the appetite of people seeking to influence legislation in the United States. In December 2011,  Wikipedia co-founder [[Jimmy Wales]] discussed a possible coordinated blackout by Wikipedia and other United States websites to protest anti-piracy two bills pending before the United States Congress: [[SOPA]] and [[PIPA]]. After committing the WMF to join a larger boycott, Wales initiated discussion with editors about his plan. Editors and others<ref>Charlie Osborne, [http://www.zdnet.com/blog/igeneration/would-a-wikipedia-blackout-be-such-a-bad-thing/13726 "Would a Wikipedia blackout be such a bad thing?"], ''iGeneration'' on [[ZDNet]], December 13, 2011, 11:04&nbsp;am PST. Retrieved September 18, 2012.</ref> debated the alternatives of completely interrupting service for one or more days, or alternatively presenting site visitors with a blanked page directing them to further information before permitting them to complete searches.<ref>{{cite news |url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/jimmy-wales/8953273/Wikipedia-co-founder-threatens-blackout-over-anti-piracy-law.html |title=Wikipedia co-founder threatens blackout over anti-piracy law |work=The Telegraph |date=December 13, 2011 |author=Christopher Williams |accessdate=September 18, 2012 |location=London}}</ref><ref name="itnews wikipedia mulls blackout">{{cite news |url=http://www.itnews.com.au/News/284285,wikipedia-mulls-blackout-to-protest-sopa.aspx |title=Wikipedia mulls blackout to protest SOPA |publisher=itnews |date=December 13, 2011 |accessdate=September 18, 2012 |author=Brett Winterford |quote=Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has threatened a knowledge "blackout" of the online encyclopedia to protest a US anti-piracy bill that could have serious ramifications for online service providers.}}</ref> On January 16, the Wikimedia Foundation announced that the English-language Wikipedia would be blacked out for 24 hours on January 18.<ref>{{cite news |title=Wikipedia to go dark in piracy protest |date=January 17, 2012 |work=[[Australian Broadcasting Corporation]] |url=http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-17/wiki-to-go-dark-in-piracy-protest/3778452 |accessdate=September 18, 2012}}</ref>  The Simple English Wikipedia voted to continue full service and did not join the blackout.<ref>https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Simple_talk/Archive_97#Potential_black-out_of_Simple_English_Wikipedia_in_the_US</ref>  Many editors complained that the blackout decision was not made in a democratic fashion and undercut Wikipedia's objectivity and non-political mission.<ref>{{cite news | url = http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/wikipedia-editors-question-sites-planned-blackout-15381673 | title =  Wikipedia Editors Question Site's Planned Blackout | first = Peter | last = Svensson | date = January 17, 2012 | accessdate = September 18, 2012| agency = Associated Press }}</ref>

The SOPA/PIPA issue is so important to Sue Gardner, the WMF Executive Director, that in March 2013, she announced that she will be leaving her position to pursue the issue in another capacity.<ref name=bizinsider>{{cite news|url=http://www.businessinsider.com/wikimedia-foundations-sue-gardner-leaving-2013-3|work=Business Insider|date= March 28, 2013|title=The Woman Who Made Wikipedia Huge Is Stepping Down|accessdate=Arpril 27, 2013}}</ref> She left on June 1, 2014.

The SOPA/PIPA issue is so important to Sue Gardner, the WMF Executive Director, that in March 2013, she announced that she will be leaving her position to pursue the issue in another capacity.<ref name=bizinsider>{{cite news|url=http://www.businessinsider.com/wikimedia-foundations-sue-gardner-leaving-2013-3|work=Business Insider|date= March 28, 2013|title=The Woman Who Made Wikipedia Huge Is Stepping Down|accessdate=Arpril 27, 2013}}</ref> She left on June 1, 2014.

| $31,800,000 (estim.)

| $31,800,000 (estim.)

|}

|}

If the WMF has $31 million in the bank, those funds could produce (at 4%) $1,240,000 in annual income, which is more than enough to fund the Wikipedia web servers in perpetuity.  So, people are questioning the need for the WMF's annual fund raising campaign.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikipediocracy.com/2014/12/11/the-wikipedia-fundraising-banner-sad-but-untrue/|title=The Wikipedia Fundraising Banner: Sad but Untrue|date=December 11th, 2014|accessdate=December 12, 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.quora.com/What-are-some-good-arguments-against-donating-to-the-Wikimedia-Foundation/answer/Andreas-Kolbe|title=What are some good arguments against donating to the Wikimedia Foundation?|work=Quora|accessdate=December 15, 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://newslines.org/blog/stop-giving-wikipedia-money/|title=Stop giving Wikipedia money|date=December 4, 2014|accessdate=December 15, 2014|work=Newslines}}</ref>

If the WMF has $31 million in the bank, those funds could produce (at 4%) $1,240,000 in annual income, which is more than enough to fund the Wikipedia web servers in perpetuity.  So, people are questioning the need for the WMF's annual fund raising campaign.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wikipediocracy.com/2014/12/11/the-wikipedia-fundraising-banner-sad-but-untrue/|title=The Wikipedia Fundraising Banner: Sad but Untrue|date=December 11, 2014|accessdate=December 12, 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.quora.com/What-are-some-good-arguments-against-donating-to-the-Wikimedia-Foundation/answer/Andreas-Kolbe|title=What are some good arguments against donating to the Wikimedia Foundation?|work=Quora|accessdate=December 15, 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://newslines.org/blog/stop-giving-wikipedia-money/|title=Stop giving Wikipedia money|date=December 4, 2014|accessdate=December 15, 2014|work=Newslines}}</ref>

Each year the WMF conducts a fundraising drive to keep the webservers working on that popular liberal website. They claim the donations go to "Servers, bandwidth, maintenance, development."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://donate.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:FundraiserLandingPage&country=US&uselang=en&utm_medium=sidebar&utm_source=donate&utm_campaign=C13_en.wikipedia.org|title=Make Your Donation Now - Donate|accessdate=September 3, 2013}}</ref> Yet, in the period July - December 2012, the WMF took in $30.9 million but spent only $1.3 million on internet hosting.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/6/68/Jul-Dec%2712_Mid-year_financials2.pdf|title=Actual vs. Plan Comparison|work=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=September 3, 2013}}</ref> During 2012, the net worth of the WMF grew by $11 million. Yet, liberal Wikipedia users continue to donate in response to the WMF's urgent appeals.

Each year the WMF conducts a fundraising drive to keep the webservers working on that popular liberal website. They claim the donations go to "Servers, bandwidth, maintenance, development."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://donate.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:FundraiserLandingPage&country=US&uselang=en&utm_medium=sidebar&utm_source=donate&utm_campaign=C13_en.wikipedia.org|title=Make Your Donation Now - Donate|accessdate=September 3, 2013}}</ref> Yet, in the period July - December 2012, the WMF took in $30.9 million but spent only $1.3 million on internet hosting.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/6/68/Jul-Dec%2712_Mid-year_financials2.pdf|title=Actual vs. Plan Comparison|work=Wikimedia Foundation|accessdate=September 3, 2013}}</ref> During 2012, the net worth of the WMF grew by $11 million. Yet, liberal Wikipedia users continue to donate in response to the WMF's urgent appeals.