In a word -- and bluntly -- it was stupid. My interview was exclusively with HR, and the interview went something along the lines of, "We're a great place to work at, but you don't really fit for $REASON." By the end of the interview, I had been told:
Despite the fact that it was a highly technical position, and that I'm now earning -- literally -- $50K more than they offered, it felt very much as if HR was making the call, which puzzled the heck out of me. If HR had already made up their mind, why did they even set up an interview? I have literally decades of experience doing things right up the alley of an SRE, four Fortune 500 companies under my belt, and I've been informed both by management and co-workers that I'm a pleasure to work with. All of which made the Wikimedia "process" rather surreal. At the least, I would have hoped to have spoken with a technical manager -- or, failing that, nobody at all. Instead, to have this semi-bizarre put-down interview thing. For example, I've been using Wikipedia since before it was Wikipedia ("NuPedia"), and stated this in my application documents. And yet I was repeatedly asked if I knew what Wikipedia was, if I had an account, etc. It felt rather condescending -- especially since I've installed Mediawiki at my past three companies. I've had many interviews in my 30 years in high tech, and this was one of the bottom three, irrespective of ensuing offer. Very, very disappointed.
In terms of technical stuff? None. See rant above.
The following metrics were computed from 1 interview experience for the Wikimedia Foundation Site Reliability Engineer role in United States.
Wikimedia Foundation's interview process for their Site Reliability Engineer roles in the United States is extremely selective, failing the vast majority of engineers.
Candidates reported having very negative feelings for Wikimedia Foundation's Site Reliability Engineer interview process in United States.