AAAAAA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

...

i wont donate £3 a month to help starving niggers, what makes them think im gonna give them $30

You can always download an offline version of Wikipedia and host it yourself. Also, aren't they losing bandwidth due to search engines autofetching their articles? They shouldn't still be having problems.

Citation needed? I just looked that up on Wikipedia and it's completely false.

Didn't that shit used to be "if everyone gave 5$"

...

I remember it being €1

...

just run ads, it's not like anyone in his right mind considers wikipedia an unbiased and trustworthy source

>Own a website where other people do all the work and then they pay you for it
Could it get any better?

There should be a way to turn this into shilling for metapedia.

Any ideas?

...

No.

Metapedia needs refinement and more citations, but it's not all that bad m8.

It was 3$ in 2013.

Who it that qutie btw?

Just run ads. It's not like anyone who gives a shit wont just block them.

i hope to god wikipedia dies

its a piece of shit honestly, let something else be made

Then it will be co-opted and turned to shit just as Wikipedia was.

But we already have metapedia
en.metapedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

...

Take a look at this shit, I'm on the danish wiki.

It clearly states that the average donation is 100 DKK, 15$. And if everyone gave 20 DKK, 3$, the campaign would be over in an hour.

Are they only asking for money for the servers used by the danish wikipedia?

never mind,

translates to

meaning they're not simply wanting money for the danish wiki.

thats not an ad, thats part of wikipedia

...

I think most adblockers treat the Wikipedia nag banners as ads and block them.

wow so funny guys

Yes, but due to inflation they now need everyone to chip in at least $60.

Wikipedia should have like 0 costs. A Very small server admin team + server and hosting costs summing a total of a few hundred k $ per year.

Wikipedia is run by volunteer admins etc.

^ Which is why it sucks. They allowed in and allowed to stay SJW admins who allowed pages to be intentionally co-opted, written full of lies etc.

They don't deserve my money, they don't deserve your money.

This is starting to look like one of those jew jokes

Top fucking Kek, they're begging for our shekels.

I want to live to see the day (((wikipedia))) goes bankrupt.

meme magic

Remember we have our own wiki
en.metapedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

...

...

Reminds me of when Sanders hit his 40 million fundraising goal and promptly raised it to 45 million. Jews gonna jew.

It's actually worse than an ad because it can't be blocked automatically.

God damned that is beautiful.

Wtf this is ridiculous. It used to be $3, and the whole selling point was "it's the price of a coffee!" (what kind of moron drinks coffee regularly and doesn't buy supplies to make his own anyway). $30 is just outrageous, for any (((nonprofit organization))) let alone kikepedia.

kek. Someone post the related comic.

OY VEY YOU ANTISEMITE

IT WAS ALWAYS 30 DOLLARS GOY

wew

This is not new, they did this before.

All the people who would donate to Wikipedia have already donated all their money to Bernie.

>$30

Is Britannica trash?

...

….?

Is there any actual proof of this or are you just talking out of your ass?

well, yeah, all the actual work is done for free. Donations go to making sure Jimbo gets top quality shrimp cocktail at his meet and greets.

it's basically a charity in that there's a stated reason the entity exists, which gets like 3% of funding, and the rest goes to party

you can just go ahead and type [citation needed], wikipedant, we all know what you meant.

thanks for the chuckle

Nah, fuck off

Reminder: books are a great thing.

wow poorfags, enjoy your shit-water

This, I only drink coffee made from the beans that a certain type of cat shat out.

The English version is fine, the German one on the other hand…

who is this semen daemon?

He stole the idea from Richard Stallman:

>Immediately upon its creation, GNUPedia was confronted by confusion with the similar-sounding Nupedia project led by Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger, and controversy over whether this constituted a fork of the efforts to produce a free encyclopedia. In addition, Wales already owned the gnupedia.org domain name.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNUPedia

Back in 1999-2000 there was a lot of talk on mailing lists and usenet groups over this. Nupedia was very different in design to GNUPedia, it was focused on peer reviewed contributions with a seven step approval process for editing, adding or removing content while Wikipedia was created more within the spirit of what rms proposed

gnu.org/encyclopedia/anencyc.txt

Jimmy Wales was was running Bomis at the time and Nupedia was an offshoot of it, he was caught in 2005 trying to scrub the wiki article on his company of any mention that it was producing softcore pornography.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bomis#Hosted_content
wnd.com/2012/12/heres-your-correction-wikipedia-founder/

...

so tired of fucking thieves hijacking the great achievements of the world.

we would be in other fucking solar systems by now

wikispooks is much better

That cucked faggot needs more shekels to run his jewish propaganda site? What a fucking faggot.

Krista Kosonen