Are You One Of Over 10,000 Donors to Wikimedia?
Nick Gonzalez
33 comments »
Wikipedia is used by millions worldwide each day, draws in billions of page views each month, and often takes the top slot on Google searches. But the truly amazing fact is that it’s stayed ad-free. This is because the mega encyclopedia and its sister sites run on borrowed time, borrowed servers, and — most importantly — public donations.
That’s why Wikpedia’s parent, the Wikimedia Foundation, has been running their annual fundraiser to support their effort to spread free knowledge. Most of their revenue comes from private individuals, with donations averaging around $25. Founder Jimmy Wales makes a personal request for donations and outlines future plans in a video below. Over the past nine days they’ve attracted over 10,000 donations (they’re also donating a lot of fan photos as well). The 10,000th one came from a contributor in Finland, who donated 10 Euros at 8:58 UTC (4.58 ET). And there’s still time for plenty more. The drive runs all the way through December 22.
You can donate money here. You can get a banner to help promote donations here.
No.
What a fantastic video
No
Not yet
“Are You One Of Over 10,000 Donors to Wikimedia?”
F*ck no. Jimmy Wales used to do porno, what the hell does he need my money for?
Can I send him a mass-age therapist for a film? Is that tax deductible, and how should that be valuated?
Of course the hell not. Jesus.
I’m not slamming erotic search engines at all though. I’m just saying, he can pay for it himself. We’re not his bank.
What do I get outta it?
http://fakesteveballmer.blogspot.com
seriously, who cares — tell that loser to stop asking for money and put up an adv.
Wow .. google Bomis (Wales’ previous stuff)…. amazing
wikipedia culture has morphed into dmoz culture. cult-like editors with a nazi-like mentality.
Christ, are you all 13? Even Slashdot’s comments are more mature and well-informed than this swill.
So Bomis is cheesy. Wikipedia isn’t just Jimmy Wales, and it’s a worthy cause.
Hell no - no $ for (ex) porn kings . . . Wales is the reason Wikipedia is soooo slimy . . .
yes
yes, for the last two years
best site on the web, hands down
one of few sites i NEED, not just want or like
wikipedia is a global treasure
Wow… jealousy runs deep! I applaud his efforts to change the world, no matter his beginnings or past activities. You can’t deny what he has accomplished for the human race. To all you religious zealots, get over yourselves and look at Jesus himself who said “let the first who is without sin cast the first stone”.
Some people really need to get their head out of their ass. Yes, he can pay for everything himself many times over, yes he is using other peoples resources to build wikipedia up… but I believe the benefits of this foundation far out weight the negatives.
Jon
Yes I did
I agree with 15. Wikipedia is one of the most useful sites on the web and the fact that they are trying to keep it as a resource by the people, for the people is commendable. As for his background as a porn star… who gives a flying f..k, get over yourselves?
Google get millions targeted traffic from wikipedia, it is best resource for searcher too.
I just did. I did my graduation research paper using Wikipedia materials. It’s probably one of my most visited sites.
Moi? Not very likely. Wikipedia is a terrific project and it has helped us tremendously, but it’s a dog-eat-dog world out there, and my next project happens to be a wiki-killer.
Yes, in fact, I am one of them. Because when I saw the donation drive bar up on wikipedia, I thought about how often I really do use this site, it’d be a shame if I didn’t chip in some money, really.
C’mon, the fact that Wales dabbled in the soft-core “Babe” biz is obviously a PR problem for him, but I’m surprised that the TechCrunch crowd would consider it a character flaw. It’s not like he was Hugh Hefner or Larry Flynt - there’s pretty good evidence he didn’t make a fortune from it.
Yep, whenever he throws up the fundraising banner I give $10. Considering it’s saved me several hundred dollars in books and subscription fees for pay information sites (not to mention inevitable late fees from libraries) and countless hours that would have been spent searching using less user-friendly methods, it has been quite the bargain.
It is a good thing to support projects like this one.
It could be loaded with ads and popups making 100 times as much money for Jimmy Wales and his foundation, or you can donate. Those people expecting something for nothing deserve NOTHING. If you hate his past, make a donation because it will keep Jimmy Wales from making hundreds of millions of dollars, maybe billions. Just look at the value of less popular websites, like Facebook, if you don’t believe me.
Personally, as soon as my net worth is back in credit in a few months, I will be making a donation of $25 (the average donation), and my income is far lower than the average.
——————————————————-
!! URGENT: Don’t donate to Wikimedia !!
——————————————————-
• Wikimedia is ALREADY a very valuable asset to its owners. When Wikimedia goes public, YOUR money will go directly in to THEIR pockets.
• Anybody who donates cash to Wikimedia is supporting their flawed and dangerous practice of deputizing users as special ‘admins’. These belligerent tyrants receive little automatic notifications whenever any ‘hot issues’ precious to them have been modified. And here’s the kicker –– if ANY modifications are not acceptable to an admin, he or she HAS THE POWER TO BLOCK further access to the article at will, and thus is able abusively control the point of view of the encyclopedia itself. It’s a nightmare.
My urgent message to Wikimedia management:
YOUR SITE is vulnerable to bias because of your practice of deputizing users as ‘moderators’ and ‘admins’. Here is the corrective action you need to take to fix this:
1) ALL moderators should only have administrative access to a small, randomly-chosen SUBSET of articles within your encyclopedia.
2) This random subset should be ROTATED among your admins.
3) Admins should have TERM LIMITS, tenured inversely based on how often they block articles.
Until Wikimedia owners take these necessary steps to improve the objectivity of their content, they will remain on my network’s BANNED IP list and certainly won’t ever see a DIME of my money.
Wow… Provide a good and free service, ask for donations, and this is the kind of mob mentality you get?
No wonder more people don’t donate their time.
Yes. Despite its flaws, Wikipedia is a global treasure. I’m not embarrassed to say that. It’s an honour to contribute to this amazing project.
yes! one can’t even fathom what wales contribution is having on education. the wales project is flushing the general knowledge bank and years*years*volumes of specialized knowledge at once. at last! we can move on and learn something new.
google, the directory for the worldwide strip-mall of small business grabs headlines, but it’s wikipedia that will really change the world.
(p.s. I sold at $600)
Jesus, why do people think he can pay for everything himself? You do realize Wikipedia is a top ten website in traffic right? There are hundreds of servers, on a few continents. Are we assuming that’s super cheap? Not to mention Wikimedia is a non-profit foundation, and Jimmy Wales isn’t even the chair of the board… Non-profits don’t “go public”. Also, the content is all freely licensed so even if the e foundation did something terrible, people could easily fork the text and start over without the foundation’s permission at all. It’s worth donating to. If you don’t want to fine, but don’t be an ass. This thread has seriously made me re-evaluate the comment quality on this blog.