Importance of Wikipedia

[Loppan Torkel]

What's your opinion of it?

It's running a fundraiser now to keep it ad-free. I kind of like wiki, but I'd like to hear some other opinions..

Is it worth supporting?

 

[Lohrenswald]

Of all the attempts through history to gather "all knowledge" into one collection, Wikipedia probably has been the most successful, and I think that gives it some value.

 

[Commodore]

What's your opinion of it?

It's running a fundraiser now to keep it ad-free. I kind of like wiki, but I'd like to hear what other opinions..

Is it worth supporting in your opinion?

I think it is valuable, but I don't know if it's valuable enough to donate money to them. I also wouldn't really mind if they started using ads to generate revenue since I use AdBlocker anyway so it would still be "ad-free" for me.

 

[Archbob]

What if they implemented something that blocks ad-blocking users from using the site so people can't free-ride?

Wikipedia I find is just as good as any encyclopedia on most things.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

I want to give them money, but I don't think that will stop the site from pestering me until the next fundraiser.

 

[Commodore]

What if they implemented something that blocks ad-blocking users from using the site so people can't free-ride?

Wikipedia I find is just as good as any encyclopedia on most things.

There are plenty of other places to find the information contained within Wikipedia so if they block AdBlock users, then I will just go elsewhere. It's no skin off my backside.

 

[Archbob]

I probably could as well, but it'd take me much longer. Wiki gathers most or all the info I need at one place. Seeing a banner doesn't bother me. Having the comb through several sites and waste time does.

 

[Commodore]

I probably could as well, but it'd take me much longer. Wiki gathers most or all the info I need at one place. Seeing a banner doesn't bother me. Having the comb through several sites and waste time does.

Of course. That's the real value of Wikipedia; the aggregated information in one convenient spot. However, if push comes to shove, I am willing to sacrifice that convenience to continue my ad-free web surfing.

 

[Loppan Torkel]

Of course. That's the real value of Wikipedia; the aggregated information in one convenient spot. However, if push comes to shove, I am willing to sacrifice that convenience to continue my ad-free web surfing.

..and now you have the opportunity to both keep it ad-free and support a worthy cause! Win-win

I want to give them money, but I don't think that will stop the site from pestering me until the next fundraiser.

I haven't heard a peep since the last fundraiser, 9 months ago. Not any I remember. Have you been pestered?
It would be nice to hear how much they make.

 

[Commodore]

..and now you have the opportunity to both keep it ad-free and support a worthy cause! Win-win

True, but I'm not one for making donations. If I'm going to give my money to someone I expect either a product, service, or some other tangible return on my investment that results in a net profit for me. If the ones asking for my money can't offer that, then I don't even consider opening my wallet.

 

[sophie]

Like most encyclopedias: it's a fast and convenient way to gain basic information, but lacks depth-knowledge on subjects. It's a good jumping-off point or quick fact-checker, but I wouldn't recommend it for much more than that.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

I haven't heard a peep since the last fundraiser, 9 months ago.

They don't have the stuff on the page?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I certainly appreciate the fact that it exists. If they start running ads in order to maintain that existence I'm okay with that. I don't mind a banner ad across the top of a website. I am a firm believer in "if you don't like what you see, don't look" and that clearly can be applied.

 

[BenitoChavez]

I don't mind ads for the most part, just as long as they aren't so many that it detracts from the content of the website. CFC has a couple of ads which I've barely noticed.

 

[Loppan Torkel]

They don't have the stuff on the page?

I can't swear on it. There might have been a blurb somewhere that I've ignored, I honestly don't remember. It hasn't been like the pestering that's going on right now anyway. I tend to use adblock though.. :-/

 

[Evie]

Wikipedia's a great resource at this time, but it,s showing some troubling issues at the internal "community" level that makes me suspect it may not remain so in the long term (clique mentality at the higher levels, hostility to newcomers, and a tendency to adhere to rules into absurdity, unless it suits them to do otherwise).

Add to that the fact that people with a lot of knowledge about a topic but little knowledge about communication often end up writing those (science articles BY science majors FOR science majors, and screw you if you're not), and they in turn use the above issues to keep away more literate newbies who might actually make the article approachable, and yeah, I have some strong reservations about the future of wiki.

 

[Cheetah]

True, but I'm not one for making donations. If I'm going to give my money to someone I expect either a product, service, or some other tangible return on my investment that results in a net profit for me. If the ones asking for my money can't offer that, then I don't even consider opening my wallet.

The emphasized part perfectly describes Wikipedia for me. I use it constantly, and have absolutely no problem giving them money from time to time. If I was to calculate the time spent per cost, it wouldn't even be a cent an hour. It's really one of the most useful, and thus valuable, products/services I use every day, and also probably the cheapest.

 

[Archbob]

Giving a few bucks to wiki is cheaper than having to buy the new version of Encarta or Britannica

 

[kramerfan86]

Wikipedia's a great resource at this time, but it,s showing some troubling issues at the internal "community" level that makes me suspect it may not remain so in the long term (clique mentality at the higher levels, hostility to newcomers, and a tendency to adhere to rules into absurdity, unless it suits them to do otherwise).

Add to that the fact that people with a lot of knowledge about a topic but little knowledge about communication often end up writing those (science articles BY science majors FOR science majors, and screw you if you're not), and they in turn use the above issues to keep away more literate newbies who might actually make the article approachable, and yeah, I have some strong reservations about the future of wiki.

Yea the more active high end editors are near insufferable. Certainly have convinced me to never try to actively get involved even on subjects I am an expert in.

 

[Goodfella]

I've donated around $40 and have a wikipedia shirt. Wiki obviously has its shortcomings but it's a great site nonetheless.