# Is Wikipedia worth donating? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [November 26, 2012, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187 "2012-11-26T19:35:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Harmonix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Harmonix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harmonix)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2012, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/21 "2012-11-27T04:10:46Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > My main concern with gullibility is the adverts that try to trick you into thinking Wikipedia is somehow hurting for money. They set goals that are entirely superfluous, to the point that not making money one year wouldn’t hurt them at all. I’ve got to disagree with you here. Those goals are not superfluous. After reading your comment I spent some time rooting around Wikipedia and I learned that they have a pretty detailed [report](https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/FAQ/en#Where_can_I_find_more_financial_information.3F) on the activities of the Wikimedia foundation including finances, a road map of activities and projected expenses. It seems the Wikimedia foundation actively does things to improve readership, retain and engage contributors and make site improvements. This stuff costs money. You’re right about them having a hefty reserve though. According to the report Wikipedia has about 27 million in reserve, which is enough to run them for about 3/4 of a year if no other revenue comes in. That’s great. But I rather agree with what Wikipedia has to say about this. > [@Wikimedia Foundation FAQ](#): > > Our top priority is to fulfill our commitment to keeping the Wikimedia projects available free of charge for people around the world, in perpetuity. This does not mean just servers and bandwidth. In order to fulfil our commitment, we need to be responsible and competent site owners. A strong and stable Wikimedia Foundation is essential to safeguard the future of the projects: running a tiny shoestring operation would not be a service to the people who depend on us. You don’t want wikipedia to run like a shoe-string operation. It needs the funds to maintain site quality and robustness. Most importantly, it needs that money to grow. Overall, I trust that donating to Wikipedia is worthwhile. I know I sure as hell get more than 5$ worth of value out of it a year. ---
**Author:** ![Enderw24](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ba9def/32.png) [@Enderw24](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enderw24)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2012, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/22 "2012-11-27T04:59:20Z")
> [@Siam\_Sam](#): > > And you know this _how_? I looked it up on Wikipedia [citation needed] ---
**Author:** ![Harmonix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Harmonix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harmonix)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2012, 5:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/23 "2012-11-27T05:13:47Z")
> [@Enderw24](#): > > I looked it up on Wikipedia [citation needed] [[citation provided]](https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/FAQ/en#Where_can_I_find_more_financial_information.3F) 😛 ---
**Author:** ![goldmund](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a4c791/32.png) [@goldmund](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/goldmund)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2012, 5:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/24 "2012-11-27T05:55:48Z")
> [@Rachellelogram](#): > > Did nobody else notice the typo in the thread title? ☹ > > 🙂 There was a typo? According to, well… hey, [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typographical_error): > [@Wikipedia](#): > > A typographical error (often shortened to typo) is a mistake made in the typing process (such as spelling) of printed material. Historically, this referred to mistakes in manual type-setting (typography). The term includes errors due to mechanical failure or slips of the hand or finger, but excludes errors of ignorance, such as spelling errors. \ 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2012, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/25 "2012-11-27T05:56:54Z")
> [@Enderw24](#): > > I looked it up on Wikipedia [citation needed] That’s their story and they’re sticking to it. ---
**Author:** ![Namkcalb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c89c15/32.png) [@Namkcalb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Namkcalb)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2012, 7:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/26 "2012-11-27T07:03:46Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > The person who created Wikipedia did so because they wanted to make money and in fact is an “Objectivist”, i.e., a follower of the teachings of Ayn Rand. I think you misunderstand Objectivism, If an objectivist gains personal utility/satisfaction from helping others, then they will help others. Wales has helped lots of people, and I’d like a cite that he did it to earn money. Jimbo Wales has debatably made money indirectly from wikipedia, as it has made MediaWiki effectively the standard wikisoftware, which may benefit Wikia, the biggest ad-supported hosting service that uses exactly the same software and is part owned by Wales. > [@Digital\_is\_the\_new\_Analog](#): > > I did..and had a similar thought. 🙂 > I was going to go with “Yeah..I’ve donated Wikipedia a few times. People are never sure what to do with it, though.” Or something like that. I was going to post that, but since I’ve already cockbombed the IQ thread today, I’m trying to play nice. ---
**Author:** ![Harmonix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Harmonix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harmonix)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2012, 7:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/27 "2012-11-27T07:42:44Z")
> [@Namkcalb](#): > > Wales has helped lots of people, and I’d like a cite that he did it to earn money. from the Wikipedia article on [jimmy wales.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Wales#Nupedia_and_the_origins_of_Wikipedia) Nupedia, the predecessor to wikipedia was conceived as a profit making idea. > [@Wikipedia on Jimmy wales](#): > > The intent behind Nupedia was to have expert-written entries on a variety of topics, and to sell advertising alongside the entries in order to make profit and to your other point > [@](#): > > Jimbo Wales has debatably made money indirectly from wikipedia, as it has made MediaWiki effectively the standard wikisoftware, which may benefit Wikia, the biggest ad-supported hosting service that uses exactly the same software and is part owned by Wales. Going to go out on a limb here and assume the MediaWiki Software is open source. Therefore anyone could have used it to make Wikia. Just like anyone can use Linux run a business that makes money. ---
**Author:** ![Namkcalb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c89c15/32.png) [@Namkcalb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Namkcalb)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2012, 10:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/28 "2012-11-27T10:04:55Z")
> [@Harmonix](#): > > from the Wikipedia article on [jimmy wales.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Wales#Nupedia_and_the_origins_of_Wikipedia) Nupedia, the predecessor to wikipedia was conceived as a profit making idea. He’d need money to pay and vett the experts and there is nothing wrong with earning money for yourself. > [@](#): > > Going to go out on a limb here and assume the MediaWiki Software is open source. Therefore anyone could have used it to make Wikia. Just like anyone can use Linux run a business that makes money. MediaWiki is opensource, but since Wikia has by far the most market share of any MWbased hoster, it would gain the most from the growth in the demand caused by Wikipedia. ---
**Author:** ![Heracles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heracles/32/487_2.png) [@Heracles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heracles)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2012, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/29 "2012-11-27T12:10:34Z")
> [@Rachellelogram](#): > > How would you go about this, exactly? Unless you were thinking about putting it on a bunch of DVDs and donating those? I seem to recall that Wikipedia used to offer copies of the whole content (tarball? DVD collection?), in the early days. Which I’d love to receive as a gift, personally, being the insecure, pessimistic hoarder that I am. ---
**Author:** ![ctnguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@ctnguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ctnguy)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2012, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/30 "2012-11-27T15:58:51Z")
> [@Heracles](#): > > I seem to recall that Wikipedia used to offer copies of the whole content (tarball? DVD collection?), in the early days. [Still do](http://dumps.wikimedia.org/enwiki/20121101/), only now it takes up 10GB even when compressed. ---
**Author:** ![Son\_of\_a\_Rich](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/son_of_a_rich/32/5439_2.png) [@Son\_of\_a\_Rich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Son_of_a_Rich)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2012, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/31 "2012-11-27T17:00:38Z")
> [@Heracles](#): > > I seem to recall that Wikipedia used to offer copies of the whole content (tarball? DVD collection?), in the early days. > > Which I’d love to receive as a gift, personally, being the insecure, pessimistic hoarder that I am. [Here.](http://thewikireader.com/) ---
**Author:** ![Harmonix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Harmonix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harmonix)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2012, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/32 "2012-11-27T17:05:18Z")
or here [Download the text of the entire English Wikipedia](http://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/04/09/download-the-text-of-the-entire-english-wikipedia/) This is probably in a more useable format than ctnguy’s link. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_is\_the\_new\_Analog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a88e4f/32.png) [@Digital\_is\_the\_new\_Analog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_is_the_new_Analog)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2012, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/33 "2012-11-28T02:01:40Z")
> [@goldmund](#): > > There was a typo? > > According to, well… hey, [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typographical_error): > > \ 😉 \ A truly pendant person wouldn’t add an ending tag without a matching beginning tag.. -D/a \ ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2012, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/34 "2012-12-02T01:40:55Z")
> [@Namkcalb](#): > > I think you misunderstand Objectivism, If an objectivist gains personal utility/satisfaction from helping others, then they will help others. I understand it perfectly. Getting utility from helping others is the same thing as doing it go make money. Getting satisfaction from helping others can only happen if you think helping others is a moral good. Objectivism teaches that it is not a moral good. Those people who help people out out of satisfaction are actually doing so because they subconsciously buy into a different moral system–one that says that helping people is the right thing to do. That many Objectivists seems to be so completely in the dark about this motivation is not my concern. The citation has already been provided. Wikipedia’s purpose was to be the loss leader to get you to use Nupedia. It didn’t work out, but, fortunately, they can prey on people’s belief that Wikipedia is on a shoestring budget by constantly running donation drives, and Jimbo can still get all his money. It’s really all just the greedy fatcat thing. And what’s worse is that it’s disguised as a form of socialism, as the actual contributors contribute to actually help out mankind, rather than help with the money making goal of the owner. It’s really just a business where the owner is getting away with paying his employees absolutely nothing. I’ll contribute, but I won’t pay. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2012, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/35 "2012-12-02T01:55:29Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > I understand it perfectly. Getting utility from helping others is the same thing as doing it go make money. Getting satisfaction from helping others can only happen if you think helping others is a moral good. Objectivism teaches that it is not a moral good. Those people who help people out out of satisfaction are actually doing so because they subconsciously buy into a different moral system–one that says that helping people is the right thing to do. That many Objectivists seems to be so completely in the dark about this motivation is not my concern. Only if by “perfectly” you mean “mostly incorrect”. Objectivism only “teaches” that helping people is not a moral good if doing so harms you. ---
**Author:** ![Harmonix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Harmonix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harmonix)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2012, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/36 "2012-12-02T02:02:23Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Getting satisfaction from helping others can only happen if you think helping others is a moral good. Objectivism teaches that it is not a moral good. What? Cite? ---
**Author:** ![Harmonix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Harmonix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harmonix)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2012, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/37 "2012-12-02T02:08:19Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > The citation has already been provided. Wikipedia’s purpose was to be the loss leader to get you to use Nupedia. It didn’t work out, but, fortunately, they can prey on people’s belief that Wikipedia is on a shoestring budget by constantly running donation drives, and Jimbo can still get all his money. While I agree that Jim created nupedia/wikipedia to make money. It doesn’t mean that’s it’s still not the best damn most amazing encyclopedia ever. Jim makes money off Wikia a service that uses wikipedia open source software. Wikipedia itself still needs your support and/or editorial contribution and it has grown larger than just Jim. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [December 2, 2012, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/38 "2012-12-02T23:45:54Z")
> [@Enderw24](#): > > They’re not going to spend it on strippers and blow. Are you sure? Have you _seen_ Jimmy Wales? ---
**Author:** ![NadineBeyer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/22d042/32.png) [@NadineBeyer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NadineBeyer)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2012, 8:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/39 "2012-12-03T08:55:55Z")
Yeah, I personally donate a symbolic amount every year. I’ve learned tons of things from it and it’s definitely worth it. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2012, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187/40 "2012-12-03T16:34:50Z")
> [@NadineBeyer](#): > > Yeah, I personally donate a symbolic amount every year. I’ve learned tons of things from it and it’s definitely worth it. They might find more use out of an _actual_ amount of money. 😉 I donated this year, because I end up getting info from the site at least once a day, on average. Maybe more. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-wikipedia-worth-donating/642187.md?page=3)