Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikipedia is not short on cash

unherd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 500 posts

Re: Wikipedia is not short on cash

#12

Post by Sebb767 »

> Indeed, in the 2012/13 year the Foundation budgeted for $1.9m to provide all its free information on tap.

To be fair to Wikipedia here, quoting a nearly ten year old figure and comparing it to current earnings in order to prove that their required expenses are low is not that honest.

Re: Wikipedia is not short on cash

#13

Post by mschuster91 »

akolbe wrote: post #4
steelbrain wrote: post #2

Related, Guy Macon's Wikipedia has Cancer ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has_C... )

Also related, in the Signpost, Wikipedia's community newspaper: Special report: "Wikipedia's independence" or "Wikimedia's pile of dosh"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2... Opinion: The Wikimedia Endowment – a lack of transparency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2...

Looks like dealing with IRS bureaucracy is the reason why the endowment is not a separate legal entity yet [1].

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Endowment/Updates/...

Re: Wikipedia is not short on cash

#14

Post by akolbe »

Sebb767 wrote: post #12

> Indeed, in the 2012/13 year the Foundation budgeted for $1.9m to provide all its free information on tap. To be fair to Wikipedia here, quoting a nearly ten year old figure and comparing it to current earnings in order to prove that their required expenses are low is not that honest.

Costs don't increase by a factor of 50 in ten years.

Note I made the same argument in Wikipedia's community newspaper:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2...

Read the comments from Wikipedians underneath. No one claimed it was a dishonest argument to make.

Re: Wikipedia is not short on cash

#16

Post by akolbe »

mschuster91 wrote: post #13
akolbe wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also related, in the Signpost, Wikipedia's community newspaper: Special report: "Wikipedia's independence" or "Wikimedia's pile of dosh"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2... Opinion: The Wikimedia Endowment – a lack of transparency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2...

Looks like dealing with IRS bureaucracy is the reason why the endowment is not a separate legal entity yet [1]. [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Endowment/Updates/...

Correct, the application is pending. However, the application was made years later than originally promised. Over the past six-and-a-half years, the endowment has accumulated over $100 million, with not a single audited financial statement ever published.

Re: Wikipedia is not short on cash

#19

Post by Hamcha »

wnkrshm wrote: post #5

Any time they ask for donations, I donate to archive.org instead.

Pro tip: If you shop on Humble for videogames, you can select Internet Archive as your non-profit target in most* occasions!

* some bundles/deals are locked to specific charities

Re: Wikipedia is not short on cash

#20

Post by whoooooo123 »

forgotmypw17 wrote: post #3

Instead of ignoring it, I installed Privacy Redirect and set it to redirect all Wikipedia links to wikiless.org. This also got rid of the annoying "preview" feature.

Is that a JS-free Wikipedia? Looks fantastic; thanks for sharing.

While we're on the subject, I'm a fan of Nitter[0] as a JS-free Twitter UI. Can anyone recommend any other JS-free frontends to popular apps?

[0] nitter.net, and it's mirrored on many other URLS: https://github.com/zedeus/nitter/wiki/Instances

Post reply on HN