David Farrell's Seemingly Random Blog: Wikipedia - Why I just made a small donation and why I think you should if you can.

I just shot a $20 donation to Wikipedia and was writing  to say why.  I am not bragging (at all - I'd brag if I was able to give them $100 or $1,000 - that would be much different).  While using the site to learn what "Archimedes Paradox" is, (a useless fact on which they had about a 1,000 word explanation) I realized I use the site several times every single day to research everything from very important facts for work, to useless facts about which I am curious. 

Is Wikipedia perfect?  No, not at all.  However, it is an amazing, free, ad-free, un-biased asset shared by the entire digital world.  It has a great method of self governance.  It appears to have 1,000 times the information that Microsoft's old Encyclopedia.  In fact, Wikipedia is so great a source, I can't remember Microsoft's encyclopedia program that they sold. 

Wikipedia had a fundraiser and put an appeal from the founder at the top of the page.  However, it didn't get 'in your face', it didn't obfuscate any results, and it didn't require anyone to become a 'member' or to sign-in to an account.  Where else can you get that?  Unlike PBS stations, where I'd rather they simply play commercials than to break up their few very high quality show with 15 minute fund-raising breaks.  This fundraiser has zero negative impact on anyone using the site who doesn't want to donate, and made donating a one-minute issue.

Think about it.  If you use Wikipedia, it might be a good idea to throw them a few bucks.  Why?  Well, without donations, they may eventually have to close or, more likely, be sold to a 'for-profit' company.  While that doesn't sound too bad, (who cares if they make a profit from it?) it would really destroy the site.  Once a 'for-profit' company took over, it would become impossible to trust the veracity of the pages.  It would, necessarily, become biased.  Finally, contributions from authors would stip, once they felt they were working to make money for someone else.  Who would write to make a profit for a company they don't own?  Now, people write for a not-for-profit where they can explain something that is their passion and about which they might be one of the most knowledgeably people in the world.  So, maybe my donation was actually selfish, as I just want to see Wikipedia succeed in the very long term (i.e. in perpetuity).

So, I'd suggest it in the same way they do on their site: