Every year, Wikipedia flies a massive imprint advertisement across the acme of its website. It'south an entreatment from Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales, asking for donations to keep the website running.

Supposedly, Wikipedia needs your help to standing running as it does. Just does it really?

In June 2021, Wikimedia passed the $100 million mark on the Wikimedia Endowment, which wasn't expected to be reached until 2026. Even excluding this nest egg, the Wikimedia Foundation saw a rise in assets of over $50 million during the 2020-2021 financial year.

What Does Wikipedia Need the Money for?

A Screenshot of Wikipedia's Landing Page

Like whatsoever website, Wikipedia has server costs, administration costs, staff costs, and more. For a website the size of Wikipedia, these costs are tremendous.

According to Statista, it claimed over v.5 unique visitors and over forty billion page views every month throughout 2021. In 2014, Wales calculated that raising $48 1000000 over the course of the year pays for "less than a penny per person [visiting the site] per month."

The Wikimedia Foundation'southward 2021-2022 Annual Plan clarifies that the total operating upkeep calls for $150 million in spending, including $15.6 million in spending allocated for grants.

This is a pregnant increase in grants spent in growing the community and content, although it doesn't country the exact places that this money is spent.

The bulk of this expenditure goes towards what Wikimedia refers to as Programmatic ratio. This includes all aspects of the platform'due south development such as technical infrastructure, platform development, and brand awareness.

Nigh a quarter of this budget goes towards what Wikimedia calls Thriving Movement. Thriving Movement is the process by which Wikimedia wishes to increase Wikipedia'due south usage in underserved communities. This includes better translation support, besides as Wikipedia in the Classroom trainers for these communities.

Wikipedia is transparent in saying it exceeded the planned revenue targets in previous years and expects to practise the same this yr. Of form, this has meant Wikipedia has enough of reserves already.

According to its 2020-2021 total twelvemonth fiscal statement this currently stands at $86.8 million in cash and $137.4 million in short and long-term investments. The foundation explains this as a decision to have a minimum of six to 18 months worth of full spending, in case of emergency.

Everything Might Not Be Equally Transparent As It Seems

What Wales says can create the picture that internet hosting is the major cost. Only the Wikimedia Foundation spends just about eight% of its total budget on it. That'due south less money defended to its infrastructure than to the Thriving Motion.

"In that location is too a huge bucket for 'other operating expenses' totaling nearly $12.5 million — some of which certainly pays for expensive downtown function space in San Francisco," wrote Gregory Kohs, editor of Wikipediocracy, in 2014.

Critics of Wikipedia often bespeak to how much coin is spent on "motility entities", which are organizers who arrange for workshops and events to celebrate Wikipedia. On offering to the attending writers is just soda and pizza, Kohs says.

If you think Wikipedia should spend more than money on the people who brand and manage the content, y'all aren't lonely. Sue Gardner, the sometime executive director of the Wikimedia Foundation, raised some "significant concerns" final yr before she left the organisation:

I believe that currently, too big a proportion of the movement'south coin is being spent by the capacity. The value in the Wikimedia projects is primarily created by individual editors: individuals create the value for readers, which results in those readers donating money to the movement... I am not sure that the additional value created by move entities such equally capacity justifies the financial cost, and I wonder whether it might make more than sense for the motion to focus a larger corporeality of spending on straight financial support for individuals working in the projects.

Gardner as well called for more accountability of these motion entities who asking funds, to clearly define success or failure.

The Case For Donating To Wikipedia

Two Hands Holding Coins and a Note That Reads

So, why should you donate to Wikipedia when it could be cutting costs and tightening its chugalug?

Wales reasons that it's important to invest in engineering and innovation, which leads to things similar the better translation support, grants funding, and upcoming Parsoid rendering for talk pages.

Near people love Wikipedia because of how like shooting fish in a barrel it is to learn new things. Wired journalist Emily Dreyfuss wrote almost her reasons to donate, which echo the frustration felt by many readers when they see Wikipedia begging for money, just likewise why it's a good idea to donate nonetheless:

Wikipedia is the best approximation of a complete account of knowledge nosotros've always seen. It's also the most robust. The almost easily accessed. And the safest. It exists on servers effectually the world so, unlike the library at Alexandria, information technology can't exist burned down.

But information technology could be cached. It could exist left to stagnate, neglected and forgotten. Worse, it could go the rarefied domain of the monied elite, like so much information before it. I'd detest to see that, and hate information technology even more if I'd been part of it. So, fine, Jimmy Wales. I will do my office.

NYMag besides interviewed four people who donated to Wikipedia, to find out why they did it despite knowing they could notwithstanding use the site.

And then there are people like Jim Pacha, who donated his unabridged estate to the Wikimedia Foundation.

The Example Confronting Donating To Wikipedia

There are enough people who believe Wikipedia doesn't need your donations anymore.

Does-wikipedia-need-donation-money-wales-dying

The cash reserves aside, information technology's argued that the site's potential to generate revenue hasn't been tapped. While Wikipedia is staunchly against advertising (for the potential conflict of interest in the authenticity of its content), there are other revenue models that could exist explored.

Wikipediocracy's Kohs makes a case for licensing content to sites like Google, which use Wikipedia's material in its search results–and makes coin off it through advert. Similarly, you lot can fifty-fifty brand your own books from Wikipedia, a service that the foundation could offer at a small price.

Non anybody is against the idea of ads, though. ZDNet's Stephen Chapman is fine with seeing ads, or coming up with any other acquirement model that is sustainable. His logic, at its cadre, is compelling:

Yous know... while Wikipedia is certainly something special, it's not and so special that it can't be easily replicated by someone who could do it ameliorate and make a killing doing so. If Wikipedia fails to come across its monetary requirements, so the idea of Wikipedia and the information therein is all out there, just waiting for someone else to come up along and do information technology all once again in a different, more easily sustainable manner.

Gardner's want to spend more money on the contributors has resonated with many people. One of them is Newsline'south Mark Devlin, who urges readers not to donate because "your money goes to a grouping of incompetent programmers and a management team that jets around the globe for 'outreach'."

Is Information technology Time to Donate to Wikipedia?

Every year, Wikipedia asks for donations, and every yr, Wikipedia receives them. If y'all believe that Wikipedia requires further donations, then the site are receiving them at donate.wikimedia.org. If you're unconvinced by Wikipedia's stance and would rather support other charities, and then in that location are other charities you can text to donate.

Regardless of what you decide, being informed is the most of import affair that you can be. If zippo else, Wikipedia helps to do only that.

Paradigm credit: Pixabay/OpenClips and Fabrice Florin

How to Create a Wiki: The vii Best Sites That Make it Like shooting fish in a barrel

Read Adjacent

About The Author

Jack Ryan (98 Manufactures Published)

Jack is a author based in Melbourne, Commonwealth of australia with a passion for all things tech and all things written. When not writing, Jack enjoys reading, playing video games, and spending time with friends.

More From Jack Ryan