After 21 years as a Wikimedia contributor, I consider myself a veteran Wikimedian. I have attended many Wikimedia conferences around the world, but Wikimania always feels special. They create incredible opportunities to meet fellow Wikimedians, listen, and learn. However, the highlight of the event for me this year was not the main conference itself, but a pre-conference event: the WikiWomen+ Summit, where I was also honored to give a talk.

During the icebreaker, we shared stories about the first articles we ever wrote and whether we had ever experienced the deletion of a biography about a woman we created. When the talks began, I learned more about the Celebrate Women Campaign and fell in love with its vision, which is deeply inspired by Wikimedia’s overall mission: “Imagine a world in which every single woman can freely share in the sum of all knowledge, and where representative information about all women and non-binary individuals is accessible to everyone, everywhere.”

Sukkoria’s presentations gave us a lot to think about in a short time, from what could potentially go wrong from a WikiWomen+ perspective to how we can responsibly integrate generative AI into wiki workflows.

Leila Zia from the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) gave a presentation about Wikipedia readers, revealing that women are underrepresented not only as editors but also as regular readers. I was surprised by this statistic: roughly 65% of readers are reported to be men. This was the first time I had seriously considered what we can do to encourage more women to become frequent Wikipedia readers. 

Among the many great tools and projects introduced at the summit, we were also introduced to a new Wiki Gender Stats tool. I was delighted by Natacha’s roleplay, which brilliantly illustrated what features were needed and why male editors with technical skills often struggle to understand and prioritize those needs. Her roleplay perfectly captured the moment when women decided to take charge:

“Now I want to be a woman in progress! I will design our own tool according to our own needs, doing it ourselves.”

In my presentation, I addressed how governance and editorial decisions on Wikimedia projects can have consequences far beyond individual content disputes. I shared my concerns about contributors, particularly women+, being blocked or banned because of off-wiki disputes rather than their actual editorial work, and discussed how this can affect both content neutrality and the health of our communities. I explored these questions further in my presentation, “How Editorial Decisions Reach Beyond Wikipedia”, which you can watch here.

Welcome to “Don’t Blink”! Every month we share public policy developments from around the world that shape people’s ability to participate in the free knowledge movement. In case you blinked last month, here are the most important advocacy topics that have kept the Wikimedia Foundation busy.

The Global Advocacy team works to advocate laws and government policies that protect the volunteer community-led Wikimedia model, Wikimedia’s people, and the Wikimedia movement’s core values. To learn more about us and the work we do with the rest of the Foundation: follow us on LinkedIn, X (formerly Twitter), and Bluesky; sign up for our quarterly newsletter or Wikimedia public policy mailing list; and visit our Meta-Wiki webpage.

________

Understanding online age verification and its impact on the Wikimedia projects

Over the past several years, lawmakers around the world have been passing a wide variety of legislation and regulations aimed to make using the internet safer for children. These laws differ in the kinds of platforms they target, the age ranges they intend to protect, and whether they apply to specific content, entire platforms, or even to devices. What they share in common, however, is the idea that minors should, in some way, have a different experience online than adults, whether that includes restricting access to certain features or types of content or banning them completely from using certain types of websites and services like social media.

This practice, called age gating, relies on a website or service host identifying and verifying the age of its users through a process called age verification. Age verification typically requires that a user, regardless of age, show a government ID and submit to a facial scan to prove that the ID is theirs. In fact, you may have already seen some of these requirements popping up on websites you use every day or have read headlines about users’ personally identifiable information (PII) being stolen. While the effectiveness of these laws remains to be seen, the Wikimedia Foundation has been raising concerns about how versions of these laws can impact important human rights like privacy, freedom of expression, and access to reliable information, as well as advocating that these laws be narrowly tailored to address some of the riskiest websites and services online. 

Explaining the basics of online age verification
[Read Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3 of our explainer blog post series]

To provide context on this complicated legal and technical shift in internet policy, the Foundation published a three-part blog series, which explains the history of age-based restrictions online, basic concepts and technological measures of age verification, and the specific types of laws repeated across many different government initiatives. 

In Part 1, we take you through an internet policy timeline, which explores how age verification and its various requirements to show different content depending on the users’ age have evolved over time. We also shed light on why the trend of child safety online has escalated the calls for age verification in recent years. In Part 2, we spell out the meaning of terms related to age verification and explain the technical processes behind complying with age verification laws. We also highlight how age gating on public interest educational content like the Wikimedia projects could impact the human rights of Wikimedia users, especially those of minors. In Part 3, we discuss the specifics of the types of platforms and content that these laws typically target, and highlight some of the public policy advocacy work we have done in the form of “friend-of-the-court” briefs related to challenges to certain state laws requiring age verification in the United States.

If you want to be informed about the recent developments around age verification regulations, as well as the potential effects these developments might have on your rights and freedoms online, this blog post series is a great place to start learning more.

Read Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3 of our online age verification explainer blog post series.

Contributing to a public consultation on the Brazil’s ECA Digital child safety regulation
[Learn more about our response in our blog post]

As we shared early this year, Brazil has joined the global conversation around child safety and age verification online by passing the Digital Statute of the Child and Adolescent (ECA Digital). The ECA Digital established a new framework for protecting minors in digital environments, and included a sweeping requirement that app stores and certain online platforms implement age verification mechanisms to show only content deemed appropriate for minors given their age. During the drafting of the law’s regulations, we submitted comments urging the Brazilian authorities to customize the application of these regulations proportionally to a platform’s risk level, and to consider an interpretation of the law that would exempt digital public goods entirely from the age verification requirements in order to protect crucial rights like freedom of expression and access to reliable information on the internet.

In July 2026, we responded to another public consultation: Brazil’s National Data Protection Authority (ANPD) solicited comments on their proposed guidelines about how to conduct age verification. In our submission, we explained that because the draft guidelines were too broad in their definition of social media, they could potentially end up capturing digital public goods like open-source software repositories, citizen science portals, and collaborative encyclopedic platforms such as Wikipedia as well.

Addressing this overbroad definition is important because, under the guidelines, platforms considered to be social media are assumed to be accessed by minors and, consequently, are required to perform age verification. If public interest projects are mistakenly defined as social media, they will be required to do the same. We suggested that the ANPD narrow their definition to focus on platforms with high-risk features, and even to go even further by creating a framework for digital public goods that recognizes their low-risk nature and that, accordingly, prevents them from being regulated the same as social media platforms.

Learn more about our response in our blog post.

Wikimedia’s value in conversations about artificial intelligence

The Foundation has illustrated how the explosion of artificial intelligence (AI) companies and services have impacted the Wikimedia projects. We have discussed the negative impact that web scraping to create AI training data has on our technical and human resources, shared how AI companies threaten the social contract behind free and open knowledge, and talked about the technical solutions we are employing to identify and counter this impact. While the vast increase of web scraping is one of the more urgent changes arising from AI’s influence on the internet landscape, there are many other ways that AI tools interact with the Wikimedia projects. The voice of the Foundation and volunteers can contribute significantly with its experience to conversations about maintaining information integrity, making sure that AI-generated content does not entrench existing knowledge gaps, and enabling community moderation so it can remain sustainable while dealing with an influx of synthetic content on the web. 

Sharing how Wikimedia safeguards reliable information at the UN Global Dialogue on AI Governance
[Learn more about why participation at the UN is important for our advocacy goals in our blog post]

Jan Gerlach (Public Policy Director) joined the first official session of the United Nations (UN) Global Dialogue on AI Governance to discuss the impact of AI web scraping on Wikipedia and the broader knowledge commons. The UN Global Dialogue on AI Governance was established by the UN General Assembly based on recommendations in the Global Digital Compact to provide a platform for governments, academics, technology companies, civil society, and other interested parties to come together to participate in open discussions about how AI should be governed and to share their best practices. In a panel titled “Safeguarding Reliable Information in the Age of AI: Finding Common Ground,” Jan shared the negative impacts that web scraping by AI tools have on the Wikimedia Foundation’s servers and resources. He shared how Wikipedia can serve as a “canary in the coal mine” for the digital commons as a whole, establishing an early warning when these valuable shared resources are put under strain by new technologies.

Leading up to the official session, the Global Dialogue also hosted several consultations in 2026 , including a discussion held by the Office of the UN High Commissioner on Human Rights (OHCHR) that the Foundation attended last May, and will host its next official session in May of next year, 2027. It is vital that civil society organizations like the Foundation are invited to participate in discussions like these in order to continue sharing how new technologies are impacting the online information ecosystem, especially open knowledge, and to work with UN Member States to determine how to best address these impacts and build a more sustainable future for the digital commons.

Learn more about why participation at the UN is important to our advocacy goals in our blog post.

Wikimania sessions showcased how the volunteer communities are considering the relation between the Wikimedia projects and AI
[Check out our blog post for public policy advocacy sessions at Wikimania and learn in Creative Commons’ blog post about their participation at the conference]

A popular topic at the 2026 Wikimania was the implications of a world that is rapidly adopting AI at scale. The conference, held in Paris, France, this year, began with a full Day Zero of advocacy-related sessions, including a Creative Commons (CC) salon, which celebrated 25 years of the organization and included several CC staff reflecting both on their beginnings there as well as new considerations AI presents to open licensing. 

Several sessions during the week also highlighted discussions about AI: from AI’s impact on creativity to what gets lost when data is scraped without important context, and from open legal and technical questions about AI to how we can best defend Wikipedia’s reliability in the age of rapid AI-generated content. Beyond the official schedule, a pre-conference event and several side events focused on AI were also organized alongside the conference. This wide variety of topics not only shows that developments in AI are top of mind in the Wikimedian communities, but also the depth of wisdom that open knowledge communities can share in relation to this new digital landscape.

Check out our blog post for public policy advocacy sessions at Wikimania and learn in Creative Commons’ blog post about their participation at the conference.

Wikimedians denied a voice at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) for a sixth time
[Read our Foundation statement to learn how and why China has vetoed the Foundation’s observer status once again]

For a sixth time, the Foundation applied to become a permanent observer at WIPO and was excluded due to a single veto from China. Despite 25 years of experience hosting one of the world’s most visited open knowledge platforms and navigating complicated and innovative copyright issues on a global scale, and even counting with the positive endorsements of many other Member States, a global community of 250,000 volunteer contributors was denied a seat at the table where the future of intellectual property policy is decided.

Even more worryingly, this year the denial was not only spurred by misrepresentations about the accuracy and neutrality of Wikimedia’s community-driven policies and practices, but also seems to signal a broader trend in suppressing legitimate participation by civil society, as evidenced by the recent cancellation of the world’s largest digital rights conference, RightsCon. The Foundation will continue to pursue accreditation at WIPO and advocate the representation of digital public goods in the world’s most influential intellectual property policy forum. 

Read our Foundation statement to learn how and why China has vetoed the Foundation’s observer status once again.

Check out the latest issue of the Global Advocacy quarterly newsletter!
[Read the newsletter and subscribe for quarterly updates]

The eleventh issue of our Global Advocacy newsletter looks closely a the topic of online age verification, launching our three part blog series on the topic with an introduction from Stan Adams (Public Policy Specialist for North America) and Amanda Jardine (Lead Counsel) explaining the value of pseudonymity online to freedom of expression and how both are threatened by these new regulations.

The newsletter also contains a cautiously optimistic update on the Foundation’s category status under the United Kingdom’s Online Safety Act (UK OSA), which will determine Wikipedia’s duties under that law. We also celebrated the Foundation joining the Digital Public Good Alliance (DPGA), highlighted a recent New York Times interview with Bernadette Meehan (CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation), and shared news about the Open the Knowledge Journalism Awards recipients and the cancellation of RightsCon.

Read more in the newsletter and subscribe for quarterly updates!

________

“Don’t Blink” is for you! Please take one minute to complete our survey about how our monthly public policy advocacy recap meets your needs and reflects your interests. Thank you for reading, every month, about how the open knowledge movement shapes discussions and decisions about the future of the internet!

________

Follow us on LinkedIn, X (formerly Twitter), and Bluesky; sign up for our quarterly newsletter to receive updates; join our Wikipedia public policy mailing list; and visit our Meta-Wiki webpage. We hope to see you there!

For over ten years, Wikimedia communities and associations in Europe have been working together to improve the legal framework for free knowledge in Europe – advocacy at the European level and participation in shaping policy at the national level go hand in hand. Copyright reform, the AI ​​Act, and the Digital Services Act (DSA) are just a few examples that have occupied us in recent years. 

Claudia Garád, Wikimedia Österreich’s Executive Director, is an active supporter of the European idea within the Wikiverse. Since 2022, Claudia has served as the volunteer President of Wikimedia Europe – a European umbrella organisation in Brussels, shaped and managed by over 30 European Wikimedia associations, and acting as a strong voice for public-interest-oriented internet policy at the European level. 

Claudia, what exactly does Wikimedia Europe do? 

Our aim is to be a kind of network hub in the international Wikiverse, facilitating effective exchange and cooperation between Wikimedia organizations. Decentralized cooperation is a major strength of our volunteer communities. In Europe, we demonstrate that Wikimedia organizations also have this way of working in their DNA. Especially in these politically and socially challenging times, when civic engagement is increasingly restricted everywhere, we can only survive and exert real influence as a collective. 

Wikimedia Europe is therefore a shared platform for collaborative work on European legislative processes that impact Wikimedia projects. It also supports collaborative fundraising activities for joint projects and skills development and transfer. This happens particularly in the areas of advocacy and fundraising, but also beyond. 

Why is international digital policy important for an affiliate such as Wikimedia Austria? 

First and foremost, it’s about the digital infrastructure on which everything is built: For Wikipedia, other Wikimedia projects, or our ÖsterreichWiki to function at all, we need an open, free, and globally functioning internet. Without interoperability and open standards, these projects would not be possible. European and international digital policy, therefore, determines very concretely whether free knowledge remains accessible to everyone and under what conditions our communities can operate. 

Furthermore, national legislation in this area is largely based on European regulations, which are usually designed with large, commercial platforms and social media in mind. Non-commercial, public service digital projects are often not given a voice and cannot lobby to the same extent as multi-billion-dollar corporations. Through Wikimedia Europe, we have the opportunity to pool and amplify the activities and resources of individual members and thus counteract this imbalance. 

Last but not least, it’s also about transparent political decision-making processes: Digital policy doesn’t just affect technical or economic developments, but directly impacts how we live together as a society. After all, we use digital platforms for consumption and communication, we form our opinions online, we work with digital tools, and so on. Therefore, we advocate for the structural integration of organizations representing civil society into decision-making processes in Austria and Europe: Politics, business, science, and civil society should work together transparently on solutions. 

What is your role at Wikimedia Europe? 

During the founding phase, I initially served as president on the interim board to prepare the organization for its spin-off, and then in 2025 I was elected to the first “official” board in the same role. My responsibilities include representing the association externally—although this has now been largely delegated to the managing director, Anna Mazgal, in day-to-day operations. In addition, I handle governance and HR matters, as well as risk management within the association, and act as a liaison to the global Wikimedia movement beyond Europe. Last year, together with the board, employees and a project group of representatives from the member organizations, we also developed our first integrated multi-year strategy. 

What does Wikimedia Europe mean to you personally? 

Jacques Delors, former President of the European Commission and architect of European integration, used to say: “Never choose between being an optimist or a pessimist. The only choice you can make is to be an activist.” 

My volunteer role as President of Wikimedia Europe gives me the opportunity to be an activist in two projects that have been formative for me personally and represent, in my opinion, the most wonderful experiments in human history: Wikipedia and the European Union. Both are examples of how people can achieve the previously unimaginable when they consistently prioritize trust and cooperation. This gives me courage, confidence, and a sense of self-efficacy, even on dark days when I feel the world is increasingly falling apart. 

To learn more about WMEU visit our page on Meta-wiki

Check the WMEU public policy blog to follow the latest developments in our public policy work in Europe

Peter Zlabinger is a Communications Advisor at Wikimedia Österreich and his job is to explain the ins and outs of the Wikiverse to our various audiences and stakeholder groups. In EU advocacy two complex universes meet – the policy making of the European Union and the Wikimedia Movement. Wikimedia Österreich has been an integral part of Wikimedia advocacy in Europe. In this interview Peter explores what makes advocacy so exciting but also important from an Austrain but also global movement perspective.

Before joining the On‑Wiki Skills mentorship program, my engagement with Wikimedia projects was mostly as a reader. I was curious about open knowledge but unfamiliar with how data works or how contributors actively build and maintain Wikimedia projects.

Through the mentorship, I was introduced to Wikimedia as a collaborative ecosystem that offers structured ways of organizing and connecting knowledge. The learning curve was initially challenging especially understanding items, properties, statements, and references but with guidance from mentors and hands‑on practice, these concepts gradually became clearer.

Skill Acquired

During the training, I developed skills in sourcing and referencing information and understanding structured data. These experiences changed how I view knowledge creation and reinforced the idea that learning continues beyond formal lessons.

Some of my image uploads

Participating in practical exercises and guided contributions helped build my confidence and showed me that I could engage meaningfully with a global open‑knowledge communication.

My Gratitude

I am grateful to the Wikimedia community, mentors, and program organizers for their support and encouragement. Completing the mentorship marked a new beginning for me, and I look forward to continuing to explore and contribute to open knowledge

There was a time when Wikipedia was the go-to source for information and one of the most trusted tools for research across the world. From students and journalists to researchers and everyday internet users, millions relied on the platform for quick and accessible knowledge. However, as technology continues to evolve, the way people consume information has also changed.

Today, Wikipedia faces growing competition from emerging technologies such as Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools and social media platforms, which now shape how many people search for and engage with information online. As a result, the platform has experienced a decline in page views over the years, raising important questions about its future relevance and visibility in the digital age.

To address these concerns, about 100 Wikimedian affiliates, volunteers, and external experts gathered in Frankfurt am Main from 30 January to 1 February 2026, for the Wikimedia Futures Lab event organised by the Wikimedia movement. The Futures Lab serves as a space for research, experimentation, and forward-thinking conversations on the future of free knowledge.

At a time when technology is rapidly transforming the internet and information-sharing, the event provided an opportunity for participants to reflect on how Wikipedia can continue to remain relevant, visible, and trusted in an increasingly digital and AI-driven world.

From the attendees

The conversations and ideas shared during the event formed the AWW Voices Podcast episode “Can Wikipedia Evolve with the Digital Age?”. In this episode, host Oluwapelumi Aina joined by Ruby D Brown, Co-Founder of African Wiki Women, Tochi Precious, Language Advocate and Co-Founder of the Igbo User Group, and Olubusola Afolabi, Community Engagement Lead at Free Knowledge Africa. 

Having attended the Wikimedia Futures Lab event, the guests shared their experiences, reflections, and key takeaways from the discussions held in Frankfurt. 

“The world around us is changing really fast. When you think about how people trust information online, AI-generated media, new laws, and shifting technologies, it becomes important to understand how these trends affect us as the Wikimedia community,” says Tochi.

Wikipedia vs Digital Age

Despite technological advancement, Wikipedia, once regarded as one of the most trusted digital information platforms, has seen a decline in page views since 2016 as more people turn to AI tools for information. However, it is important to recognise that many AI systems are trained using content from platforms like Wikipedia.

“For example, when you search for something on Google, the AI overview provides a summary alongside references. Very few people actually click on the Wikipedia link for the longer version. This shows that people are still consuming Wikipedia content, but AI tools now act as middlemen,” explains Olubusola.

According to her, this shift means Wikipedia can no longer rely solely on users visiting the platform directly. Instead, it must adapt to changing online habits and find ways to bring information closer to the spaces where audiences already spend their time.

She adds that Wikipedia must adapt by meeting audiences where they already are, bringing information directly to the platforms people use instead of expecting them to always visit the main website.

The solution

The rise of AI and social media has also changed how people consume information. Many users now prefer short-form content over long-form reading because of shrinking attention spans. Since Wikipedia is traditionally a long-form platform, there is growing pressure for it to evolve alongside these changing habits.

For many younger internet users, information is no longer consumed through lengthy articles alone. Videos, creators, podcasts, and short-form explainers are increasingly becoming the preferred way to learn and engage online.

“People are moving away from institution-based information and increasingly relying on personalities. They want direct interaction, and video content makes information easier to consume. As Wikimedia, we need to pay attention to these shifts so we can meet people where they are,” says Ruby.

The Dilemma

Wikimedia exists because of the volunteers who edit and write the content on the platform. While keeping up with technological change is necessary, the movement also faces the challenge of ensuring that technology does not overshadow the human element that has always been at the centre of Wikimedia projects.

As conversations around AI continue to grow, many community members believe the focus should remain on supporting contributors rather than replacing them.

Last year, the Wikimedian community launched its AI Strategy, which clearly showed that AI should not replace the human writers and editors but rather support their work.