Propagate the model, not issues

(English) This is an essay. It expresses the opinions and ideas of some Wikimedians but may not have wide support. This is not policy on Meta, but it may be a policy or guideline on other Wikimedia projects. Feel free to update this page as needed, or use the discussion page to propose major changes.

Wikipedia's organization Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) should not propagate their viewpoints on any specific social, political or economic issues that is not directly related to Wikipedia's operation and instead only support and propagate its model of openness − transparency, open knowledge, open-source, commons-based peer production, crowdsourcing and public online participation as well as its associated culture.

Range

Propagating neutral information on topics of current social discussion and relevance that may appear to support a specific side or view may be due as long as it's not excessive. However this should only be done when paying attention to voices of concern so that it doesn't become excessive, incompatible with the Wikipedia community or one-sided in the information disseminated. The best way to avoid the latter would be to, if at all, only propagate pages that a) inform about all major views on the issue b) and neutrally & appropriately so and c) are about the entire broad issue and not a selected subportion of it.

Why this matters

We, including and especially the WMF, need to remain neutral on Wikipedia-unrelated issues when speaking on behalf of Wikipedia so that we don't become hostile to certain groups of editors with certain differing views so that Wikipedia can be unbiased and incorporate all major viewpoints. This as well as caution on what is stated under Wikipedia's name is also important for remaining to be regarded as neutral and unbiased by the public at large as well as the groups with differing views on issues. These groups may then not only give Wikipedia more credibility they may also be more open to learning about the relativity and truthfulness of their points as well as learning about their opponents points (all of which leading to more constructive argumentation). It is also important for the financial support of readers of the site who may happen to have differing views.

Wikipedia should have at its goal to be a neutral but inclusive source of uncensored information with any public outreach or statements made only under consideration of the preservation of this public image.

Examples of issues that are related to Wikipedia's operations

The following are a few examples of issues that are related to the proper operation of Wikipedia and necessary conditions for its creation and continuation:

Internet censorship
Online mass surveillance (see also: Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA)
Rights of non-profit organizations
Software and Internet-related laws (see also: Protests against SOPA and PIPA § Wikimedia community & policy.wikimedia.org/stopsurveillance)

Potential violations

Wikimedia Foundation joining the amicus brief that challenges US immigration and travel restrictions and several related statements
- Why: while restrictions on travel may obstruct WMF's operations, restrictions on immigration do not.
  Furthermore the amicus brief makes various points that are not made from Wikipedia's position (but American businesses) or are unrelated to its operation such as its point that the order makes it more difficult for the US to attract or deprive other countries of their brightest minds. And lastly statements have been made by the WMF such as "...and closing the doors to many refugees. It threatens our freedoms of inquiry and exchange, and it infringes on the fundamental rights of our colleagues, our communities, and our families" here. This statement is out of place for two reasons: a) WMF never has been and should not become an organization that fights against what it (or the WMF) perceives to be infringements of perceived fundamental rights and b) restrictions on immigration, with travel still being allowed, do not threaten freedom of Wikipedia-related inquiry and exchange

Signaturies

This page could feature a section for signatures of editors who agree with it.