What do you think is the most entertaining wikipedia article? - eviltoast
  • peregrine_falcon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    That’s all untrue or misrepresentation. There aren’t that many executives and while money does get misused, that’s not where it’s going - instead some of it is going to grants and other programs that aren’t very important to the mission. However, quite a lot of donations go to very important projects, such as lawyers to keep editors in repressive countries out of jail, programmers to keep the website going, etc etc.

    “2%” is a misrepresentation because programmer and operations salaries are a lot more than that and they’re equally important to keeping the lights on. If I own and operate a server for a website, then clearly my salary is part of what it takes to run the website even if it’s not included in “hosting”.

    “Renumeration” is a red herring as paying contributors is obviously a non-starter.

      • AdmiralShat@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Wiki has a weird cult around it.

        I remember right before the reddit migration there were a surge of wiki related memes about paying Wikipedia instead of doing this or that and it felt super weird.

        I always wondered if it was paid shilling or if it was organic users who just loved Wikipedia so much they felt the need to make a bunch of memes about giving them money