Wikipedia requesting donations?!

They do a fundraiser every few months, nothing new under the sun

Keyword : Donation.

They probably earn more money through donations than they would if they were to put adverts up, then again, who really knows...

forlearnx said:

*note the part where they refer to themselves as "not for profit"

Click to expand...

Not for profit simply means the company does not pay dividends to its stockholders.

...Does anyone seriously have a problem with Wikipedia turning a profit?

I don't see any ads, do you see any ads? How are they sustaining themselves and their project, one of the most important endavours we as a species are undertaking: The most comprehensive, FREE, encyclopedia. This...ugh I don't even know what to say...I'd give them $10,000,000 myself right now if I could.

This isn't even the first time that donations come around. You've always been able to donate, but I'm sure there are people that didn't even know this.

It's good that they're putting up a donation request, which to me just reads like, "you know all those times we helped you with homework? why not give a little back?" ...And I have absolutely no problem with this.

Nothing in life is free.

Yes, lots of not for profit organizations, including charities, give their staff big paycheques.. They need to pay their staff!

actually we have to pay them for all the informations they collect because we are using their site to get informations...but instead they are just requesting for a donation only..that means give if you want to help not only their site but some other institutions..ive read that the site is helping some institutions too...

Wikipedia is a huge site that requires a lot of space. More space than most websites out there considering the vast amount of information on their site.
They also get more visitors to their site than you could ever dream of. That requires a huge backbone with a massive amount of bandwidth.
These servers will of course require power and adequate cooling. (I've been in a datacenter that runs Costco's servers...it is huge, HOT, and expensive, and Wikipedia's needs will blow that out of the water).
Their datacenter's will require rent, it's highly unlikely that they own the property this is on. Which means they also are outsourcing for a security company. These are payrolls that they indirectly pay for, without being one of those 150 employees.

And that's just Wikipedia. Their company runs more than JUST Wikipedia. (Just look at the website to see their lists of other sites)
There is a good chance their lawyers aren't considered employees. Lawyers that do that kind of work don't work for 30,000 a year.
Now consider all the technical work. Developers, engineers, these are people that went to school for this shit. They didn't fill out applications to McDonald's, Pizza Hut, and Wikipedia. They are going to expect a certain lifestyle...or they could just go work somewhere else. Being non-profit doesn't mean your employees are non-profit. They will require wages on par with what they'd get paid elsewhere.

So, in addition to your math being nothing but pure conjecture (Without true knowledge or consideration of the facts)...you need to realize that being non-profit does not mean "can't make good money". It simply means they must meet federal guidelines, in order to achieve tax-exempt status.

[FONT=RobotoRegular, arial, sans-serif]"[/FONT]The businesses may not allocate profits left over, after paying employee salaries and bills pertaining to operations, to any individual or private shareholder. These organizations may not campaign for a particular political group or cause; nor may they attempt to influence legislation."

So in reality...they have every right to put millions of dollars in their pocket if they wanted to. (Whether they are doing that or not) They offer a free public service that anybody is allowed to use, regardless of your political or religious beliefs. In return, they are tax exempt...and they are not allowed to donate money towards a politician that you don't support.

Short story long...they're simply asking for donations, rather than posting pictures of hot girls that redirect you to dating sites. And they don't use scrapebox to gather articles that other people wrote...then spin them to generate content so they can make easy money. You should just be grateful for what they provide...or don't use it.

Can someone with experience in Internet Marketing,espically buying/selling ad spaces. Please explain how having ads makes your site not independent, especially when you have 450,000,000 uv a month? To me it seems that any ad network such as google would allow make exceptions to the rules just for you.

Well, if I have money, I would pay for education for some children in india rather than paying these millionaires.Lol, isn't it funny, a thousandnairs paying a millionaire a DONATION.

What so good about their site.It's not wikipedia that gave me knowledge, it's rather google, there is no shortage of content creators in this world.

Btw, is payroll like our (UK) version of national insurance contributions??

Wikipedia helped millions of students to get good grades, complete their homework..etc.. And not to free knowledge. They deserve that money.

dariobl said:

Wikipedia helped millions of students to get good grades, complete their homework..etc.. And not to free knowledge. They deserve that money.

Click to expand...

But they should at least run ads instead of begging for donations. They are not going to be forced to censor themselves due to the traffic they would bring to any ad network,or they could sell ads themselves.

You forgot 1 huge, huge problem:
Not everyone donate, and usually they only donate once.

Furthermore, people expect new shit from site they donate to.
It's not a sustainable business model.

Run a donation orientated website yourself and you will see.

They can just set up a infolink system and sell contexual ads.... make $50mil a year to help maintain things and stop fucking whinging every few months about donations when they are sitting on a gold mine.

I would not donate to them.... dmm stupid jimmy and his principles.

Roparadise said:

But they should at least run ads instead of begging for donations. They are not going to be forced to censor themselves due to the traffic they would bring to any ad network,or they could sell ads themselves.

Click to expand...

You can donate if you want and if you can, no one is forcing you to do it, and ads are way annoying than that donate picture.

i was thinking of sending them $5. myself.
i use their site daily..

I deal with Wikipedia daily (work for a Wikipedia PR company) and I find it a sad state of affairs they can't think of something to turnover some money without begging for donations.