Everyone, The past six months have been a complex and troubling time for our community in France. Let me be absolutely clear, with no confusion or ambiguity, that the Wikimedia Foundation condemns harassment. We take all harassment claims seriously, investigate them promptly, and take the appropriate action to enforce our policies whenever necessary. My goal here today is to provide more information about the actions of the Wikimedia Foundation, the principles to which we adhere, and the situation in which our movement finds itself.
As many of you know, there have been months of discussion within the French Wikimedia community, independent committees and governance bodies, and the Wikimedia Foundation about the governance and operations of Wikimédia France. During this time, we have seen growing tensions between a number of the former leaders of Wikimédia France and some members of the French Wikimedia community. This situation created great strain on the French community, former and current staff of Wikimédia France, and concerned Wikimedia volunteers around the world. Much of this was documented by community members and in the press. Over the past months the Foundation has received formal and informal complaints alleging harassment and other harmful behaviour, and we have enforced existing policies whenever applicable. Recently, an individual associated with our movement published an essay about the events in France on the blogging site Medium and shared that essay with this list. It contained a number of deeply concerning allegations of harassment. Let me first address the most troubling claims of the recent essay—those regarding the Foundation’s handling of allegations against the Wikimedia Foundation’s current Board Chair. In May of 2017 the Wikimedia Foundation was informed, in a letter and for the first time, that the then-Executive Director of Wikimédia France was alleging claims of harassment against the current Board Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation, dating back to his tenure as former Chair of Wikimédia France. In this letter the Executive Director described a number of interactions with the Foundation’s Board Chair when he was Chair of Wikimédia France, and went on to accuse him of using his position as Foundation Board Chair to to turn the Wikimedia Foundation’s sentiment against the French chapter. Contrary to the assertion in the Medium essay, while the former Wikimédia France Executive Director’s letter detailed tense and disagreeable interactions between the two individuals, it did not characterize those interactions as sexual harassment. Also contrary to the essay’s assertions, the Wikimedia Foundation took immediate and appropriate action after receiving the complaint. The Wikimedia Foundation, under clear direction from our Board, responded promptly: - We notified the Vice Chair and Board Governance Chair immediately after receiving the then-Executive Director’s letter. - Under their direction and supervision, we promptly hired expert French legal counsel to conduct an investigation on this issue. - The Foundation Board Chair was informed of the investigation and recused from all relevant discussions. The Board Chair was also recused from any discussion regarding Wikimédia France and the French Wikimedia community, including any participation in funding decisions. - The investigation by the experts found that the French chapter’s Executive Director’s detailed statements of facts, in addition to not being characterized by her as sexual harassment, also did not support a finding of sexual harassment. - Based on the information provided, French counsel also looked at whether the allegations supported a finding of “moral” harassment, ultimately concluding that they did not. - The findings were conveyed to the then-chair of the board of Wikimédia France. The chapter leadership was asked on more than one occasion if it had any additional evidence or wished to further discuss the conclusions. No additional information was provided. - Under these circumstances, the Board of the Wikimedia Foundation found no merit to the charges. *As has been repeatedly stated, the Foundation remains fully committed to reviewing and investigating additional information, if presented, of sexual or other harassment allegedly committed by any Wikimedia Foundation staff or board member. We fully condemn harassment in the Wikimedia movement.* The essay in Medium also references experiences of a number of former Wikimédia France Board members who reportedly left their posts because of alleged harassment from French Wikimedia community members. In the majority of these cases, the Wikimedia Foundation has not received complaints and has no further information about these allegations. We are aware that some people working at the Foundation for some months have received comments from a number of community members through informal channels about alleged intra-community harassment. These included complaints and allegations of harassment made against the former Wikimédia France Executive Director and then-Board Chair by Wikimédia France staff and community members, as well as counter-complaints from former Wikimédia France board members against members of the French community. In each instance of which we are aware, the individual raising the complaint was directed to the Wikimedia Foundation’s Support and Safety team, which is trained and equipped to independently investigate and assess these matters, particularly where members of the larger Wikimedia community are concerned. In total, the Foundation received roughly a dozen of these complaints. Each of these complaints received by the Foundation was investigated and responded to promptly, enforcing the relevant anti-harassment policies whenever appropriate. In some cases, and when appropriate, our response resulted in content (for example, content that identified Wikimedia community members who guarded their anonymity) being removed from public websites or the Foundation contacting users who posted inappropriate material. In others, we found that while certain comments at times crossed the lines of civility, the actions did not meet the threshold of sanction under our policies or constitute intentional or sustained patterns of harassment. As a cumulative result of these complaints, the Wikimedia Foundation has recommended to Wikimédia France that they take immediate steps to implement a friendly space policy. At the chapter’s exceptional September general assembly, the motion to develop and implement a friendly space policy passed with overwhelming support, with 98% of the membership voting in favor. The Wikimedia Foundation has offered Wikimédia France our assistance with this policy’s composition and implementation. We are committed to working with the new Wikimédia France conseil d’administration (governing board) to support the French community as they work to address and resolve these and other outstanding issues. The Wikimedia Foundation and the new leadership of Wikimédia France are already cooperating to address the governance-related concerns raised by the volunteer Funds Dissemination Committee in the first half of 2017. As part of this work, we have encouraged them to review how they will independently handle claims of harassment in the future. The Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimédia France share a common goal: a healthy, welcoming, respectful, inclusive Wikimedia community in France. I know I am not alone in my dismay for how these events have unfolded. Many dedicated, good-faith members of the French community, including current community members and present and former Wikimédia France board and staff members, have experienced distress and anxiety over recent months. Those outside of the community have watched with dismay as our peers and friends have found themselves disoriented, distressed, alienated, or at odds with one another. And yet we also know that many in France now feel a renewed sense of purpose for building the healthy and welcoming community we all desire. Situations such as the recent events in France provide us with an opportunity to learn from the past in order to do better in the future. We have seen this time and again in our communities, as organizations (including the Wikimedia Foundation) have emerged from governance and other challenges stronger, with deepened commitments to openness, collaboration, and humility. Today is another such opportunity. Katherine  https://www.mathisbenguigui.eu/wikimedia-timeline/  http://www.lemonde.fr/pixels/article/2017/09/11/vers-une-sortie-de-crise-a-wikimedia-france_5184101_4408996.html http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/rue89/rue89-nos-vies-connectees/20170718.OBS2248/exclusions-menaces-budget-recale-c-est-la-crise-chez-wikimedia-france.html  https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/04/WMFR_AG_2017-09-09.pdf/page1-2550px-WMFR_AG_2017-09-09.pdf.jpg On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Caroline Becker <carobecke...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Emeric, > > I am very pleased that you take mental health seriously. I remember, not so > long ago, that your actions while you were in Wikimedia France had serious > impact on the mental health of at least two of your members. > > In January, someone had a meltdown just in front of you. Could you remind > us what you did after that ? > > In April, you learnt that your actions as a chair caused me a medical > leave. What can the Foundation and the movement as a whole learn about how > you dealt with the situation ? > > Warmly, > > Caroline > > 2017-10-12 12:39 GMT+02:00 Emeric Vallespi <emeric.valle...@gmail.com>: > > > Dear Maria, > > Dear all, > > > > The Wikimedia Foundation board of trustees, the executive and the legal > > management of the Wikimedia Foundation have been informed of Nathalie > > Martin's complaint against her former employer now member of your board, > > and then of the criminal complaint against this same person (facts from > his > > time in Wikimédia France and other from his time in your Board). > > > > It would have been logical for a board of trustees member to gather her > > testimony. No one has sought to make contact with her. Why? > > At the very least, the Wikimedia Foundation board of trustees could have > > requested a copy of the complaint, as well as the various testimonies, so > > that they could study them and make their opinion. We had no > solicitation. > > Why? > > From what I see, the Wikimedia Foundation has done everything to stifle > > the problem. Here is the only initiative WMF has taken: paid "independent > > lawyers" (a concept unknown to me…) to "question Christophe". He > responded, > > to the general surprise, that there was no problem. > > Do you really feel that this is a serious investigation? Honestly? > > Why did not these lawyers also hear Nathalie? > > Why did these lawyers not ask questions to the Wikimédia France Board of > > trustees members? Only with the testimony of the defendant himself, the > > Wikimedia Foundation today states that there is no problem. ... > > During the site visit, Nathalie proposed to the Wikimedia Foundation > > representatives to organize a confrontation. Not only did she have a flat > > denial, but, moreover, it was replied that it must not be addressed. > > Why did the Wikimedia Foundation not accede to this request for > > confrontation? Not to know the truth which can be too embarrassing to > > assume? > > > > We have a movement employee who brilliantly held management > > responsibilities for 4 years (great longevity for an Executive Director…) > > who asked for help. And what is the answer of the movement, of the > > Wikimedia Foundation? Nothing. Nothing was undertaken to give her any > kind > > of listening or help. > > > > Marie-Alice Mathis, who courageously expressed disapproval of the sexist > > harassment of Nathalie, was also harassed by community members. Nathalie > > and Marie-Alice suffered health damages and had medical leaves issued by > > real general practitioners. The Wikimedia Foundation was informed and > what > > did you do? Nothing, or worst: two messages from your staff legitimizing > > the harassment and one from a member of your board who publicly stated > > against Wikimédia France without any prior contact with us. > > What kind of help or support did you offer to Marie-Alice? > > > > The outcome of the complaints is not even the issue at this stage and > this > > is not my point (I’m not a judge as you or other community member think > > they are). > > The real problem is that today a man in the movement, if he has power > > position, can do absolutely everything he wants without any control. The > > problem is, despite all the empty values you’re communicating on, you > > legitimize whatever the community does. Because the community is the > > measure of all things. > > No objective process is foreseen to protect women (and more generally, > > people) or at least to hear them. > > Do you find this normal for a movement that advocates inclusiveness and > > respect? > > > > I’ve read an ardent defender of epicene style of writing who is accusing > > of lying other women because of their private then public declarations. > > Having no clue of what is in the procedure. Thank you for enlightening me > > about true fight with feminism. > > > > I’m glad that « We take all allegations of harassment seriously », but I > > can not endorse this functioning which goes against legality and simply > > against human values. > > > > N.B: English is not my native language, may you be as tolerant of my > > selected words or sentences construction as with harassing behavior. > Thanks > > for your understanding. > > > > Regards, > > -- > > Emeric Vallespi > > > > > On 11 Oct 2017, at 19:54, María Sefidari <kewlshr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Dear all, > > > > > > > > > We would like to specifically address the allegations related to > > harassment > > > in this thread’s original email. We take all allegations of harassment > > > seriously. Earlier this year, the Board of Trustees was informed that > > > allegations of harassment had been made against the Wikimedia > Foundation > > > Board Chair dating back to his time as chair of Wikimédia France. We > > > immediately directed the Foundation to investigate. The Foundation > > employed > > > independent, external experts and conducted an investigation. Based on > > the > > > information presented, the investigation found no support for the > > > allegations. That conclusion was conveyed to the Wikimedia Foundation > > Board > > > as well as the chair of Wikimédia France. > > > > > > The Wikimedia Foundation remains committed to independent investigation > > if > > > presented with new information. Absent such information, we consider > the > > > allegations to be without merit. > > > > > > > > > On behalf of the Board, > > > > > > > > > María Sefidari > > > > > > El 8 oct. 2017 5:20, "John Erling Blad" <jeb...@gmail.com> escribió: > > > > > > When I first saw the posts I thought it would probably be more opinions > > to > > > them than the very clear blame-game that were going on. Having a partly > > > anonymous community and a chapter that only represents some of the > users > > > are an invitation to fierce battles. > > > > > > Whatever going on at WMFR, I believe it is time for reevaluating the > role > > > of WMF in this. I'm wondering if there should be a new board for WMF, > > > unless they get a new chair themselves asap. Reorganize, solve the > > > problems, and move on. > > > > > > No, I do not know any of the people involved. > > > > > > John Erling Blad > > > /jeblad > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Marie-Alice Mathis < > > > mariealice.gar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >> Hello all, > > >> > > >> I haven’t had a real opportunity to introduce myself: I am Marie-Alice > > >> Mathis, 32, a now ex-member of the Board of Wikimédia France. > > >> > > >> The transition with the newly elected members of the Board is now > > complete > > >> and I gladly step down to get away from the violence, exhaustion and > > >> frustration of these past few months. > > >> > > >> I was a Board candidate because after completing my PhD I finally had > > more > > >> time to contribute to the projects and serve the community through the > > >> French chapter: after watching my husband Rémi Mathis do it for years > I > > > had > > >> a pretty good idea of what it meant. I did not know our ED Nathalie > > Martin > > >> or our chair Émeric Vallespi before working with them, and now that I > > have > > >> I can vouch for their hard work and attachment to the movement’s > values. > > >> > > >> Today, I have lost friends or people I thought were friends because I > > >> defended Nathalie and Émeric in good faith during the smear campaign > > based > > >> on the community’s assumption that they were the source and cause of > all > > >> the chapter’s problems, real or perceived. Although I have worked with > > > them > > >> closely for a year, I have been repeatedly informed that I’ve been > > >> manipulated by Nathalie from the start and should not have blindly > > > believed > > >> everything Émeric was saying. I’ve been personally attacked on WMF > > sites, > > >> email lists, and social media for weeks, my every word scrutinised, > > >> questioned and mocked assuming I was either ignorant or lying. I’ve > been > > >> told by so-called feminists who were endorsing a particularly sexist > > rant > > >> against me to “stop making inflammatory comments”. I’ve been called a > > >> conspiracy theorist because I questioned the role of our former chair > > >> Christophe Henner, now chair of the Board at the WMF, in the threats > to > > >> withdraw our chapter agreement and the cutting of half our FDC > funding. > > >> People close to Christophe who have resigned from the WMFR Board early > > in > > >> the crisis rather than take responsibility for their mistakes now call > > >> themselves victims and whistleblowers. The WMF, who is perfectly aware > > of > > >> the charges of sexual harassment filed by Nathalie against Christophe > > for > > >> facts dating back to when he was her boss at Wikimédia France, is > > >> pretending WMFR leadership has used the threat of legal action to > > >> intimidate chapter members and silence opposition. > > >> > > >> Some unfounded allegations have been made on this very list by > prominent > > >> members of the community (and what is a newbie’s word worth in that > > case, > > >> right?): from extremely serious accusations of misuse of chapter funds > > for > > >> personal gain (that strangely enough never made it to the French > justice > > >> system despite a so-called “rather convincing rationale”), to > gratuitous > > >> ones that Nathalie was making the Board’s decisions for us and > dictating > > >> our communication (I am old enough to write my own emails, thank you > > very > > >> much), to ever vague ones of “quite generous expenses reimbursement“. > > None > > >> of this has been supported by proof or tangible facts, but the goal of > > >> spreading distrust and dissent in the chapter and the wider community > > has > > >> clearly been reached. Even now that Nathalie has left her position and > > the > > >> Board has resigned, some are still defaming her in the French media in > > the > > >> hopes of winning the stupid argument of who were the bad guys in the > > >> crisis. > > >> > > >> I am also extremely disappointed that no one from this list asked us > > (the > > >> Board) what was happening when these allegations were made, with only > a > > >> handful of people suggesting to wait before all the facts were known. > > >> Instead, you took for granted the very short and extremely biased > > English > > >> summaries of the Board’s communications (which were instantly > circulated > > > on > > >> this list without our consent and in violation of our chapter’s > bylaws), > > >> and joined in the chorus of outrage, condemnation and verbal abuse. > > >> > > >> But worse to me than all this, I am actually terrified at how easily > the > > >> Wikimedia community can turn on a person, with no regard whatsoever > for > > >> decency or legality, when it has made up its mind about who has no > place > > >> there. I have personally experienced what it means to disagree with > this > > >> angry mob: questioning the dominant opinion or calling out > individuals’ > > >> toxic behaviour makes you in turn acceptable collateral damage and a > > “fair > > >> game” target for harassment. > > >> > > >> Speaking of this, the movement as a whole needs to address the issue > of > > >> staff-volunteers relations exemplified by the rapid turnover of > > executive > > >> staff across chapters. Nathalie stayed at WMFR an almost record > > breaking 4 > > >> years, but at what cost? I’m being extremely serious in adding that > this > > >> conversation needs to take place before something irreversible happens > > as > > > a > > >> result of harmful group behaviour within the community. > > >> > > >> Sincerely, > > >> Marie-Alice Mathis // AlienSpoon > > >> > > >> > > >> PS: for your information about my position regarding the WMF’s role in > > > this > > >> crisis and their recent unilaterally added conditions [ > > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grant_expectations_for_ > > >> Wikimedia_France_-_2017-2018] > > >> for payment of our FDC-attributed grant, I attach my email to Katy > Love > > >> from Sept 20. > > >> > > >> Katy, (Cc WMFr Board and Rémi) > > >> > > >> In the WMF "Grant expectations" document sent to the Board of WMFr, > you > > >> mention as a condition for APG funds payment that I do not resign from > > my > > >> position on the Board until the governance review is complete, and > that > > > any > > >> Board member planning to resign must report and justify it to WMF. > > >> > > >> You also mention that you retain the right to cease funding WMFr if > you > > >> consider that legal threats are being used inappropriately to stifle > > civil > > >> and appropriate participation in the chapter. Moreover, you condition > > >> payment to being informed if the chapter leadership feels that legal > > > action > > >> is appropriate to take against current or former board members or > staff. > > >> > > >> Let me be clear: these conditions are outrageous and unacceptable. > > >> > > >> First of all, my legitimacy as a Board member of WMFr does not come > from > > >> any commitment to WMF but from being democratically elected by French > > >> chapter members. WMF has no say in who stays or not on the Board, and > > >> trying to intervene on such governance issues is, again, putting both > > >> organisations at risk of being legally recognised as co-employers. > > >> > > >> Second, as a (volunteer) Board member I have been subjected to > > harassment, > > >> sexist abuse, and unjustified allegations of misconduct by community > > >> members, that have impacted my health and mental well being to the > point > > >> where I was no longer able to do my (paid) job in cancer patient care > > and > > >> my GP put me on medical leave. A large volume of this abuse took place > > on > > >> WMF property (fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipédia:Le_Bistro > <http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro> > > <http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro> > > > <http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro> > > >> <http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro> > > >> <http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro> and the > > >> WMF-hosted, > > >> publicly archived mailing lists wikimedia-l and wikimediafr). > > >> You personally and on behalf of WMF encouraged French community > members > > to > > >> challenge chapter leadership citing governance issues, without a word > > >> mentioning the violence suffered by the Board and executive staff at > the > > >> hands of some French members during this crisis. Worse, you presented > > the > > >> Board's email condemning the harassment as inaccurate and problematic, > > >> which made the community feel all the more legitimate in their harmful > > >> attacks. > > >> When I reported the abuse in person to WMF employees during the site > > visit > > >> you personally empathised with my distress at the time, and thanked me > > for > > >> being honest about how your email to the wikimediafr list had made our > > >> already precarious situation untenable. And then you did nothing. > > >> My husband Rémi, who witnessed first hand the effects of the > harassment > > on > > >> my health, called on you to release the site visit report so the > > > misconduct > > >> allegations would stop. You didn't, until 3 days before our General > > >> Assembly (where the allegations were repeated), on the same day you > > asked > > >> that I stay on as a Board member. Even your choice of words in the > > "Grant > > >> expectations" document is telling: "egregious incivility" is not what > we > > >> are talking about here. We are talking about unacceptable and illegal > > >> defamation and harassment with serious real life consequences. > > >> Rémi also called on the wikimedia-l list to stop the unfounded > > > allegations, > > >> and was attacked in turn because of "his conflict of interest as the > > >> husband of a Board member". He also reported the abuse to the WMF > > >> governance committee, to the Suport and Safety team and mentioned it > to > > >> Christophe Henner and Katherine Maher on Twitter, to no avail. To this > > day > > >> we haven't received any support or acknowledgement whatsoever. All the > > >> while the sexist abuse continues, and French editor MrButler was > > moderated > > >> on the wikimediafr maling list for his continued personal attacks > > against > > >> me. This is exactly the kind of behaviour the Board's email to the > > members > > >> was calling out, yet you continue to deliberately ignore it and refuse > > to > > >> do anything about it. > > >> > > >> Finally, your asking to be informed of any legal action against > chapter > > >> members or staff is yet another example of the WMF taking sides while > > >> posing as a neutral arbitrator. Calling someone out on their toxic > > >> behaviour or actually filing a complaint are no legal threats or > > >> intimidation, but by claiming they are you are trying to silence > victims > > > by > > >> denying them their basic rights to legal protection. At least two > > >> complaints have been filed against community members and more may be > > >> coming, including on my behalf. You will not be informed because it is > > not > > >> for WMF to decide whether they are justified or frivolous. > > >> > > >> For all these reasons I am deeply shocked and hurt by your payment > > >> conditions and will not abide by the terms of your grant expectations. > > > With > > >> most of WMFr funding hanging in the balance your unilaterally revised > > >> conditions amount to blackmail but I will not stay in harm's way at > the > > >> request of the organisation who has failed me in every aspect when I > > came > > >> in good faith to work for the community. I will resign when I see fit > to > > >> protect my health, and continue to speak honestly and publicly about > > your > > >> actions and empty words of safety and inclusivity. > > >> > > >> Sincerely, > > >> Marie-Alice Mathis, vice chair of WMFr > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > >> wiki/Wikimedia-l > > >> New messages to: Wikimediaemail@example.com > > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > , > > >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > New messages to: Wikimediaemail@example.com > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimediaemail@example.com > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > -- Katherine Maher Executive Director *We moved! **Our new address:* Wikimedia Foundation 1 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600 San Francisco, CA 94104 +1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6635 +1 (415) 712 4873 kma...@wikimedia.org https://annual.wikimedia.org _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>