James Heilman removed from WMF board

[Midsize Jake]

I suspect they are working out a severance package.

If employee morale is as low as reported, there's no other way.

Oh, come on - of course there's another way. How about no severance package at all?


Seriously though, there's always the WMF Way, which is to ignore the staff, ignore the users, ignore the critics, ignore common sense, and just do whatever best maintains the illusion of control. That's not to say Ms. Tretikov will remain for the long term, but I don't see her leaving any time soon if they think it will make them look as though the staff or the users are even involved, much less in charge, of the decision-making process. And of course, she herself will (or at least should) want to hold on to the job like Grim Death.

[Moral Hazard]

It seems to me that it is a hostile take-over of the WMF from Erik Möller.
Lila came in, got rid of Möller and hired some apparently competent leadership (one of whom has had terrible problems in his family and had to leave). The leaders are focused on reforming the WMF.

Given the WMF's record of irritating the community, why should we care if the long-term staff are upset? Their being upset is expected. They cannot say, "We are angry because we are being replaced and because Lila does not express her wonder at our amazing accomplishments and shower us with more benefits and higher salaries", so they complain about her leadership style.

Does Lila need to be at WMF headquarters more? She is the public face of the WMF, and her presence at conferences is an attempt to improve the image of the WMF, which it desperately needs if it is to attract good employees.

If they spend less on airfare, they are more likely to hire another WhatamIdoing (T-C-L).

[The Adversary]

Given the WMF's record of irritating the community, why should we care if the long-term staff are upset? Their being upset is expected.

Agreed.

Given their rather terrible track-record, I´m rather surprised that there haven´t been more "dissatisfaction" with Lila from the staff.

What I don´t understand is why Hellman got involved with staff issues? As a community representative he must be aware of "the average" Wikipedians view of staff (loooooow)... so why should he sucker up to them? (*IF* (and it´s a big IF) that is what he has done?)

[Vigilant]

Given the WMF's record of irritating the community, why should we care if the long-term staff are upset? Their being upset is expected.

Agreed.

Given their rather terrible track-record, I´m rather surprised that there haven´t been more "dissatisfaction" with Lila from the staff.

What I don´t understand is why Hellman got involved with staff issues? As a community representative he must be aware of "the average" Wikipedians view of staff (loooooow)... so why should he sucker up to them? (*IF* (and it´s a big IF) that is what he has done?)

Simple.
He wanted to be a hero.

[The Adversary]

Given the WMF's record of irritating the community, why should we care if the long-term staff are upset? Their being upset is expected.

Agreed.

Given their rather terrible track-record, I´m rather surprised that there haven´t been more "dissatisfaction" with Lila from the staff.

What I don´t understand is why Hellman got involved with staff issues? As a community representative he must be aware of "the average" Wikipedians view of staff (loooooow)... so why should he sucker up to them? (*IF* (and it´s a big IF) that is what he has done?)

Simple.
He wanted to be a hero.

It does´t make sense to me: why be a hero for a couple of hundred (as a max) WMF-people.....instead of being a hero for the couple of thousand Wikipedians who voted for him?

Anyway; I don´t know what happened...none of us do, for sure. We can only make some "educated guesses".

[Vigilant]

Given the WMF's record of irritating the community, why should we care if the long-term staff are upset? Their being upset is expected.

Agreed.

Given their rather terrible track-record, I´m rather surprised that there haven´t been more "dissatisfaction" with Lila from the staff.

What I don´t understand is why Hellman got involved with staff issues? As a community representative he must be aware of "the average" Wikipedians view of staff (loooooow)... so why should he sucker up to them? (*IF* (and it´s a big IF) that is what he has done?)

Simple.
He wanted to be a hero.

It does´t make sense to me: why be a hero for a couple of hundred (as a max) WMF-people.....instead of being a hero for the couple of thousand Wikipedians who voted for him?

Anyway; I don´t know what happened...none of us do, for sure. We can only make some "educated guesses".

Last guy in his office syndrome.
Staffers at the WMF thought, "Hey! That guy's a community elected BoT member. Let's tell him our sad story."
Heilman responds with thoughts to himself, "I am a SUPERMAN!" and went to the board with the staffers' stories.

The BoT looked at him and went, "What. The. Fuck?!" and had a private conversation wherein they decided to kick his ass to the curb.

Everyone cries now.

[Poetlister]

No, no, no... David Gerard!!!

He's a British citizen. Would he get a work permit? Would he and his household want to relocate to California?

[eagle]

No, no, no... David Gerard!!!

He's a British citizen. Would he get a work permit? Would he and his household want to relocate to California?

Perhaps he should follow the WMF's establish practice and threaten to shove a pen in some lady's throat in order to demonstrate that he has the moral character required for WMF sponsorship of his work visa/green card.

Of course, if Mr. Gerard is selected as Executive Director, he could collaborate with Mr. Wales to move the WMF headquarters from San Francisco to London.

[Poetlister]

Of course, if Mr. Gerard is selected as Executive Director, he could collaborate with Mr. Wales to move the WMF headquarters from San Francisco to London.

That might subject the WMF to English law, and if they have any sense, they wouldn't want to do that.

[eagle]

Of course, if Mr. Gerard is selected as Executive Director, he could collaborate with Mr. Wales to move the WMF headquarters from San Francisco to London.

That might subject the WMF to English law, and if they have any sense, they wouldn't want to do that.

You are correct. If the WMF relocates based on most favorable legal environment, I am sure that Mr. Wales will pick Kazakhstan.

[tarantino]

The minutes of the November 7-8 2015 board meeting were published today. There are several items of interest there. Among them:

Pursuant to the Gift Policy, the Board voted to approve a gift from the Knight Foundation after a motion by James seconded by Denny.

Dariusz and Boryana presented on the process for Board recruitment to fill Jan-Bart's and Stu's seats after December 2015. The Board discussed that financial experience and skill should be a priority for one of these seats. The Board also discussed the time commitment necessary for the Board. The Board asked the Governance Committee to take these points under consideration and provide an update at the next meeting.

Boryana, the wmf's VP of HR, prior to September 2015 worked under Arnnon Geshuri at Tesla.

[Vigilant]

The minutes of the November 7-8 2015 board meeting were published today. There are several items of interest there. Among them:

Pursuant to the Gift Policy, the Board voted to approve a gift from the Knight Foundation after a motion by James seconded by Denny.

Dariusz and Boryana presented on the process for Board recruitment to fill Jan-Bart's and Stu's seats after December 2015. The Board discussed that financial experience and skill should be a priority for one of these seats. The Board also discussed the time commitment necessary for the Board. The Board asked the Governance Committee to take these points under consideration and provide an update at the next meeting.

Boryana, the wmf's VP of HR, prior to September 2015 worked under Arnnon Geshuri at Tesla.

Was that ever disclosed anywhere?

[thekohser]

Boryana, the wmf's VP of HR, prior to September 2015 worked under Arnnon Geshuri at Tesla.

They literally are still pulling the same shit as when Beaudette hired Q2 Consulting (his former employer) for a research project, without any competitive bid.

It's like they are incapable of learning from past fiascoes.

[Vigilant]

Boryana, the wmf's VP of HR, prior to September 2015 worked under Arnnon Geshuri at Tesla.

They literally are still pulling the same shit as when Beaudette hired Q2 Consulting (his former employer) for a research project, without any competitive bid.

It's like they are incapable of learning from past fiascoes.

The people keep changing and none of them are competent.
Where would the institutional memory and ethics come from?

[Kelly Martin]

The people keep changing and none of them are competent.
Where would the institutional memory and ethics come from?

From the one member of the Board who has been there all along.

[tarantino]

Boryana, the wmf's VP of HR, prior to September 2015 worked under Arnnon Geshuri at Tesla.

Was that ever disclosed anywhere?

Andreas mentioned it on wikimedia-l a week ago, before the minutes were released.

[eagle]

The people keep changing and none of them are competent.
Where would the institutional memory and ethics come from?

From the one member of the Board who has been there all along.

Exactly. Remember, in August 2015, the Board amended the Bylaws to term-limit the Community elected Trustees, so that other long-serving Board members such as Sj (T-C-L) would not be allowed to continue serving more than six years.

[Moral Hazard]

Of course, if Mr. Gerard is selected as Executive Director, he could collaborate with Mr. Wales to move the WMF headquarters from San Francisco to London.

That might subject the WMF to English law, and if they have any sense, they wouldn't want to do that.

You are correct. If the WMF relocates based on most favorable legal environment, I am sure that Mr. Wales will pick Kazakhstan.

[Vigilant]

The people keep changing and none of them are competent.
Where would the institutional memory and ethics come from?

From the one member of the Board who has been there all along.

[Cla68]

Perhaps someone has addressed this already in this thread, but is this an episode an example of the role status takes in leading WP and the WMF? I interpret what happened here as showing that the WMF board members and paid executives view WP editors as having very low status compared to themselves. Dr. Heilman is a doctor, but that title apparently carries no status with the WMF board.

As we all know, people's status changes according to the environment or social groups we find ourselves with. Evidently, being a doctor carries little status with people who have status in the social media, Internet, and free-culture communities. The board saw Heilman as a WP editor first-and-foremost. Would a Google exec get kicked-off the WMF board for snooping around? Not bloody likely.

I get the impression that WP editors are viewed as kooky peons and useful idiots by the WMF administration. Sure, a few WP editors have "risen" to minor executive roles in the WMF over the past few years, but didn't most of them stop actively editing once that happened?

[Randy from Boise]

Perhaps someone has addressed this already in this thread, but is this an episode an example of the role status takes in leading WP and the WMF? I interpret what happened here as showing that the WMF board members and paid executives view WP editors as having very low status compared to themselves. Dr. Heilman is a doctor, but that title apparently carries no status with the WMF board.

As we all know, people's status changes according to the environment or social groups we find ourselves with. Evidently, being a doctor carries little status with people who have status in the social media, Internet, and free-culture communities. The board saw Heilman as a WP editor first-and-foremost. Would a Google exec get kicked-off the WMF board for snooping around? Not bloody likely.

I get the impression that WP editors are viewed as kooky peons and useful idiots by the WMF administration. Sure, a few WP editors have "risen" to minor executive roles in the WMF over the past few years, but didn't most of them stop actively editing once that happened?

The Board is nothing more than a legally necessary manifestation of the community. But it stands outside of community control, controlled instead by Jimmy Wales and his clique.

RfB

[MCleven]

In Moral Hazard's post replicating one by Kiefer.Wolfowitz there's this:

"
In Canada, the medical degree is an undergraduate degree, often a second degree, according to Wikipedia (!). "

According to Wikipedia huh? I had a look around, not too long a look around, and noted on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physician#Regulation and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_(t ... wide_usage and don't see anything like that...which article d'ya think he's talking about?

What I do see, however, is a common practice of lumping Canada in with other Commonwealth countries, which is unwieldy and vague at the same time. i.e. Unreliable and making assumptions/ generalizations where specifics should be required

I've known more than a few medical doctors in my time; it's not like they get a B.M. and start practicing medicine - never mind emergency room medicine. And actually, there's no B.M./B.Med. that I can see on the curriculum at the University of British Columbia http://you.ubc.ca/programs/degree-a-z/ I suspect a search of all Canadian university sites will yield much the same result. Yes, generally a B.Sc. in some field of science is a prerequisite for entry into the MD program but I've *never* heard of a doctor in Canada who became such with only an undergraduate degree.....

So..... just more examples of why Wikipedia shouldn't be used as a reference, even by other Wikipedians (and ex-Wikipedians).

Of course if Dr. Heilman shows up and corrects me that's fine; but as all too often within Wikipedia the line in question, wherever it is, was probably not added by a Canadian, never mind a Canadian medical doctor.

had a look at Kiefer.Wolfowitz's userpage btw, and noting he's banned by ARBCOM, then looking over his contributions and interests and qualifications and.....wonder what the qualifications of those on ARBCOM who banned him are, and what he was banned for.

Noting the mystery of the reason/motive of the Board in canning Heilman and the suggestion that big money/big lawyer influence is behind it, I've often wondered about why certain people are given a long leash to advance questionable aims on Wikipedia and whose money/influence is behind such witchhunting and hounding. And not just about me either......

[Randy from Boise]

had a look at Kiefer.Wolfowitz's userpage btw, and noting he's banned by ARBCOM, then looking over his contributions and interests and qualifications and.....wonder what the qualifications of those on ARBCOM who banned him are, and what he was banned for.

He levied on Wiki none-too-subtle intimations of pedophilia about another editor, an individual who was subsequently banned into oblivion by San Francisco for unstated reasons.

It wasn't really what he said, but rather how he said it and where. He made himself an annoyance to the wrong people and he was made to go away.

It would be interesting to see if all is forgiven now that he has implicitly been vindicated.

RfB

[lilburne]

A little under 3 weeks later and both of my predictions have come to pass.

[Vigilant]

had a look at Kiefer.Wolfowitz's userpage btw, and noting he's banned by ARBCOM, then looking over his contributions and interests and qualifications and.....wonder what the qualifications of those on ARBCOM who banned him are, and what he was banned for.

He levied on Wiki none-too-subtle intimations of pedophilia about another editor, an individual who was subsequently banned into oblivion by San Francisco for unstated reasons.

It wasn't really what he said, but rather how he said it and where. He made himself an annoyance to the wrong people and he was made to go away.

It would be interesting to see if all is forgiven now that he has implicitly been vindicated.

RfB

That can't stand as it it.

Demiurge1000 (T-C-L) was a child predator.
I found him chasing teen and preteen male children and contacting them off-wiki on other sites after at least one parent had forbidden their child from talking to Demiurge1000.

There is no doubt that Demiurge was banned for child protection reasons. None.

Kiefer was banned because he wouldn't shut up about it when the wiki-l33t didn't want a public spectacle about child molesters grooming children on the wiki talk pages.

Keep in mind that Demiurge1000 was regularly working on JimboStalk to remove 'troublesome' posters ... with Jimbo's approval.
He was also instrumental in welcoming new, young users and was in several new users greeting areas.

Also keep in mind that admins, ARBCOM and the WMF, especially Sue Garder and Lila Tretikov, had been warned, repeatedly and vehemently, about this guy's behavior for years with no noticeable effect.

Demiurge was a protected player on en.wp right up until they banned him.

[Moral Hazard]

had a look at Kiefer.Wolfowitz's userpage btw, and noting he's banned by ARBCOM, then looking over his contributions and interests and qualifications and.....wonder what the qualifications of those on ARBCOM who banned him are, and what he was banned for.

He levied on Wiki none-too-subtle intimations of pedophilia about another editor, an individual who was subsequently banned into oblivion by San Francisco for unstated reasons.

It wasn't really what he said, but rather how he said it and where. He made himself an annoyance to the wrong people and he was made to go away.

It would be interesting to see if all is forgiven now that he has implicitly been vindicated.

RfB

Tim and the rest of Wikipediocracy agree to disagree.

Please read what I wrote. The core issue is that responsible organizations ban certain behavior that allows pedophiles to operate, while Wikipedia did not and does not. As Kudpung bragged before the last election, he is free to continue to have private meetings and private communications with minors. Like many Wikipediots, Kudpung has his head up his ass, but I don't think anybody has ever raised a concern about his behavior towards minors.

The banned editor was also cultivating stupid boys and young men for political purposes. When I commented on that, I was blocked.
Then the heroes at Wikipediocracy forced me to stop denying a pattern of behavior by the banned editor, which I thought was just a kinky interest in spanking (which I attributed to his apparently being British), which educated me about child-protection issues and about Wikipedia.

[Randy from Boise]

There is no doubt that Demiurge was banned for child protection reasons. None.

Kiefer was banned because he wouldn't shut up about it when the wiki-l33t didn't want a public spectacle about child molesters grooming children on the wiki talk pages.

I think we can agree on that beyond any doubt whatsoever. Bear in mind that KW never explicitly made the pedophilia charge, but hinted at it disingenuously, nor did WMF ever provide an official explanation for the ban. But we know what KW was charging and why Demiurge was banned...

RfB

[Moral Hazard]

The other issue was Ironholds, whose long misogynistic record was revealed from IRC logs, by the heroes of this site (and some off it). Wikipedia needed to deal with an administrator and WMF employee using its IRC channel to discuss hurting women.

Perhaps now, I would have viewed it as cliches from on-line gaming boys who like to shock each other. Sordid.

[Randy from Boise]

The other issue was Ironholds, whose long misogynistic record was revealed from IRC logs, by the heroes of this site (and some off it). Wikipedia needed to deal with an administrator and WMF employee using its IRC channel to discuss hurting women.

Perhaps now, I would have viewed it as cliches from on-line gaming boys who like to shock each other. Sordid.

Yes, this also. This struck me as a histrionic response to hyperbole rather than an understandable taking an issue to 11 with respect to an actual threat of bodily harm. One's mileage may vary.

RfB

[Vigilant]

The other issue was Ironholds, whose long misogynistic record was revealed from IRC logs, by the heroes of this site (and some off it). Wikipedia needed to deal with an administrator and WMF employee using its IRC channel to discuss hurting women.

Perhaps now, I would have viewed it as cliches from on-line gaming boys who like to shock each other. Sordid.

Yes, this also. This struck me as a histrionic response to hyperbole rather than an understandable taking an issue to 11 with respect to an actual threat of bodily harm. One's mileage may vary.

RfB

Either interpretation should have led directly to Oliver Keyes being frog marched to the door with his desk contents in a box.

That it didn't is indicative of just how poorly the WMF handles HR issues.

[Earthy Astringent]

Ironic that editors complain about the editing "workplace" being toxic dump of misogyny, when the real workplace of the WMF gets a free pass.

BTW, I'm not saying user space on Wikipedia isn't all those things and more. But I wouldn't know now because 95% my edits are now done via ip and I pointedly ignore everyone (unless I'm trolling a dickhead).

[SB_Johnny]

I would be thankful for this clear demonstration that the "community" is not enfranchised, if only the message was received. Even our own RfB seems to be missing the moral of the fable.

Maybe they'll fiigure it out before the next trustee election?

[Moral Hazard]

One moral:
Lila's WMF has banned a handful of editors who may seem to present a threat to children or who have otherwise earned global bans for other behavior, after the English Wikipedia fails to act after being warned about definite patterns of risky behavior by multiple persons.

[Larkin]

There is no doubt that Demiurge was banned for child protection reasons. None.

Kiefer was banned because he wouldn't shut up about it when the wiki-l33t didn't want a public spectacle about child molesters grooming children on the wiki talk pages.

I think we can agree on that beyond any doubt whatsoever. Bear in mind that KW never explicitly made the pedophilia charge, but hinted at it disingenuously, nor did WMF ever provide an official explanation for the ban. But we know what KW was charging and why Demiurge was banned...

RfB

Of course I support the ban as I think it's clear that Demiurge was behaving inappropriately, but we ought to be cautious about bandying the p word around. Even if D wasn't grooming children and minors as a sexual predator, his behavior was still unacceptable.

I don't frankly know what the Foundation could have done more (or do more now). It might be that it needs to be more frank that (inevitably with all social media) there is a problem. It might help if it stopped dissimulating the image of Wikipedia as a resource for children (Tretikova at her recent presentation discussed in one of the threads here, the "what Wikipedia means to me" 15th anniversary publicity drive).

[Moral Hazard]

Adults should not be collecting child pen-pals and discuss meeting them on other internet sites or (at least once) tell a minor that he will visit his town.
Sane organizations have rules against such meetings, even electronic.
Nobody sane and awake cares about whether such meetings are innocent or not.

Whether any organization should welcome an internet weirdo having an interest in spanking children and in opposing age-restrictions on sexual material is a related question.

[Randy from Boise]

Ah, the vigilante mentality can be so pure.

And it is so dangerous...

RfB

[Vigilant]

Ah, the vigilante mentality can be so pure.

And it is so dangerous...

RfB

[SB_Johnny]

Here we go.

I sooooo want to see Jimmy reply to this now, though it's almost as good to imagine him squirming.

For those who haven't had the pleasure of an email correspondence with Jimmy where you simply couldn't be convinced, he eventually devolves into that guy from the apocalypse movie who says "you don't want to die a virgin, do ya?"

[tarantino]

It is absurd that the inside baseball schmoozing insider buttkissers of the "chapters" have appointed set-asides instead of standing election with other candidates for community decision. That's an absolute minimum change that needs to be made with the structure of the Board.

The real change would be to go back to the membership structure that Alex Roshuk created for the organization in the first place, with dues-paying members who would elect a majority of the board in the same way that most other non-profit organizations elect their governing bodies. But Der Jimbo didn't like those bylaws, undermined them from the day they took effect, and surreptitiously amended them to change the WMF into a non-member organization in (I believe) 2007 in order to ensure that nobody would ever undercut Jimbo's authority to exercise control the organization.

Foundation employee Adamw has recently posted Wikimedia Foundation membership controversy on meta.

This page is part of an open-source investigation into the Wikimedia Foundation's status as a membership organization.

It's possible that donors, active and past Wikimedians still have a case for suing the Board for ownership and control of the Foundation, plus damages.

[Sockpuppet]

It is absurd that the inside baseball schmoozing insider buttkissers of the "chapters" have appointed set-asides instead of standing election with other candidates for community decision. That's an absolute minimum change that needs to be made with the structure of the Board.

The real change would be to go back to the membership structure that Alex Roshuk created for the organization in the first place, with dues-paying members who would elect a majority of the board in the same way that most other non-profit organizations elect their governing bodies. But Der Jimbo didn't like those bylaws, undermined them from the day they took effect, and surreptitiously amended them to change the WMF into a non-member organization in (I believe) 2007 in order to ensure that nobody would ever undercut Jimbo's authority to exercise control the organization.

Foundation employee Alexw has recently posted Wikimedia Foundation membership controversy on meta.

This page is part of an open-source investigation into the Wikimedia Foundation's status as a membership organization.

It's possible that donors, active and past Wikimedians still have a case for suing the Board for ownership and control of the Foundation, plus damages.

Membership organization? Like the old boys club?

[thekohser]

Foundation employee Alexw...

Adamw

[tarantino]

Foundation employee Alexw...

Adamw

Yes, I had Alex Roshuk on my mind. Perhaps a mod can edit the post.

I fixed it. --Zoloft

[Moral Hazard]

The discussion of the WMF's structure as a member organization (or not) deserves its own thread, methinks.

[lilburne]

Here we go.

I sooooo want to see Jimmy reply to this now, though it's almost as good to imagine him squirming.

For those who haven't had the pleasure of an email correspondence with Jimmy where you simply couldn't be convinced, he eventually devolves into that guy from the apocalypse movie who says "you don't want to die a virgin, do ya?"

Hmmm!

That is exactly the kind of behavior that led us to believe that he was not trustworthy. I don't trust him, the board didn't trust him, and he was not a proper person for a board where honesty and transparency are so incredibly important. It's as simple as that. Dreaming up some kind of wild "Google conspiracy theory" is silly. linkhttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =700407119[/link]

Yet we know that Google are involved in conspiracies linkhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk ... on_Geshuri[/link], criminal activity linkhttp://www.politico.com/story/2011/08/g ... eds-061989[/link], and that they involve wikipedia in their deceptions linkhttps://www.quora.com/Wikimedia-Fundrai ... nt/1546898[/link].

[Poetlister]

This page is part of an open-source investigation into the Wikimedia Foundation's status as a membership organization.

Only the WMF would try to crowdsource such a discussion!

[Sockpuppet]

This page is part of an open-source investigation into the Wikimedia Foundation's status as a membership organization.

Only the WMF would try to crowdsource such a discussion!

More like a rubber stamp committee.

[lilburne]

The Board is nothing more than a legally necessary manifestation of the community. But it stands outside of community control, controlled instead by Jimmy Wales and his clique.

Which means they could sell it off at anytime.

[Randy from Boise]

The Board is nothing more than a legally necessary manifestation of the community. But it stands outside of community control, controlled instead by Jimmy Wales and his clique.

Which means they could sell it off at anytime.

They could certainly sell it out at any time...

RfB

[lilburne]

They could certainly sell it out at any time...

They did that years ago.

[HRIP7]

Returning from Davos, Wales says,

Could someone please manually archive this page and could other people please not revert it? If there's something still to be said on the old threads, let's start a new one. I am hopeful that the archiving bot will start working again once we reduce the size of the page. Alternatively, I wonder if there is a 200 page limit or something. I don't have time to properly investigate!--Jimbo Wales (talk) 14:12, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

That was duly done.

So was there anything still to be said on the old threads? There are two things I remember off the top of my head. One outstanding question concerns Wales' earlier assurance that he was in favour of making the Knight Foundation grant documentation public.

"What sort of details do you want? I'll have to talk to others to make sure there are no contractural reasons not to do so, but in my opinion the grant letter should be published on meta. The Knight Grant is a red herring here, so it would be best to clear the air around that completely as soon as possible."

I enquired on the Wikipedia Weekly Facebook group whether that had actually happened:

This sounded reassuring, but is anyone aware of the grant letter and grant application actually having been published on Meta since then?

Asaf Bartov replied,

Asaf Bartov: They have not. Staff would be delighted to do so, given leave.
John Vandenberg: It shouldn't require approval. There should be a requirement that anything to be private should have an explicit documented reason why it cant be published.
Asaf Bartov: Perhaps. But that is not the status quo. So it does require approval.

The other matter concerns whether it's fine to publish the email Jimmy Wales sent to Doc James on Dec. 30, 2015. The surmise that no answer would ever be forthcoming from Wales on that matter has so far not been disconfirmed ...