On May 20, the WMF provided an update on the Community Wishlist, revealing the decision to to disband the team of six staff and replace it with a decentralised program. Community discussions have arisen as a result of the decision, with many commenters bringing up recent attempts to unionize, claiming it to be a key motive behind the decision. An ongoing petition to stand up and take action has gathered over 900 signatories, including many prominent and respected Wikipedians.

The recently formed Wiki Workers United — a labour union composed of staff at the Wikimedia Foundation — have provided a statement on their website, akgnowledging that they don't know the foundations motive behund disbanding the tech team, while stating that the union is necessary for the long term viability of the project.

• About: WP:WWU
• Response: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(WMF)#WWU_statement_(May_23)

We, the undersigned, stand in solidarity with Wiki Workers United and affirm our willingness to engage in collective action if called upon by WWU, up to and including staging an editorial strike. Editors participating in the collective action would be able to use normal Wikipedia consensus-building methods to establish the action's terms and, if desired, to establish further demands of our own in addition to WWU's demands.
— Wiki Workers United solidarity

Wikipedia:Wiki Workers United solidarity This response is at over 900 signatories, one of the largest petitions on the project ever, and one of the few times over 300 editors agreed on something. As per their statistics, 55 of the 817 administrators, as well as several oversighters, CheckUsers, Stewards, interface administrators, and arbitrators, and other prominent and trusted Wikipedians. The only petition to have recieved more support was the 2024 open letter to the Wikimedia Foundation, in response to the WMF considering disclosing personally identifiable information to the Delhi High Court during the legal proceedings of Asian News International v. Wikimedia Foundation. Over on Meta Wiki, over 950 editors have also expressed solidarity with the union more generally, with many editors having signed both.

User:Tamzin/What would an editorial strike look like?

• WP:Village pump (WMF)#Response from the WMF (21 May)
• WP:Village pump (WMF)#Response from the WMF (22 May)
• WP:Village pump (WMF)#Response_from_WMF_24_May
• Wikipedia:Village_pump_(WMF)#Note_from_the_Wikimedia_Foundation_on_unionization

• Wikipedia:Village_pump_(WMF)#Data_on_Wishlist_work
• m:Talk:Community_Wishlist#Statistics_about_the_implementation_of_wishes

written by wikipedian Jake Orlowitz (Ocaasi)

Wikipedia_talk:Wiki_Workers_United_solidarity: See page header for coverage by external media. Currently lists 12 websites.

Add using {{userscript |code= [.js] |name= [script name] |doc= [doc page] }}

• ...

(SUBST: THE TRANSCLUSIONS, AND TRIM/REFORMAT, PRIOR TO PUBLICATION)

{{Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/Approved}}

{{Wikipedia:BAG/Status}}

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community: 2026 #21, #21, & #21 (FIX WEEK NUMBERS). Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available on Meta.

• Meeting item 1