Hundreds of prolific Wikipedia editors are threatening to go on strike | The VergeSkip to main contentThe homepageThe VergeThe Verge logo.The VergeThe Verge logo.TechReviewsScienceEntertainmentAIPolicyNotificationsNotificationsHamburger Navigation ButtonThe homepageThe VergeThe Verge logo.NotificationsNotificationsHamburger Navigation ButtonNavigation DrawerThe VergeThe Verge logo.Login / Sign UpcloseCloseSearchTechExpandAmazonAppleFacebookGoogleMicrosoftSamsungBusinessSee all techReviewsExpandSmart Home ReviewsPhone ReviewsTablet ReviewsHeadphone ReviewsSee all reviewsScienceExpandSpaceEnergyEnvironmentHealthSee all scienceEntertainmentExpandTV ShowsMoviesAudioSee all entertainmentAIExpandOpenAIAnthropicSee all AIPolicyExpandAntitrustPoliticsLawSecuritySee all policyGadgetsExpandLaptopsPhonesTVsHeadphonesSpeakersWearablesSee all gadgetsVerge ShoppingExpandBuying GuidesDealsGift GuidesSee all shoppingGamingExpandXboxPlayStationNintendoSee all gamingStreamingExpandDisneyHBONetflixYouTubeCreatorsSee all streamingTransportationExpandElectric CarsAutonomous CarsRide-sharingScootersSee all transportationFeaturesVerge VideoExpandTikTokYouTubeInstagramPodcastsExpandDecoderThe VergecastVersion HistoryNewslettersArchivesStoreVerge Product UpdatesSubscribeFacebookThreadsInstagramYoutubeRSSThe VergeThe Verge logo.Hundreds of prolific Wikipedia editors are threatening to go on strikeNotificationsNotificationsComments DrawerNotificationsCommentsLoading commentsGetting the conversation ready...ReportCloseReportPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All ReportNewsCloseNewsPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All NewsTechCloseTechPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All TechHundreds of prolific Wikipedia editors are threatening to go on strikeAfter the Wikimedia Foundation abruptly dissolved a beloved team of engineers, Wikipedia’s volunteers are angry — and discussing how they can push back.by Mia SatoCloseMia SatoFeatures Writer, The VergePosts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All by Mia SatoMay 29, 2026, 12:00 PM UTCLinkShareGift Image: The VergeMia SatoCloseMia SatoPosts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All by Mia Sato is features writer with five years of experience covering the companies that shape technology and the people who use their tools.Wikipedia is one of the last bastions of trust on the internet. But last week, volunteer editors and contributors were alarmed to hear that a small but important team of engineers at the nonprofit that supports it had been laid off. The layoffs didn’t just threaten to sever an important link between the Wikimedia Foundation and its community — they also raised concerns that the WMF was engaging in union-busting. After days of heated discussion, some Wikipedians are ready to support a strike. What that even looks like on a platform where creators mostly aren’t being paid is a different question.On May 20th, the WMF said it was disbanding the Community Tech team, a group of five engineers and one manager who are among WMF’s paid staff. The team was a bridge between the foundation and Wikipedia’s army of volunteers. The team developed tools and features that contributors use every day: things like plagiarism detectors, dark mode, or chart and graph tools. Editors and former foundation employees describe it as an approachable group — somewhere volunteers could turn if they needed help, or to have their voice heard.Even so, this system could get backlogged. The WMF acknowledged that the process of responding to community requests for features and tools was not working perfectly, and said that having a centralized team was “leading to frequent bottlenecks and delays.” So going forward, that work would be distributed among multiple teams instead of through a centralized Community Tech team.“Why aren’t you backtracking like hell right now?”The reaction from the community was immediate and negative. Longtime contributors demanded the reinstatement of team and changes to the way the wishlist, a log of new features and tools the community requests, was run. Others suspected an ulterior motive. In recent months, Wikimedia staff had announced their intent to unionize, and some suggested the foundation was specifically laying off staff involved in the union drive. The breakup of the Community Tech team was also not the first instance of shocking, sudden departures. The union Wiki Workers United, which has not yet been recognized, declined a request for an interview.Jimmy Wales, a cofounder of Wikipedia, argued with contributors on the site’s discussion pages, saying it was “time to get serious about meeting community needs,” and assuring volunteers that there would still be dedicated staff working on the wishlist. Volunteers did not find it comforting.“If it’s not about the money, it’s not about the union, why aren’t you backtracking like hell right now?” says Hannah Clover, an editor and former Wikimedian of the Year. “Even Jimmy is trying to pass this off as somehow listening to the community, and that’s infuriating.”In an email to The Verge, Nadee Gunasena, chief of staff at the Wikimedia Foundation, said that the restructuring was based on internal assessments dating back to September 2025. Gunasena said the restructuring will ensure that volunteer requests will be fulfilled by a variety of teams with expertise in different areas, and that it will seek to place the six Community Tech employees in other roles; if none are found, they’ll be laid off next month. Gunasena also denied that WMF has terminated any staff for union activities. If union supporters recruit enough staff to call for a vote — which hasn’t yet been requested — “we respect the rights of all eligible staff to vote, and if the majority of eligible staff vote in favor of representation, we will proceed to negotiate in good faith,” Gunasena said.The relationship between the Wikimedia Foundation and the volunteers that maintain Wikipedia had been improving consistently, says Femke Nijsse, a volunteer contributor — until the layoffs. Now, Nijsse says, it feels like the relationship is moving in the opposite direction.“The wishlist has been broken for two, three years, and the response has not been to fix that, but to fire the people that are still making it sort of work,” she says. Nijsse has suggested a way to overhaul the process that has unsurprisingly prompted extensive discussion among volunteers. At the top of the list is to reinstate the Community Tech team.RelatedWikipedia is under attack — and how it can surviveWikipedia bans AI-generated articlesBoth editors and former employees worry that the work done by the Community Tech team will fall by the wayside without dedicated staff. One former foundation employee, who asked not to be named in order to speak freely, told The Verge that several of the employees on the disbanded team were “one-of-a-kind developers who know segments of the tech stack that no one knew.”“This follows a pattern of breaking up community-facing teams with the idea that now everyone’s going to be responsible for it,” they say. “And what happens every time is no one’s responsible for it, and then it gets neglected.”Tamzin Hadasa Kelly, another volunteer editor, said in a message to The Verge that it was clear immediately that the community was angry. Kelly created a petition in solidarity with the union in which volunteers are saying they are willing to engage in collective action — potentially even an editors strike — if WWU asked them to. It’s since been signed by more than 700 editors, most from Wikipedia’s English-language site, who are collectively responsible for writing tens of thousands of articles and making nearly 10 million edits. “The goal was not to do some performative stunt or just turn this into a community vs. WMF power struggle, but to put the power in the hands of the people who need it, which is WWU,” Kelly said.A strike would likely not happen unless WWU called for one, and there’s no clear timeline for this. For now, the volunteer community is rapidly signing on to the petition, and will need to hammer out what a strike would look like via Wikipedia’s consensus-based guiding decision-making process. Some proposed actions don’t necessarily impact Wikipedia’s content. Contributors have discussed measures like blocking banners calling for donations to the WMF, which could cut into the foundation’s funds.Routine vandalism, spam, errant sentences, and other less urgent rule-breaking would go unmoderatedThe version of a strike proposed by Kelly, however, would call on editors to cease any activity on Wikipedia other than to remove the most egregious examples of abuse, like the posting of personal information, harassment, or adding fabricated and unsourced information about living people. Routine vandalism, spam, errant sentences, and other less urgent rule-breaking would go unmoderated. Pages might go blank, or quickly become outdated, says Nijsse.The effects of any kind of work stoppage could be profound, given how much weight the site carries on an internet filled with sludge. “Wikipedia can very quickly become dated if there’s not hundreds and hundreds of people updating it every day,” Nijsse says. “Breaking news is probably where you’ll see a bigger problem, where articles just don’t get created.” Wikipedia is also a major source for AI tools like Google’s AI Overviews or ChatGPT. If Wikipedia breaks, the internet breaks — and Wikipedia needs the unpaid editors, whose anger is quickly mounting.“There will be no Wikipedia. It will quickly deteriorate” if even a critical mass of volunteers stop working, says another former Wikimedia Foundation employee. “That would be a disaster, not for Wikipedia, but for humanity.”Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.Mia SatoCloseMia SatoFeatures Writer, The VergePosts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All by Mia SatoCreatorsCloseCreatorsPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All CreatorsLaborCloseLaborPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All LaborNewsCloseNewsPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All NewsReportCloseReportPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All ReportTechCloseTechPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All TechMost PopularMost PopularKia’s flagship EV has a battery problemThe golden age of handheld gaming is already overThey’ve finally made the Oura Ring smaller and lighterValve raises Steam Deck prices by more than $200What’s next for Microsoft’s Surface PCs?The Verge DailyA free daily digest of the news that matters most.Email (required)Sign UpBy submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.Advertiser Content FromThis is the title for the native adMore in ReportNintendo’s newest WarioWare is a weirdo smartphone appThe line between games and movies keeps getting blurrierKia’s flagship EV has a battery problemThe golden age of handheld gaming is already overThe Pope isn’t AGI-pilledNobody wants to tell me why they only listen to their own Suno slopNintendo’s newest WarioWare is a weirdo smartphone appAndrew WebsterMay 28The line between games and movies keeps getting blurrierAndrew WebsterMay 28Kia’s flagship EV has a battery problemTom WarrenMay 28The golden age of handheld gaming is already overSean HollisterMay 28The Pope isn’t AGI-pilledHayden FieldMay 27Nobody wants to tell me why they only listen to their own Suno slopTerrence O'BrienMay 26Advertiser Content FromThis is the title for the native adTop Stories8:03 AM UTCBlue Origin explosion is a major setback for NASA’s Moon plans and Amazon’s Starlink competitorTwo hours agoAdobe’s conversational AI agent is a mediocre design internMay 28The golden age of handheld gaming is already overMay 28Kia’s flagship EV has a battery problem5 minutes agoThis AI startup will clean your home for free to train future robots52 minutes agoThis is MSI’s new Claw 8 EX AI Plus gaming handheldThe VergeThe Verge logo.FacebookThreadsInstagramYoutubeRSSContactTip UsCommunity GuidelinesArchivesAboutEthics StatementHow We Rate and Review ProductsCookie SettingsTerms of UsePrivacy NoticeCookie PolicyLicensing FAQAccessibilityPlatform Status© 2026 Vox Media, LLC. All Rights ReservedNotifications DrawerThe VergeThe Verge logo.Sign in to see your notifications or create an account to join the conversation.Sign in

Volunteer editors and contributors to Wikipedia have expressed significant anger and are considering a strike following the Wikimedia Foundation’s decision to dissolve the Community Tech team, a group of engineers and managers who served as a crucial liaison between the foundation and the volunteer community. This action generated immediate friction because the team had developed essential tools and features used daily by editors, such as plagiarism detectors and dark mode capabilities, and the dissolution raised suspicions that the foundation was engaging in union-busting activity, especially given recent internal discussions within Wikimedia staff regarding unionization.

Longtime contributors demanded the reinstatement of the team and fundamental changes to the process by which the community requests for new features and tools, known as the wishlist, are managed. Some concerned that the focus on restructuring was motivated by internal organizational disputes rather than addressing community needs, leading to frustration among volunteers who felt that the foundation had failed to address the backlog and slow response times regarding community requests for features over several years.

In response to mounting dissatisfaction, some editors, including Tamzin Hadasa Kelly, initiated a petition demonstrating a willingness among over seven hundred editors to engage in collective action, potentially an editors' strike, if the Union Wiki Workers United made such a call. This action was framed not as a performative stunt, but as a means to place power in the hands of the community, which Kelly argued was necessary.

The proposed strike would focus on specific actions, advocating for the cessation of routine moderation and editing, such as addressing spam, errant sentences, and other less urgent rule-breaking, while allowing for the removal of serious abuses like personal information harassment or fabricated content. The rationale behind this proposed action was to prevent the deterioration of the site, as editors fear that a work stoppage could cause the site to quickly become dated, particularly concerning breaking news and the creation of new articles. This concern is amplified by the fact that Wikipedia serves as a major source for emerging technologies and AI tools, suggesting that the stability of the platform is vital for the broader internet. Furthermore, there is a fear that if a critical mass of volunteers ceased work, the site would deteriorate, which would have profound implications not just for Wikipedia, but for the broader information environment.

The Wikimedia Foundation, through its chief of staff Nadee Gunasena, justified the restructuring by citing internal assessments and aimed to distribute the fulfillment of volunteer requests across various specialist teams. Gunasena further stated that the foundation did not terminate staff for union activities and committed to negotiating in good faith if union supporters organized a vote among eligible staff. However, some volunteers, including former contributors, felt that the foundation’s response did not alleviate their concerns, suggesting a perceived shift in the relationship between the foundation and its volunteer base following these organizational changes.