Talk:Wikimedia Foundation bylaws

Disciplinary Board

the Disciplinary Board mentioned under "Chair" is mentioned nowhere else and seems to be out of the picture now; perhaps it should be removed from the bylaws. +sj+ 16:48, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Why? Not everything in the bylaws has been done yet. We don't have a treasurer either, though we will soon -- there's no need to just remove them because they haven't been created yet. Angela 18:12, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Well, the role of the treasurer is well-defined. The Treasurer shall review the financial operations of the organization and advise with the Executive Secretary on financial matters; make financial reports to the Board of Trustees at regular and special meetings; and perform such other duties as assigned by the Chair or the Board of Trustees. The Disciplinary Board is mentioned in passing, with no definition, under a section about the role of the chair. +sj+ 22:29, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Proofread copy

Incorporating as many of the [October changes] as I could, fixing typos and grammatical mistakes and ambiguities, correcting out-of-place terminology. Changes were tracked with Track Changes in MS Word; please go over them one by one. +sj | Translate the Quarto | + 22:07, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

• WMF-bylaws-proofread.doc

Thanks. Your changes can also be seen in this diff. A totally unnaproved draft update is at User:Angela/Wikimedia Foundation bylaws new draft which incorporates those changes. Angela 09:57, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Approved changes

Changes have been made to the following sections:

1. Wikimedia Foundation bylaws#A. CONTRIBUTING ACTIVE MEMBERSHIP:
2. Wikimedia Foundation bylaws#B. VOLUNTEER ACTIVE MEMBERSHIP:
3. Wikimedia Foundation bylaws#Section 2.1. MEMBER REPRESENTATIVES.

These changes were approved in a meeting of the whole Board on 7 June, 2005. The changes reflect that the next election will not recognise any difference in role of the two elected Trustees, and that the election terms will be for 2 years rather than 1. Red text below indicates new text.

In addition to these two changes, a more modified version of the bylaws at [1] was informally approved pending legal review.

Angela 13:36, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"it's"->"its"

Could we please have all instances of "it's" in this document changed to "its"? I realize that it's a minor grammatical quibble, but those are what I do best. :) - jredmond 20:15, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You're absolutely correct about "it's". Its place is not here. ;) Bjarte 22:10, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

But Bjarte, if you correct its, its are no more "copy of original version", I pointed out. --Aphaia | Translate Election | ++ 22:40, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The current version is a work in progress, and is already different from the original. Anthere

So the real, official version should also be updated as soon as possible to reflect correct usage of the possessive form of it, viz "its" rather than "it's". It's just as wrong as writing "he's" instead of "his", or "she's" instead of "her(s)", and is a mistake that should be avoided in an official document from an encyclopedia institution! :) I suppose the "official" document needs to be updated on all the other issues, too. Bjarte 11:34, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Nod. We had a board meeting early june to discuss bylaws update. We need legal approval for some of the changes, and Jimbo has on his agenda to contact a lawyer for that matter. The bylaws will be changed as soon as validated. See User:Angela/Wikimedia Foundation bylaws new draft Anthere

Examination of bylaws?!?

Please see [2], somebody has in mind to threaten sysops and use the bylaws to have them revoked. Is it any serious? I don't really understand all that stuff, but this guy is really becoming annoying. (Should I post this on juriwiki?) Kipmaster 13:20, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Balance of power

For future versions of the bylaws, can I suggest that there be more elected members of the board than non-elected members of the board? As it is now, the non-elected members have the balance of power, and so the only time that the elected members (and by extension, the community) has any say in a decision is when the non-elected members disagree. Given that the non-elected members are apparently acquaintances from before Wikipedia, this makes the whole election process rather meaningless. I realise that it may be a big step for the non-elected members to put complete trust in the community, but I think that Wikipedia is living proof that this approach can work. Can I suggest 4 elected + 3 non elected? A1kmm 03:11, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Definition of chair

"The Chair shall be the chief elected officer of the corporation". That isn't really very clear. Elected by who? The board? Perhaps this should be cleared up? A1kmm 03:11, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

right now, it is self appointed. Ant

New bylaws discussion

bylaws update

Typographical error

The last article should be numbered IX and not XIX LouisBB 22:09, 10 November 2006 (UTC) This does not occur in the update LouisBB 22:19, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Issue numbering

I suggest that the original issue of the Wikimedia Foundation bylaws be designated Issue 01 and clearly marked as such on the title page. If any alteration should deem necessary then this number should increase and the forthcoming Issue should be designated Issue 02, etc. Apart from dispelling confusion this would ensure that Translators translate the latest issue.

As further suggestion, accounting with the possibility that writing an amended issue may be delegated, to a Board Member, for instance, the name of its Author should also appear on the title page, together with the name of the person (Chairman/Chairman Emeritus) who approved it, and the Date of Issue.

Finally: Whilst ensuring that every translation is marked with the current statement over the sole legal validity of its English version, the translation of the bylaws, together with other public (official) organisation documents of the Wikimedia Foundation should be encouraged. LouisBB 22:09, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikimedia Articles of Incorporation (United States)

Does anyone have a link to the Articles of Incorporation? Thanks, Tisane 21:20, 17 March 2010 (UTC)