I just sent money to Wikipedia

[Rogar]

Today I went to the Wikipedia site to look something up. They were soliciting funds and I made a smallish donation using Pay Pal. I use wiki a lot. I'll be reading a book where something is mentioned that I'd like to check out, or I'll look up a movie star or musician, or maybe settle a discussion with a friend. Wiki isn't the usual charity that helps the disadvantaged or a special interest group, but I think it's a valuable resource that usually presents unbiased and informative information with references and links for further reading. Plus it's not loaded with advertisements or commercial sponsors. And it's available to the whole world, or at least those who have internet access that isn't censored, which seems like a great thing.

I was thinking later that maybe they have an income stream from somewhere and really don't need the extra money, but they claim to be a non-profit and supported be online readers. Has anyone delved into wiki finances or it's organizational reputation? I support a small number of special interest causes, but it seems like getting true facts out to the world is an important issue.

[catherine]

I haven't delved, but I have also given small donations during their end-of-the-year drives. The reason is, I believe in The Commons, and if I gain benefit from something that's offered for free, I think a small, voluntary donation is the least I can do in the way of thanks.

Kind of the way I feel about this forum.

[JaneV2.0]

Me three Thanks for reminding me it's that time of year again.

[Gardenarian]

I use wikipedia all the time, and also donate once a year or so. It's really a cool project. As a librarian, I always have to tell people it's not a trustworthy source, but I honestly think it's the best starting point for most research. The links provided are often excellent.

[Tammy]

I know! All the official people make fun of Wikipedia. But I find it the best place for a good summary on any topic. It's often more thorough as webMD and seems as accurate as well on the topics that I know enough about to render a solid opinion.

[Mary B.]

I'm a sometimes academic, and I never tell students not to use Wikipedia. I tell them it's a great place to get a first overview of something, and that the references cited there can be a timesaver. It's not sufficient as a reference any more than a paper encyclopedia was for university-level papers.

That said, it's a great go-to source for information. It's really interesting to look at the editing history of some of the articles, too -- gives you an idea of how much disagreement there has been about some articles, and how much effort to refine others.

[SteveinMN]

Ditto here -- usage and donations. There was a time several years ago when Wikipedia rightly met the definition, "The Russian Roulette of Information". But they've taken many steps to review/audit what's in the articles, and I now rely on Wikipedia to provide either non-essential information or a fairly-neutral overview of a new topic.