Once a year at this time I donate to Wikipedia.

Ah thanks for all your responses! I feel better about continuing to donate now. 😁

FriedGreenTomatoes2

“Thank you! Your generosity means so much to us.
You will receive a confirmation via email when we have processed your donation.

Contributions from readers like you help us host and manage Wikipedia and its sister projects.

The Wikimedia Foundation is an international non-profit organization that supports local and independent associations around the world. Our tax-exempt status varies according to the laws of each country. Donations to the Wikimedia Foundation are likely not tax-deductible outside the USA. If you have any questions about tax exemptions or reductions, we invite you to contact [email protected].

We value your support and try to prevent donors like you from receiving more fundraising messages. If you clear your browser's cookies, or visit on a different device, you may still see additional banners. Copying the link to this page and opening it on your other devices will suppress the banners.”

A couple of my friends think I’m daft/soft. “They’ve got tons of money, you haven’t”. Fair comment.

It’s just that I use their site (a lot). And trust their impartiality.

Do YOU donate?
What are your thoughts on this?

Yes I know we can all choose whether/where to donate but my question is only concerning Wikipedia.

FGT2 Please don't trust Wikipedia - anyone can edit any entry at any time, so whoever wishes to can put lies or biased info on there. I was a librarian at an FE College, and we always made students aware that they should never trust any fact from Wikipedia - and that most academic institutions will not accept it as a reference for assignments etc.

I don't use Wikipedia either. There are far more reliable sources - although in fairness I don't 100% trust any source, even scientific journals, so I get info from lots of sources.

My yearly donation is to the Salvation Army. They are wonderful and really help people everywhere. And your money do go to greedy executives like other charities

I donate a small amount monthly as it can be useful but I do get fed up of being asked to donate every time I log in, I am sure there must be ways of them knowing who does donate regularly

I donate annually too. Just a small amount, but as it's a source I often use I feel it's only fair to contribute.

I donate when asked, but this is only the second year I’ve been asked, so maybe I haven’t used it so much.

Of course at Uni level students have to check original sources, I wouldn't expect any different.

There are huge lists of those original sources as footnotes for major articles.

They also give warnings for inadequate entries.

For the politically bias concerns it's interesting to check out for oneself. I've just had a look at the Reform Party and Keir Starmer and see no problems with "bias".

But huge swathes cover everyday knowledge from your favourite flower to life deep under the sea to attempts to investigate outer space to ....well, everything.

Here is wiki's approach of controversial topics
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Controversial_articles

Had to look up Donald Trump out of interest. Well, after about 9 ages of info, there were over 850 original sources to check......

I donate but always wonder how many do - obviously quite a few Gransnetters!

I donate each month and occasionally at other times. I like Wiki a lot and it strives to remove or annotate contentious or just plain wrong edits.
This used to be a larger problem but they generally seem to be more on top of it now.
That said, as a former journalist it was drummed in to me to always check my sources, as well as having general awareness of where a story originates. Everyone has a bias but if you are aware of this it puts it into context.

Very happy to find that so many Gransnetters donate to Wikipedia. I make a donation every year because I use it all the time. I well remember when my children were growing up we bought an entire set of Encyclopedia Britannica because it was so difficult to find any information about anything pre-internet. It cost a staggering fortune, more money than we could spare, but I thought I was doing the right thing for their education. We couldnt afford a holiday that year. Its easy to forget that knowledge was power and much of it locked away or only available at a premium. Even the library was relatively inaccessible where we lived. I agree its worth cross checking Wikipedia information if its vital to be accurate, but that is good practice with any source.

I wouldn't donate to Wikipedia. As mentioned by others, their information is not always reliable, and can be altered by other users. There are many more sites that give honest information, even when it is often ridiculed as a conspiracy theory. Sadly, much of what happens in this world is not what it seems. So much is purposefully hidden from us. For that same reason, mainstream media is also off my list of reliable sources of information.

SunnySusie

Very happy to find that so many Gransnetters donate to Wikipedia. I make a donation every year because I use it all the time. I well remember when my children were growing up we bought an entire set of Encyclopedia Britannica because it was so difficult to find any information about anything pre-internet. It cost a staggering fortune, more money than we could spare, but I thought I was doing the right thing for their education. We couldnt afford a holiday that year. Its easy to forget that knowledge was power and much of it locked away or only available at a premium. Even the library was relatively inaccessible where we lived. I agree its worth cross checking Wikipedia information if its vital to be accurate, but that is good practice with any source.

Dont other sites also involve possible revisions/change, I cant find one that does not.
In fact there is a danger in any site purporting to deliver the absolute truth from one person or even a close group of "peer reviews?"

Sorry Sunny Sue I started replying to you (we got the Encyclopedia Britannica too as kids)

but ended up addressing "are there alternatives to wiki"

My use of Wikipedia focuses on the banal. 😁
Nonsense stuff.
Such as “is Shirley Bassey is alive?”
“What time do Man. Utd play their match on Sunday?”
Handy as quick reference for which I’m grateful.
Remember years ago there was “Ask Jeeves”? I wonder what happened to it?
I could ask Wikipedia …. 🤣

I donate a small amount annually.

Yes. I donate sporadically

I don't use Wikipedia much. You can find out most things by typing into Google.

I also donate sporadically, and use it quite a lot. However, I do absolutely HATE the wording of the requests. They always humbly request the donation. Having said that, I still feel that I should donate, as I find it very useful, especially in Family History - if I want to find where a particular place is, or what historical county it is in, it tells me.
As far as accuracy is concerned, yes, take the information with a pinch of salt and perhaps check elsewhere, but generally the people editing are doing it for genuine reasons.

''It’s just that I use their site (a lot). And trust their impartiality.'' So let me tell you a true story. There was a series on television, presented by a local person [Maltese]. I was doing a series of interviews at the time, and I thought I'd look her up on Wiki. I was shocked. Someone had edited the entry and included words that were English spellings of rude and vulgar Maltese words, completely out of context, and they were not picked up by the system, because probably the editors assumed they were real words, and not one of them that was supposed to, had a diacritic, so they were not flagged by spell-check. I wrote to her, and she ignored me; I wrote to Wiki, and after about a month, the offending page was removed and replaced. I do not know whether this was her doing, or mine, but I do not want to find out. I did not interview her, since I was not worthy of her attention, and someone else did, trying to copy my style. People asked me why I did not sign the interview, and I said it was not my work. In brief - do not believe all you read on Wiki, because people with an agenda can edit the ''information'' there.

It is hugely useful especially as regularly now citations to other items are indicated in the references section. Yes I contribute and as others have said, not much but regularly.

When I taught in FE we insisted that our students STARTED by using Wikipedia as a beginning point but it was never allowed to be used alone and everything ‘copied and pasted’ from the site then had to be double checked against other sources for assignments. It was a very good discipline and a very useful jumping off point that my students appreciated from induction onwards as they had been ‘banned’ from using it in school. Like learning NOT to call me Sir, using Wikipedia intelligently was part of leaving childhood behind

I liked your post and take on this Neilspurgeon0. Good to hear a different viewpoint. Thank you.

Like you Dillonsgranma we donate to the Salvation Army for their Christmas appeal.

I donate. I use it a lot to make videos and for those saying that it’s sometimes inaccurate let me tell you, it’s a lot more accurate than AI is.

Like FannyD, £2 per month. Very useful service, I use it a lot.