Wikipedia begging for money

[brooks4405]

Historically the messages asking for donations have come up for a couple of weeks a year, but now it has been running for months on end and the messages are getting ever more desperate. Maybe people have decided they have better thing s to do with their hard earned than donate to Wikipedia to fund jollies for arse hole administrators? The chapter in my part of the world has plenty of money in the bank according to its last accounts, yet still cries poor.

(edited title)

[ericbarbour]

Yes. We know.

From 2017:
https://wikipediasucks.co/forum/viewtop ... 2655#p2655

From 2018:
https://wikipediasucks.co/forum/viewtop ... 5340#p5340
https://wikipediasucks.co/forum/viewtop ... 3581#p3581

2019:
https://wikipediasucks.co/forum/viewtop ... 288#p12288
https://wikipediasucks.co/forum/viewtop ... 543#p16543

2020/21:
https://wikipediasucks.co/forum/viewtop ... 423#p18423

Probably a few others I can't find right now....

[Ognistysztorm]

Historically the messages asking for donations have come up for a couple of weeks a year, but now it has been running for months on end and the messages are getting ever more desperate. Maybe people have decided they have better thing s to do with their hard earned than donate to Wikipedia to fund jollies for arse hole administrators? The chapter in my part of the world has plenty of money in the bank according to its last accounts, yet still cries poor.

If there are financial frauds in Wikimedia as suspected then shit's about to get real. Many people in America and in the world don't take financial frauds kindly.

[ChaosMeRee]

Historically the messages asking for donations have come up for a couple of weeks a year, but now it has been running for months on end and the messages are getting ever more desperate. Maybe people have decided they have better thing s to do with their hard earned than donate to Wikipedia to fund jollies for arse hole administrators? The chapter in my part of the world has plenty of money in the bank according to its last accounts, yet still cries poor.

This all came up in the last financial report.

Put very simply, Wikipedia is losing brand value, particularly with its target market, the young idealists who genuinely bought into the myth that is Wikipedia. As a result, small donations, Wikipedia's main source of income, are becoming fewer and smaller, and donors are not recommending Wikipedia to their friends. Rather worryingly, apparently they don't even look at Wikipedia anymore.

As usual, Wikipedia doesn't really know why people are turning away from it, but their default is to blame technology and come up with yet more half baked half assed solutions.

To me it seems obvious. Wikipedia long ago abandoned its neutrality principle, and instead enthusiastically embraced the war against Trump. A decade ago it would have been considered outrageous for Wikipedia Administrators to be proud!y displaying banners that personally attack the ideological enemies of Wikipedia, while at the same time writing Wikipedia articles in that topic area and banning people for non-neutral editing. Now they call that a Tuesday.

Similarly, a decade ago everyone knew the sound logic behind Jimmy Wale's advice that you should show respect to everyone, even as you show them the door. Today, Wikipedia Administrators and their hangers on try to outdo each other in how enthusiastically they can punch a Nazi. It is deeply ironic and hilarious to watch.

But they didn't gamble on the world becoming a far more complex place. It is no longer a case of dividing people into red (bad) or blue (good). People's beliefs are nuanced, and so naturally to be able to form and defend these blended views, they seek out quality information.

When they fire up a Wikipedia page, the bias screams out at them like a megaphone. They feel the strong push of Wikipedia's warriors forcing them toward a conclusion, the RIGHT conclusion.

The effect is remarkable. As it turns out, these young idealists don't like being told what to believe. They don't like being force fed the supposedly correct opinion. They don't like being treated like children. They quite rightly think of themselves as being above being the sort of sad fragile poof who would only go to Wikipedia to have their pre-existing views validated. They already have their socials if they need the comfort of a silo or an echo chamber.

And it seems pretty clear that the people who take a peek behind the curtain and see how the sausage is made, run a mile. They know a Nazi run exercise in Approved Texts when they see it.

So they have clearly been going elsewhere.

To make up the shortfall in donations, the begging banners have to be seen by more people and have to be run over a longer duration.

If that doesn't do that trick, Wikipedia plans to pivot toward chasing large legacy gifts and corporate donations, seemingly not realising that is virtually guaranteed to lose them even more donors of the young and idealistic type.

As always, the hilarity comes in knowing it was the volunteers not the Foundation, the pieces of shit like Drmies and Beeblebrox, the pathetic middle aged white Western male assholes desperately trying to seem woke, the people who stripped all power from Jimmy Wales, who are the cause of this calamity.

[ericbarbour]

If that doesn't do that trick, Wikipedia plans to pivot toward chasing large legacy gifts and corporate donations, seemingly not realising that is virtually guaranteed to lose them even more donors of the young and idealistic type.

And they will become even more dependent on large corporate and other donations--which will lead eventually to commercial advertising on the "NOT FOR SALE" Wiki. If they get desperate enough, Jimbo's bleating that it's "not for sale and never for sale" will become very hollow indeed.

As always, the hilarity comes in knowing it was the volunteers not the Foundation, the pieces of shit like Drmies and Beeblebrox, the pathetic middle aged white Western male assholes desperately trying to seem woke, the people who stripped all power from Jimmy Wales, who are the cause of this calamity.

They will ride the burning zeppelin into the ground. "It's not MY fault!"

[ericbarbour]

In the past the begs were applied sorta-randomly to content pages. RIght now this is on EVERY page, even the front page. The pop-under is also on every page. True desperation sets in. Still expecting them to change "end of the year fundraiser" to "constant bleating".

screamingformoney1.jpg (50 KiB) Viewed 461 times

screamingformoney3.jpg (36.04 KiB) Viewed 461 times

scremaingformoney2.jpg (17.77 KiB) Viewed 461 times

[ChaosMeRee]

Wikipedia is still not on the market

Wikipedia is still lying to people to extract money from their wallets.

(you cannot sell a non-profit, and any profits from selling the assets must be used for the benefit of Wikipedia)

Also, why would Wikipedia be put on the market even if you could sell it?

What exactly is it about an organisation with net assets of $255 million, yearly earnings of $180m from an annual wage bill of $100m, that sounds in financial distress?

They are laying people off due to falling small donations off the back of a decreasing brand value, but if they can't figure out how to fix that (ask Uncle Google for some pocket change), nobody would want to buy Wikipedia, not even for $1.

[DexterPointy]

I'm not seeing any Give us money banner on wikipedia (neither on en.wikipedia.org nor on da.wikipedia.org)
The money-run could be IP-dependant.
Anyone here using a geo-locatable proxy or VPN for accessing WWW, so to further investigation?

[Bbb23sucks]

I'm not seeing any Give us money banner on wikipedia (neither on en.wikipedia.org nor on da.wikipedia.org)
The money-run could be IP-dependant.
Anyone here using a geo-locatable proxy or VPN for accessing WWW, so to further investigation?

I have one. Any idea of what countries to check? Where I live, I get the banner.

[DexterPointy]

I have one. Any idea of what countries to check? Where I live, I get the banner.

Well, I'm in Denmark, so consider that one already checked with great confidence.
Otherwise, perhaps check one random country in the EU, and one in Europe not part of the EU. Further, then one or two countries per continent.
So, perhaps (random suggestions)
- Spain
- Switzerland
- England
- South Africa
- Morocco
- Brazil
- Argentina
- Canada
- Australia
- Japan
- Russia
(and I think we can safely omit Antarctica )