Asklemmy

Absolutely not. They have way more money than they can sensibly spend, keep begging for more as if they could barely keep the lights on (they could probably easily keep the core mission going with about 10% of the money they're getting), and then expand their spending to match the donations they collected.

They then created an endowment (i.e. a pile of wealth that generates enough interest to sustain them indefinitely), using both additional donations and some of the money given to Wikimedia (which reduces the apparent amount of money they spend and is not listed as money Wikipedia/Wikimedia has, as it is accounted for separately). The $100M endowment was planned to take 10 years to build, got completed in 2021, five years before schedule. Wikimedia also has a separate cash hoard of almost a quarter billion dollars.

It's actually all in their article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation#Finances

Yes, every month. Why? Because in my opinion it is one of the greatest collective projects of mankind (even with the flaws it has).

Nope, I've donated to the internet archive because I have infinity more respect for them and they actually need more funding.

Wikipedia has more than they know what to do with, the money just falls out of their pockets

Giving 10 bucks a year, even though I use it very little. But sometimes it's just easy and quick to look something up or read an interesting article, and I know that there are many people (students, etc.) who rely on it more than I do and have less money to spend

Yup. $20 every year.

I just like that it’s there and I’ve used it a lot, and I want it to be there for the next generation.

Plus, they’ve maintained staying ad free, sub free, and bullshit free. I can’t think of another site that’s kept that level of decency.

Yes, sporadically but usually once I year I give them a donation.

Wikipedia is an insanely valuable resource we as a society just take for granted, especially those that grew up with it. Instant access to nearly infinite information is an absurd luxury we have, and it's a resource I want to see continue without being tied to corporate interests or abusive government regulation.

It's never much mind you, but I try to contribute a little around Christmas time if I can.

I think once a year they show the donation banner, then I donate something like 10 dollars. I use Wikipedia almost daily, so I'm glad to contribute something.

I think Wikipedia is a valuable common good and should be maintained. Because I can afford it, I donate monthly, even if I only use it a few times each month.

Yes, and I even have it as an automatic scheduled payment so I don't forget. Even with its flaws, it remains one of the shining gems of the Internet, and a resource I use frequently in both my professional life and my personal one. I remember how it was to suddenly want to learn more about a random topic before Wikipedia and I don't want to go back.

I also donate to The Internet Archive.

I heard that the wiki foundation is pretty well off and the saleries they pay the executives are rising pretty fast. Havent donated myself but in principle I should, eventho the higher ups are earning this much.

No. I did donate once and then they illegally spammed my email for a year. I had to threaten them with a lawyer to stop. It was senseless.

No because I already donate to the EFF and Internet Archive and I figure that's enough. And apparently Wikipedia already has enough money according to the comments here

I used to do a regular donation ($5 a month or something) but then I found out Jimmy Wales (who was a figurehead of the site at that point) was a weird Ayn Rand libertarian and stopped.

I did once. Then I don't because Wikipedia is currently in a stable financial situation so I can donate to another entity that needs resources.

Do you donate to Wikipedia? Why or why not?

I did and ever since have been rewarded with an endless barrage of "you gave once before so do it aga--a-a--aa-a-a-a-a-a-a-in" banners. Given the ecomonics of fundraising I wouldn't be surprised if donors were badgered more than non-donors.

No, because I'm very poor.

It has an abominable political slant, so absolutely not. If there was a way to split the science/math/etc. segment from the rest of it, that one would totally be worth donating to.

I used to use it for free when I was broke. Now I give a little extra per month to hopefully offset that. It's invaluable to me. That and public radio.

Absolutely. What a ridiculous amount of information for free, if you use it at all, it deserves $2-3 every now and then to keep it free. If someone buys it, they will fuck it up.

I gave to them once or twice before the pandemic showed up. It was something I wanted to do, but never could since I was never financially able to.
I stopped once I found an article showing that Wikipedia is not hurting for money at all, yet they kept groveling for money. I think it also said the CEO/owner was keeping a lot of the money for themself which I was not a fan of.

I can't realistically afford it due to various factors but if I had a proper "western" wage, I surely would donate.

Wikipedia is one of the great achievements of humanity and the Internet. Ofc I donate. If their management's salary is high -- that's good. It should be a well-paid job. Everyone should be compensated appropriately for their time. With money or (preferably: and) with the satisfaction that their job is important and appreciated.

I did once or twice. I also donated to Signal and couple smaller projects I used. I always plan to donate more but a man has to eat and fly on vacations to Canary Islands...

I used to, but then they removed crypto because of propaganda efforts by reactionary idiots masquerading as progressives. Now, I have no way to donate to them.

Yes, once a year or so. I've gotten a lot of value out of it and i like the idea of paying it forward for people who aren't in a position to donate

Same here. I believe it's worth it, I can afford it.

I support not only Wikipedia, but also Signal and my local Mastodon-instance.

I do regularly.

Knowledge, bitch!

When I was younger my friend group got in a heated debate about something semantic for fun. The opposite side from me tried to prove their point by editing Wikipedia and showing it to me. They had to show a screen shot because it had changed back in the time they ran from the computer lab to the lunch room, I used this in my arguments every time we argued about it after that.

I've been donating to the Wikimedia foundation regularly since 2016 since I believe it's a resource everyone should have access to.

The Wikipedia is not perfect but, for several topics, it's a great starting point or recap. I've used it for science related queries and, even if the style is not uniform and some entries are hard to read, it is an amazingly useful project which doesn't get old (and the phone app is fantastic)