Upon going to Wikipedia, I saw this plea for help:
“Wikipedia is non-profit, but it’s the #5 website in the world. With 450 million monthly users, we have costs like any top site: servers, power, rent, programs, staff and legal help.
To protect our independence, we’ll never run ads. We take no government funds. We run on donations: $5 is the most common, the average is about $30.
If everyone reading this gave $5, our fundraiser would be done within an hour. Please help us forget fundraising and get back to Wikipedia.“
I won’t even consider giving Wikipedia a single red cent until they provide an unbiased platform, and cease to violate their supposed claim of providing a “neutral point of view“, which is contradicted by articles such as “HIV/AIDS Denialism,” “9/11 conspiracy theories,” (without failing to present the official government conspiracy theory as the most prominent conspiracy theory), and completely leaving out references to organizations like Pilots for 9/11 Truth, which has uncovered some damning information.
[...] For more hypocrisy regarding the mass media’s coverage of conspiracy theories, see my article, Don’t donate to Wikipedia until they live up to their stated guidelines. [...]
[...] is yet another indication of why Wikipedia needs reform, as I demonstrated in my article, Don’t donate to Wikipedia until they live up to their state guidelines, about not applying their neutral-point-of-view standard to articles such as the one on the AIDS [...]
[...] 2) Don’t donate to Wikipedia until they live up to their stated guidelines [...]