Hope my mail finds you in the best of health and spirit. I like to take the 
opportunity to thank you for a penning a detailed email with clarification. 
Yes, we all looking forward for a better possible outcome.

Stay healthy and be safe.

Best Regards,
(U: Marajozkee)
(Sent from my iPhone pardon the brevity) 

> On 22-Jun-2020, at 6:14 AM, Nataliia Tymkiv <> wrote:
> Dear all,
> As Acting Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees since March
> [1] I take full responsibility for this situation. I am truly sorry for all
> the frustration this whole situation has caused to volunteers, who have
> engaged in discussions expressing their concerns, and to the staff, who
> have been working and not really sure if that is really the direction the
> Board is prepared to seriously consider, or if it is just an exercise on
> our part. As Chair of the Board, I recognize the Board owes clear
> information to the communities and guidance to the staff.
> In 2017, the Board approved the 2030 Movement Strategic Direction,
> recognizing the strategic importance of growing the reach of the Wikimedia
> projects to new languages, communities, and geographies, as part of our
> global mission. In June 2018, the Board approved a Foundation Annual Plan
> that included research into the Wikimedia and Wikipedia brands to
> understand how they could be tools in helping us reach these goals.
> In November 2018 [2], the staff presented research to the Board about the
> Wikipedia and Wikimedia brands. I personally, even though a relatively long
> term Wikipedian (and a bit less long term Wikimedian), was basically
> convinced by the findings that a rebranding is needed and beneficial for
> our mission and global vision, and furthermore that it should be based on
> the Wikipedia brand. The information presented there also convinced the
> Board that the team should continue their work, but as you can see from the
> minutes the Board believed that communication is crucial, but already a
> possibility for a new name for the Wikimedia Foundation was seriously
> considered [3].
> And I am going to be frank here - intuitively taking the name of something
> like “Wikipedia Foundation” makes a lot of sense, whether or not it makes
> sense upon deeper consideration. But, of course, no one was planning to
> just rename the organisation, more conversations were needed. It was
> convincing enough for us (the Board) to approve the budget for this
> initiative.
> The Board has received regular updates about the Brand work along the way,
> including approving continued work in the 2019 and 2020 annual plans.
> However, the Board has not yet had a very serious, frank conversation about
> what the Board will do when the work is finished, including how to balance
> feedback from many communities, and the importance of reaching new
> communities. The Board also has not yet received a final report, as the
> exploratory project was and still is ongoing.
> The process itself, even though the brand project team has designed its
> process to be inclusive and transparent, has created bitterness in some
> volunteers, some of whom feel they were led on or even actively
> manipulated. I am sure there was no intent to do that. But, for instance,
> people do point to a reported KPI (key performance indicator) in the
> previous survey as an alleged attempt at deceiving either the community or
> the Board. The Board did not make its decision to support the brand project
> based on that number, nor does the clarification of that number or removal
> of that KPI influence the Board’s support for the project. Good-faith
> mistakes should not undermine trust in our colleagues’ intentions or the
> purpose of an entire process. But this “elephant in the room” feeling is
> hurting all of us - both volunteers and staff, so I acknowledge that this
> created a lot of bitterness.
> I want us to take a step back and try to have an honest and constructive
> conversation on what our future work will be together. I know there is
> mistrust towards the Wikimedia Foundation acting in good faith, I also know
> the staff members feel intimidated when talking with the communities, so it
> is really difficult to have a frank dialog. We are all in this vicious
> circle - we do not trust each other, so we do not talk honestly; we do not
> talk honestly so we cannot build that trust. I truly want that to change.
> So I am going to be as direct as possible about the Board’s perspective.
> The executive statement says, “A rebrand will happen. This has already been
> decided by the Board” [4]. What does it mean? The brand project was
> approved by the Board in 2018. Rebrand may include: names, logos,
> “taglines,” colours, typography, or any combination of the above. An
> outcome of the project will be a set of recommended new branding
> practices.The Board has not approved any specific recommendations yet.
> However, it is important to be clear: the Board absolutely can change the
> name of the Wikimedia Foundation, even to the “Wikipedia Foundation,” if it
> decides.
> Has the Board made the decision to change the name of Wikimedia Foundation
> yet? No, the Board has not. In 2018, the Board agreed that the name of the
> Wikimedia Foundation does not help us with our strategic goals. From
> 2018-2020, the Board has been reviewing research and participating in the
> brand process with the goal of finding a better name. The Board has not yet
> made a decision to change the name to another name, as the Board has not
> yet had a final report on the results of the Brand Project, or the
> opportunity to discuss the findings and tradeoffs, and make a decision for
> what the Board will do. The Board conversation about this is planned to
> happen during the August meeting.
> Did the Board want to possibly have the rebranding (if approved) to take
> place before Wikipedia’s 20th birthday in January 2021? Yes, in a way. The
> resolution [5] talks about the work being done by then, but it is indeed
> unclear whether the changing of the brand was included or just the
> completion of the research by the Foundation. The timeline can still change
> if the Board decides it.
> Should the Board be clearer in what the Board is directing the Wikimedia
> Foundation to do? Yes, I believe so. Some of this unclarity and
> misalignment is the cause of all this unfortunate frustration.
> What are the possible outcomes for the August Board meeting on branding?
> The Board can 1) stop the project, 2) pause the work being done or 3)
> continue with it.
> Does the Board still want you to take the survey [6] then? Yes. The
> currently open survey [6] is intended to find the best possible outcome if
> the Foundation's (!) branding were centered around Wikipedia, and your
> voice is needed. It is an opportunity to provide constructive feedback on
> those alternatives. If you are engaging in discussions around it, please be
> kind to each other.
> Do all organisations in our movement have to have a uniform name? Per the
> Board’s resolution from 2013
> <> [7]
> - yes, but it was a decision made at that time when the Board believed
> there was a chance to increase visibility and recognition of Wikimedia as a
> brand. It is 2020 now, and it may be the right time to loosen up on this
> approach and allow all organisations in the movement to use different names
> [8], best suited for their local context. Or keep uniform names, but allow
> using any of our brands for fundraising purposes. Or something else. The
> Board does have a sense that there is a need to be much more
> outward-looking and optimize our key assets, including our brands, for the
> challenges to come.
> All across the Movement we have a lot to do to accomplish our 2030 goals
> and build out our movement strategy. And that work can be done as the
> Wikimedia Movement, Wikimedia communities, and the Foundation even with a
> new name, depending on our needs.
> Stay safe,
> antanana / Nataliia Tymkiv
> Acting Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
> [1]
> [2]
> [3],10,11#Branding
> [4]
> [5]
> [6] 2030 Movement Brand Project: Naming Convention Proposals Survey:
> [7]
> [8]
> *NOTICE: You may have received this message outside of your normal working
> hours/days, as I usually can work more as a volunteer during weekend. You
> should not feel obligated to answer it during your days off. Thank you in
> advance!*
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> and 
> New messages to:
> Unsubscribe:, 
> <>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: and
New messages to:

Reply via email to