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.==

===Salaries===

===Salaries===

The current Executive Director, Deputy Director, and their personal assistant had a [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/4/41/FY_2008_09_Annual_Plan.PDF reported compensation budget] and other expenses of $472,000, which was excessive for an organization of its size in 2008.  At the same time as the above report, publicly-funded '''Earth Island Institute''' had revenue of about $6.5 million, 15 employees (practically the same size as the Wikimedia Foundation at the time, and headquarters in the very same city of San Francisco), but the CEO earned only $67,423.  The Northern California chapter of the '''Arthritis Foundation''' had revenue of $5.1 million, but the CEO was paid only $45,050.  '''Child Family Health International''' in San Francisco had revenue of $4.0 million and 11 employees, but the CEO earned only $82,000.  Embarrassingly, when audited by Charity Navigator, for years the Wikimedia Foundation received only 1 star out of a possible four in the important category of ''Organizational Efficiency''.  When you get right down to it, the money that people donate to the Wikimedia Foundation is more likely to be spent on an item that doesn't address the charitable mission of the organization than to be spent on something that does.

The current Executive Director, Deputy Director, and their personal assistant had a [http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/4/41/FY_2008_09_Annual_Plan.PDF reported compensation budget] and other expenses of $472,000, which was excessive for an organization of its size in 2008.  At the same time as the above report, publicly-funded '''Earth Island Institute''' had revenue of about $6.5 million, 15 employees (practically the same size as the Wikimedia Foundation at the time, and headquarters in the very same city of San Francisco), but the CEO earned only $67,423.  The Northern California chapter of the '''Arthritis Foundation''' had revenue of $5.1 million, but the CEO was paid only $45,050.  '''Child Family Health International''' in San Francisco had revenue of $4.0 million and 11 employees, but the CEO earned only $82,000.  Embarrassingly, when audited by Charity Navigator, for years the Wikimedia Foundation received only 1 star out of a possible four in the important category of ''Organizational Efficiency''.  When you get right down to it, the money that people donate to the Wikimedia Foundation is more likely to be spent on an item that doesn't address the charitable mission of the organization than to be spent on something that does.

===Growth===

===Growth===

Ask yourself, how is Wikipedia inherently different now than it was in 2005? Other than an abortive attempt by Jimmy Wales to [http://www.examiner.com/wiki-edits-in-national/wikimedia-commons-cannot-control-teen-pornography purge the site] of some images that could be construed as child pornography, there has been no major transformation at the site. Just some server volume growth -- a terribly cheap commodity to manage.  

Ask yourself, how is Wikipedia inherently different now than it was in 2005? Other than an abortive attempt by Jimmy Wales to [http://www.examiner.com/wiki-edits-in-national/wikimedia-commons-cannot-control-teen-pornography purge the site] of some images that could be construed as child pornography, there has been no major transformation at the site. Just some server volume growth -- a terribly cheap commodity to manage.