Changes

{{toc right}}

{{toc right}}

Every year the [[Directory:Wikimedia Foundation|Wikimedia Foundation]] asks for financial contributions from unsuspecting donors who don't realize that 54 cents of every dollar they contribute will be wasted on ledger items that are ''not'' the program services that the Wikimedia 501(c)(3) is obligated to uphold.  So, every year we publicize this list of the '''Top 10 Reasons Not to Donate to Wikipedia''', in hopes that more people will become educated about what's really going on behind Wikipedia.  Your comments are welcome on the [[Talk:Top 10 Reasons Not to Donate to Wikipedia|discussion page]] here, or you may e-mail ResearchBiz@gmail.com for more discreet dialog.

Every year the [[Directory:Wikimedia Foundation|Wikimedia Foundation]] asks for financial contributions from unsuspecting donors who don't realize that 54 cents of every dollar they contribute will be wasted on ledger items that are ''not'' the program services that the Wikimedia 501(c)(3) is obligated to uphold.  So, every year we publicize this list of the '''Top 10 Reasons Not to Donate to Wikipedia''', in hopes that more people will become educated about what's really going on behind Wikipedia.   

During the Wikimedia Foundation fundraising season, more than 1,000 people a day view this page.  Thanks to excellent search engine rankings for the page, it is hoped that at least some of the readers who visit will be dissuaded from adding their donation to the Wikimedia Foundation's wasteful spending spree.

During the Wikimedia Foundation fundraising season, more than 1,000 people a day view this page.  Thanks to excellent search engine rankings for the page, it is hoped that at least some of the readers who visit will be dissuaded from adding their donation to the Wikimedia Foundation's wasteful spending spree.  And we're not the only voice that's critiquing the Wikimedia Foundation's waste and ineptitude:

 

 

 

 

Also, please pardon the fact that most of the content on this page was written in 2011 and 2012 and has not been substantially updated since them.  The Wikimedia Foundation has a new Executive Director, for example (Lila Tretikov replaced Sue Gardner).  But the wasteful spending patterns continue unabated.  If anything, they have been accelerated.  With hope, the contents of this page will at least inspire you to find out more about the shortcomings of the Wikimedia Foundation, before you are duped into offering them money that they don't need and (more importantly) don't deserve.

==Wikimedia Foundation finances are suspect.==

==Wikimedia Foundation finances are suspect.==

===Governance===

===Governance===

The Wikimedia Foundation has a history of unclear, tardy, and misleading financial statements.  The early Form 990s filed by the Foundation stated that there was "no business relationship" between any of the Board members, even though 60% of the Board were simultaneously employed as key principals by the for-profit commercial enterprise, [[Directory:Wikia|Wikia, Inc.]]  Early on, the Wikimedia Foundation asked an attorney to design the organization as a membership body, but after his work was nearly complete, they [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alex756 scrapped the idea], having suddenly realized that a majority vote of citizen-members could unseat a corrupt Board of Trustees and demand line-by-line financial accountability.  The Foundation's insiders didn't want that possibility to threaten them, so they insulated themselves from a voting membership by remaining a non-member organization.  Multiple top staff and former officers have privately expressed concern over [http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/10/business/fi-wikipedia10 financial wrongdoing] by certain board members.  Indeed, the former Chief Operating Officer of the Foundation ([[Directory:Carolyn Doran|Carolyn Doran]]) was a wanted multi-count felon.  The Foundation's former executive director and head legal counsel, Brad Patrick, resigned due to problems the organization had with him.  The Foundation lacks a Board of Trustees with a wide base of civic and social stakeholders.  Almost to a person, they are cronies and insiders who were incubated within Wikipedia. The Foundation is by design narrow and weak, reflecting only the interests of a dysfunctional social networking community.

The Wikimedia Foundation has a history of unclear, tardy, and misleading financial statements.  The early Form 990s filed by the Foundation stated that there was "no business relationship" between any of the Board members, even though 60% of the Board were simultaneously employed as key principals by the for-profit commercial enterprise, [[Directory:Wikia|Wikia, Inc.]]  [[Image:Sue and WMF Staffers drinking champagne 2013-03-08.jpg|thumb|left|300px|WMF Executive Director Sue Gardner and other staff drinking sparkling wine and showing off some donor money. (You didn't think it all went toward web servers, did you?)]] Early on, the Wikimedia Foundation asked an attorney to design the organization as a membership body, but after his work was nearly complete, they [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alex756 scrapped the idea], having suddenly realized that a majority vote of citizen-members could unseat a corrupt Board of Trustees and demand line-by-line financial accountability.  The Foundation's insiders didn't want that possibility to threaten them, so they insulated themselves from a voting membership by remaining a non-member organization.  Multiple top staff and former officers have privately expressed concern over [http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/10/business/fi-wikipedia10 financial wrongdoing] by certain board members.  Indeed, the former Chief Operating Officer of the Foundation ([[Directory:Carolyn Doran|Carolyn Doran]]) was a wanted multi-count felon.  The Foundation's former executive director and head legal counsel, Brad Patrick, resigned due to problems the organization had with him.  Patrick's replacement as General Counsel would also have a short term in office, disappearing under a [http://www.examiner.com/article/wikipedia-s-top-attorney-says-goodbye shroud of mystery].  The Foundation lacks a Board of Trustees with a wide base of civic and social stakeholders.  Almost to a person, they are cronies and insiders who were incubated within Wikipedia, or who have invested money in for-profit satellite projects of Wikipedia. The Foundation is by design narrow and weak, reflecting only the interests of a dysfunctional social networking community.

===Salaries===

===Salaries===

Wikipedia smothers out more authoritative, but less-linked-to sites in Google and other search engine rankings. Microsoft [http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/30/microsoft-encarta-dies-after-long-battle-with-wikipedia/?hp closed down Encarta], mainly due to the Wikipedia effect.  Wikipedia has garnered an ability to set the 'truth' in mainstream media and blogs that consult it every day, without digging deeper to verify facts from independent sources.  Controversial Wikipedia pages suffer from "ownership" by content bullies who drive off independent editors, all supported by administrator cabals who follow one another around, supporting reverted edits and editor blocks and bans.  Wikipedia creates a monoculture of knowledge that is little different than a farmer who would make the mistake of planting just one type of crop, year after year.

Wikipedia smothers out more authoritative, but less-linked-to sites in Google and other search engine rankings. Microsoft [http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/30/microsoft-encarta-dies-after-long-battle-with-wikipedia/?hp closed down Encarta], mainly due to the Wikipedia effect.  Wikipedia has garnered an ability to set the 'truth' in mainstream media and blogs that consult it every day, without digging deeper to verify facts from independent sources.  Controversial Wikipedia pages suffer from "ownership" by content bullies who drive off independent editors, all supported by administrator cabals who follow one another around, supporting reverted edits and editor blocks and bans.  Wikipedia creates a monoculture of knowledge that is little different than a farmer who would make the mistake of planting just one type of crop, year after year.

<br>

<br>

==Your donation will indirectly fund Wikia, Inc., which is not a charity.==

==Your donation will indirectly fund Wikia, Inc., which is not a charity.==

* A [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=2902 quality, not quantity] drive in 2006, as well as the post-Essjay "[http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=7090 Credentials Verification]" boondoggle of 2007 were announced to great fanfare in the tech media, but once Jimbo Wales and his crew got the public relations boost they wanted, the initiatives themselves just vanished.

* A [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=2902 quality, not quantity] drive in 2006, as well as the post-Essjay "[http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=7090 Credentials Verification]" boondoggle of 2007 were announced to great fanfare in the tech media, but once Jimbo Wales and his crew got the public relations boost they wanted, the initiatives themselves just vanished.

* A WikiProject of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Lists_of_topics topic lists] has existed since November 2007, but it is still half unfinished.

* A WikiProject of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Lists_of_topics topic lists] has existed since November 2007, but it is still half unfinished.

* A call in January 2010 to diminish over 50,000 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Unreferenced_Biographies_of_Living_Persons entirely unreferenced biographies] of living people down to a more manageable 20,000 by September 1, 2010 has met with failure.  A full month after that milestone objective, over 24,000 biographies of living people still lurk on Wikipedia with not so much as a single reliable source to back up the content.  To their credit, after yet another 14 months of work, the list was finally whittled down to less than 200; but as of June 2012, the list was back up over 700.

* A call in January 2010 to diminish over 50,000 [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Unreferenced_Biographies_of_Living_Persons entirely unreferenced biographies] of living people down to a more manageable 20,000 by September 1, 2010 met with failure.  A full month after that milestone objective, over 24,000 biographies of living people still lurked on Wikipedia with not so much as a single reliable source to back up the content.  To their credit, after yet another 14 months of work, the list was finally whittled down to less than 200; but as of June 2012, the list was back up over 700.  So, to some degree, Wikipedia is the world's most-accessed reference where you can write a biography about a living person, without any citations to back up any content in the biography.

Indeed, in a way, all those big donations that [[Directory:Wikimedia_Foundation/Grand_Donors|overly generous donors]] contributed have missed the target completely. To paraphrase [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=28967&view=findpost&p=227814 one insightful observer], '''it is not the Wikimedia Foundation that makes the Wikipedia, it is the editors'''.  Giving money to the WMF is like leaving a gratuity for a cotton plantation owner because you like the quality of work the slaves are doing.  Giving the slave owners an even bigger carrot to dangle over the heads of the worker donkeys who are ultimately going to feel the stick, not taste the carrot.  It's irresponsible use of money; unethical.

Indeed, in a way, all those big donations that [[Directory:Wikimedia_Foundation/Grand_Donors|overly generous donors]] contributed have missed the target completely. To paraphrase [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=28967&view=findpost&p=227814 one insightful observer], '''it is not the Wikimedia Foundation that makes the Wikipedia, it is the editors'''.  Giving money to the WMF is like leaving a gratuity for a cotton plantation owner because you like the quality of work the slaves are doing.  Giving the slave owners an even bigger carrot to dangle over the heads of the worker donkeys who are ultimately going to feel the stick, not taste the carrot.  It's irresponsible use of money; unethical.

==Wikipedia is in a legally precarious position.==

==Wikipedia is in a legally precarious position.==

[[Section 230]] was designed to protect Internet service providers from libelous content generated by customers and re-distributed by the ISP.  The Wikimedia Foundation has hidden behind this protection by claiming that it, too, is an "interactive computer service".  We all know it's not, and one day, libel published on Wikipedia is going to lead to a courtroom test.  Unaccountable administrators are given the "Oversight" capability to make problematic content literally "disappear", and the Foundation hopes that the warrant of these administrators is never traced back to their offices.  For more on the history of noteworthy libel against innocent parties on Wikipedia, please look up the cases of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seigenthaler_incident John Seigenthaler], of [http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-caught-in-the-deadly-web-of-the-internet-445561.html Taner Akcam], and of [http://www.itwire.com/content/view/9913/53/ Fuzzy Zoeller].

[[Section 230]] was designed to protect Internet service providers from libelous content generated by customers and re-distributed by the ISP.  The Wikimedia Foundation has hidden behind this protection by claiming that it, too, is an "interactive computer service".  We all know it's not, and one day, libel published on Wikipedia is going to lead to a courtroom test.  Unaccountable administrators are given the "Oversight" capability to make problematic content literally "disappear", and the Foundation hopes that the warrant of these administrators is never traced back to their offices.  For more on the history of noteworthy libel against innocent parties on Wikipedia, please look up the cases of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seigenthaler_incident John Seigenthaler], of [http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-caught-in-the-deadly-web-of-the-internet-445561.html Taner Akcam], and of [http://www.itwire.com/content/view/9913/53/ Fuzzy Zoeller].

==Wikipedia is unpredictable, inaccurate, and unmanageable.==

==Wikipedia is unpredictable, inaccurate, and unmanageable.==