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, Wikia, Inc. The Wikimedia Foundation has a history of unclear, tardy, and misleading financial statements. Even this KPMG expense summary would dictate that $2.1 million would be sufficient for the Wikimedia Foundation, so why do they call for a budget nearly ten times what's actually needed? And look out, Wikimedia director Sue Gardner is calling for a 50%-larger budget of $29.5 million for 2012! Last year, she tallied up a 12% pay raise for herself, even amidst a severe economic downturn.
#Wikimedia donate us plus#
A KPMG audit reported that in 2009, the Wikimedia Foundation spent only $822,405 on Internet hosting fees, plus $1,259,161 in "operating" costs (which includes many of the unnecessary staff who had been hired in just the previous two years). However, one assessment contends that Wikipedia and all its sister projects could probably operate on a budget of $1.6 million (including salaries for several IT developers), because over 99% of the actual work being done is accomplished by unpaid volunteers. In 2011, the Wikimedia Foundation called for a budget of approximately $20 million. Wikimedia Foundation finances are suspect. 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. But the wasteful spending patterns continue unabated. The Wikimedia Foundation has a new Executive Director, for example (Lila Tretikov replaced Sue Gardner). Just pay us our salaries - by Andreas KolbeĪlso, please pardon the fact that most of the content on this page was written in 20 and has not been substantially updated since them. Wikipedia doesn't need your money - by Andrew Orlowski.Wikimedia Fundraising: Where Is Your Money Going? - by Eric Barbour.And we're not the only voice that's critiquing the Wikimedia Foundation's waste and ineptitude: 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. 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.ĭuring the Wikimedia Foundation fundraising season, more than 1,000 people a day view this page. 10 Wikipedia is unpredictable, inaccurate, and unmanageable.Įvery year the 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.9 Wikipedia is in a legally precarious position.8 Wikipedia is a NSFW site lacking child-protection standards.6 Small donations make Wikipedia irresponsible.5 Wikipedia is more a roleplaying game than an encyclopedia.4 The Wikimedia Foundation's leadership leaves much to be desired.3 Your donation will indirectly fund Wikia, Inc., which is not a charity.1 Wikimedia Foundation finances are suspect.
0 kommentar(er)
