Wikimedia Foundation elections/2022/Affiliates regional distribution for the Analysis Committee/ESEAP

This page supports ESEAP affiliate participation in the 2022 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees elections Analysis Committee.

The Movement Strategy and Governance team is available to support this process.

Ramzy and Vivien are the facilitators supporting this process for ESEAP affiliates.

Context

The affiliate organizations voted in this election in July to shortlist six candidates from the candidate pool. Each affiliate organization was allowed one vote. This selection used the Single Transferable Vote method. Affiliate organizations discussed the candidates the affiliate organization wanted to select. Candidates ranked candidates in order of preference.

The Affiliate Representatives were able to ask questions for the candidates to answer. Candidates published answers starting on June 24.

To assist with this selection process, an Analysis Committee was be formed.

Analysis Committee

For regional distribution of the Affiliates and facilitators who will be supporting it, see Affiliates regional distribution for the Analysis Committee

The Analysis Committee was formed from the affiliates during late April and May. The Analysis Committee was planned to be composed of 9 representatives of affiliates (including all chapters, user groups, and thematic groups) from regions across the movement. One each from:

• CEE (Central & Eastern Europe);
• ESEAP (East and Southeast Asia, and the Pacific region);
• Sub-saharan Africa;
• Latin America and the Caribbean;
• MENA (Middle East and North Africa);
• North America (USA and Canada);
• Northern and Western Europe;
• South Asia;
• plus one for thematic affiliates.

There was no representative from the Northern and Western Europe or South Asia.

The selection process to form the Analysis Committee was defined by the affiliates, with support of the Elections Committee and the Movement Strategy and Governance team as needed.

The Analysis Committee evaluated the candidates against the skills and diversity, equity and inclusion criteria shared by the Board of Trustees. The Analysis Committee used the statements the candidates answered on their application to rate the candidates. The Analysis Committee rated candidates with a gold/silver/bronze framework. This rating was used to provide input to the affiliate organizations when they planned their vote. The details of the evaluation of each candidate will not be shared.

After the six candidates were selected during the affiliate organization voting process, the ratings of each selected candidate were published to inform the community vote. This process aims to find the best balance between sharing useful information and minimizing unnecessary exposure of candidates.

Process

The Analysis Committee worked from late May to mid-June. Details of their meetings and process can be found on the Analysis Committee Discussions.

The Board Selection Task Force and the Elections Committee developed a set of evaluation criteria for the Analysis Committee to evaluate candidates against. The Analysis Committee members assessed candidates individually. Only two Movement Strategy and Governance facilitators who supported the process had access to these individual scores.

Procedure for determining the committee member

Similar to a previous regional process, the procedure should be defined by the affiliates in the table below.

This page was created to assist the affiliate coordination and should be edited collaboratively.

Region affiliates

Affiliate	Affiliate representative	Comments
Myanmar Wikimedia Community User Group
PhilWiki Community
Vietnam Wikimedians User Group
Wikimedia Australia
Wikimedia Community User Group Malaysia
Wikimedia Indonesia
Wikimedia Thailand
Wikimedia User Group of Aotearoa New Zealand	Giantflightlessbirds	The NZ group will withdraw from consideration, as we would rather see more diversity in the Analysis Committee.
Wikimedia Community User Group Hong Kong
Wikimedia Taiwan
Wikipedia Asian Month User Group
Paiwan Wikimedians User Group	iyumu	We are appreciated to get involved in this regional discussions/elections. We hope the ESEAP representative will support language diversity of the movement which can encourage more small communities to take part in.
위키미디어 한국 (Wikimedia Korea)

Users willing to be an Analysis Committee member

(Self nominations or nominated by others with nominee accepting)

• GDHFang

Please sign your username along with the affiliate name, and your view below to indicate whether you support the candidacy of GDHFang:

• Athikhun.suw (talk) 10:25, 18 May 2022 (UTC) (WMTH)
•  Support —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 21:43, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Endorsed on behalf of WMHKG. Michael (WMHKG) (talk) 02:18, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
•  Support. As a member who has been involved in the Wikimedia movement, she/he is a right candidate to represent ESEAP community in the Analysis Committee. Rachmat (WMID) (talk) 04:05, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
•  Support. Wikimedia Australia (WMAU) thanks User:GDHFang (Wikimedia Taiwan) for being willing to serve on the Analysis Committee, and we support her as the ESEAP nomination. AmandaSLawrence (talk) 02:39, 26 May 2022 (UTC)