> A decision about how the public consumes Wikipedia content (e.g., Media
> Viewer) is an editorial decision,

and it's one that the WMF has chosen to
> make unilaterally. WMF has furthermore moved to give its staff rights that
> facilitate unilateral behavior in the future. But to the degree that Sue
> Gardner's policy remains in place (and I'm assuming it does), the WMF's
> position is that any problematic actions taken by individual staff should
> be subject to community processes.

I think this is a misunderstanding. Erik's actions are pretty clearly made
in his capacity as a WMF senior staff member, and it follows from that fact
that the WMF regard this a decision that it is (at least in the final
analysis) one that is theirs to take (that is to say, not "editorial"

Arguing that Erik ought to be sanctioned on the German wikipedia for doing
his job is, being as kind as possible, futile wikilawyering.

If you disagree with what he is doing then some appropriate courses of
action involve speaking to Foundation ED or their Board.  There are many
other inappropriate courses of action that are being pursued as well,

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Reply via email to