Wikipedia has a ton of money. So why is it begging you to donate yours?

submitted by [deleted] from washingtonpost.com

all 20 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]zyxzevn🐈‍⬛ 21 insightful - 1 fun21 insightful - 0 fun22 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Asking for donations is to make it appear that wikipedia is an open and trustworthy platform. But it is anything but that.

Wikipedia gets money from companies and organisations that want to sustain their narrative/propaganda.
"Fact"-checkers have a similar money scheme.

[–]solarsavior 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I no longer donate to Wikilietoya.

[–]NiceDickBro 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yeah and it's more obvious than ever lately it's just another arm pushing whatever the media wants it to say because it ranks so highly on search engines... Granted wikipedia is flawed to begin with because it uses news and media articles as truthful sources to base their articles on.

I'm not sure how long it's been going on, probably years, but the bias lately is so stark I try to avoid it overall.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

When Wikipedia calls someone "far-right" the source is usually a CNN or MSDNC article... and they consider that credible.

[–]NiceDickBro 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Wikipedia is becoming rational wiki by the day

[–]magnora7 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Why does taco bell ask you to donate a dollar to end hunger?

Why do toll booths continue to exist on roads that are already paid off many times over?

Because people are greedy

“Wikipedia is absolutely unique in that it’s a nonprofit operating in the space of multibillion-dollar brands,” Lih said. “On top of that, it has to answer to this cacophony of voices — to divine what the community wants, and then respond to that.”

[–][deleted]  (4 children)

[deleted]

    [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    That link is deader than vaudeville.

    [–]asterias 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

    Hasn't this already been done by Metapedia and a few other projects?

    [–][deleted]  (4 children)

    [deleted]

      [–][deleted]  (3 children)

      [deleted]

        [–][deleted]  (1 child)

        [deleted]

          [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          Black Bread Matters.

          [–]Tom_BombadilBombadildo 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

          Course: Zionist Editing on Wikipedia

          [–][deleted]  (2 children)

          [deleted]

            [–][deleted] 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

            lmao

            [–]PingPong 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

            I began to hate Wikipedia about halfway through last year. It's full of woke nonsense now.

            [–]Yin 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

            Wikpedia is controlled by communist editors.

            [–]iraelmossadreddit 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

            damn they just got me. god damn fucking jews.

            [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

            It's a pretty good rule of thumb that if a mainstream rag like the washingtonpost says it's a great site then you know it's crap. Also the major search engines have it at the top of the list. Nearly everything I believe in if I go there I find it discredited. Chiropractors, anti-vax, some even think it's ultimately controlled by the CIA. Wouldn't surprise me at all.

            [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

            has anyone here tried to be an editer of wiki, making and editting pages? I have and it is all censored based on reliable sources, which are those compromised sources like CNN, ny times etc. So if you're reading wikiedia, you might as well just be reading cnn.

            [–]jykylsin2034 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

            Yeah they just delete your stuff unless it has leftist sources

            [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

            Happens at least once a year, probably more. I never really kept track, but wouldn't surprise me if they had a similar schedule to Public TV fundraising. Unlike with the United Negro College Fund (way back when), and the more recent ACLU, this is one leftist con I never fell for....Wikipedia has always had the stench of libtardation, and their threat of ad support never scared me into donating.

            [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

            Jews. Always the jews.

            [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

            Or the jesusfreakos that support the jews. Or the leftists the jews support. Or the politicians the jews own. I'm starting to see both a pattern and common denominator here!