Have you/will you donate to wikipedia?
Personally i'm pretty sick of their constant whining considering they have tons of dough stashed away
Have you/will you donate to wikipedia?
Ryder Martin
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
news.slashdot.org
upload.wikimedia.org
twitter.com
Christian Brooks
paying for fake info
Kevin Turner
No. Also, there's a close button, you know?
Jonathan Harris
What's fake on there?
Sebastian Jones
No. I know someone who did once and they send emails every year asking for more.
Parker Scott
No, wikipedia has a run away spending problem
Parker Morris
What's that saying where if something is overfunded it will expand to soak up the funds?
Julian Richardson
>paying for things that are free
Hunter Gomez
Ian Scott
WE WILL NEVER RUN ADS
WE WILL ONLY COVER HALF YOUR FUCKING SCREEN BEGGING FOR MONEY
Sebastian Foster
When I was young, I believed Wikipedia. But now I know only the content of featured articles can be trusted. Unpaid volunteer did not get access to Encyclopedia Britannica, old historical issues of New York Time etc... The donation money should be used to improve the quality of articles. I have no trust in Wikipedia.
Adam Nelson
It isn't as if the people who create anything of value, i.e. the article writers, are paid. Can't Jimmy Wales pay for his own three martini lunches?
Jacob Price
So where does all of the money go??
200+ employees, who do nothing of value.
Expensive office space in San Francisco.
Giving away money in the form of "grants" which produce nothing of value.
Carter Morales
Not lately but I have before
Xavier Richardson
aside from the obvious shitposts some pages are pretty dodgy since anyone can edit anything and a lot of stuff depends on the perspective, sometimes the history of the page and the discussions are pretty telling. Also some pages have a relatively different point of view depending on the language. Obviously the more closely related to politics it is, the worse it gets
Benjamin Barnes
>paying for propaganda
Cameron Robinson
There's a reason there are sources.
Xavier Gray
It's still there more or less. If you care about this issue, you can open a discussion on the relevant talk pages. Wikipedia has an open process and you can the debate the content in public.
This thread just inspired me to donate. Thanks OP.
Easton Lewis
the obvious marxist interpretation of anything related to history.
Mason Sullivan
The most recent audited accounts of the Wikimedia Foundation showed net assets of $92 million and revenue of $82 million. None of this money, incidentally, pays for writing or checking Wikipedia content – that's the job of unpaid volunteers – and only $2 million are spent on internet hosting every year.
upload.wikimedia.org
Andrew Sullivan
>300 employees
Gabriel Bennett
There's nothing wrong with that pic, other than maybe the need to add militant blacktivists to the "black power" article. It's a fact that "white pride" as a term has been mostly used by KKK larpers. There's nothing wrong with white heritage but this particular expression is fucked