Wikipedia

[guybrushthreepwood]

Please do not donate to this unsophisticated ancient website.

Any respectable modern website would recognize modern convenient means of donation.  I'll tell you what Wikipedia, if you publish your address, I'll send you a check.  Remember checks?  LOL!!  Morons.

you do realize they allow bitcoin donations, right?

That might be true, but they build their donation page as if they don't.  So in effect, they don't.  In other words, their user interface if very bitcoin unfriendly - even if they will accept bitcoin in some other medium.  They need a QR code on that page or people can easily donate in bitcoin without searching around for 30 minutes.  I am giving nothing.

Lol, seriously? They accept it and that's good enough. What do you want? A massive flashing bitcoin logo on their homescreen? Something tells me you wouldn't actually donate to wikipedia anyway so it's probably irrelevant.

[Krona Rev]

"To protect our independence, we'll never run ads"

To protect my independence, I won't give you my name.

Kudos. Excellent response.

[zyzzbrah]

"To protect our independance, we'll never run adds"

To protect my independance, I won't give you my name.

do yo need to give your name if you make a btc donation??

[ChuckBuck]

Yea it is kind of wack for Wikimedia to require you to put so much personal information:



Kind of defeats the purpose of Bitcoin being a truly anonymous no strings attached method of payment.

At least other non profits like Mozilla, United Way, and Tor Project are more accessible and require less info when donating Bitcoin to them:

http://www.unitedway.org/pages/donate-bitcoin-to-united-way

https://www.torproject.org/donate/donate

[mikewirth]

Please do not donate to this unsophisticated ancient website.

Any respectable modern website would recognize modern convenient means of donation.  I'll tell you what Wikipedia, if you publish your address, I'll send you a check.  Remember checks?  LOL!!  Morons.

you do realize they allow bitcoin donations, right?

That might be true, but they build their donation page as if they don't.  So in effect, they don't.  In other words, their user interface if very bitcoin unfriendly - even if they will accept bitcoin in some other medium.  They need a QR code on that page or people can easily donate in bitcoin without searching around for 30 minutes.  I am giving nothing.

Lol, seriously? They accept it and that's good enough. What do you want? A massive flashing bitcoin logo on their homescreen? Something tells me you wouldn't actually donate to wikipedia anyway so it's probably irrelevant.

What?  Are you stupid?  If it is very hard to use and to find the donation page buried deep in some tree structure with shitty interfaces, which don't work - you still say 'they accept bitcoin'?  Nobody will use bitcoin if it isn't easy to use and promenantly displayed.  fuck Wikipedia - most of that site is all trash anyway.  Don't donate.  Maybe we can choke them off and a new site will come along.

[rgenito]

Please do not donate to this unsophisticated ancient website.

Any respectable modern website would recognize modern convenient means of donation.  I'll tell you what Wikipedia, if you publish your address, I'll send you a check.  Remember checks?  LOL!!  Morons.

you do realize they allow bitcoin donations, right?

sure, they allow bitcoins... but what's up with BLATANTLY not showing bitcoin as a payment option? seriously. that's just uncalled for. And this is exactly why I continue to deliberately *not* support wikipedia until they get their act together.

[freedomno1]

I tried to tell them to post a Bitcoin address last year during a donation campaign. Shame on them for not providing one.

I'd love to make an anonymous Bitcoin donation because I appreciate the service they provide and the worldwide cooperative nature of Wikipedia content.

Their loss.

In agreement if I cannot retain the option to maintain my pseudoanonyminity when making a donation to some group or organization then it is their loss.

[EnFinlay]

Please do not donate to this unsophisticated ancient website.

Any respectable modern website would recognize modern convenient means of donation.  I'll tell you what Wikipedia, if you publish your address, I'll send you a check.  Remember checks?  LOL!!  Morons.
https://i.imgur.com/U1tD8dv.jpg

Nice respectable, modern web browser, guy.

I like you.  Carry on.

[Bitcoins101]

Yea it is kind of wack for Wikimedia to require you to put so much personal information:



Kind of defeats the purpose of Bitcoin being a truly anonymous no strings attached method of payment.

At least other non profits like Mozilla, United Way, and Tor Project are more accessible and require less info when donating Bitcoin to them:

http://www.unitedway.org/pages/donate-bitcoin-to-united-way

https://www.torproject.org/donate/donate

Bitcoin was never meant to be truly anonymous.

Wikipedia is the worst website on the Internet you could donate to.

Wikipedia is a "non-profit" website that puts real businesses out of business. They have effectively cornered the online information market and instead of using advertising-based models (which create revenue from the non-enthusiast users), they ask the enthusiast users (who already contribute countless hours of work maintaining pages) for donations.

A few years ago I ran a very large online forum. All revenue was ad revenue. I disabled all ads for all registered users, because they're already contributing content to the site - you don't need to take their money, too. Instead, I let people who were not contributing by posting (unregistered users) contribute financially by littering the site with advertisements for them.

I strongly feel that this is the correct way to run a business (or even a nonprofit website), rather than ask your very best members to contribute money. Wikipedia should partner with Google's advertising and serve advertisements to all non-contributors. Google already puts them #1 for every search term (which pushes the informational sites on specific topics from real enthusiasts out of business), so it would only be natural.

If you want to donate to a site in that space, I'd recommend archive.org. The primary monetary contributors are going to be the users who utilize the resources they provide the most extensively, so asking for donations seems reasonable in their case.

Tails is okay and probably more worthy than archive.org. However, there are lower-funded privacy and anonymity projects you can contribute to that don't constantly have security holes. Properly configured TBB plus FDE is likely significantly safer than Tails.

[doof]

Please do not donate to this unsophisticated ancient website.

Any respectable modern website would recognize modern convenient means of donation.  I'll tell you what Wikipedia, if you publish your address, I'll send you a check.  Remember checks?  LOL!!  Morons.

Nice respectable, modern web browser, guy.

I like you.  Carry on.

Beaten!  Ancient site on ancient browser.  If you dont like the site, dont use it.

[exoton]

I tried to tell them to post a Bitcoin address last year during a donation campaign. Shame on them for not providing one.

I'd love to make an anonymous Bitcoin donation because I appreciate the service they provide and the worldwide cooperative nature of Wikipedia content.

Their loss.

In agreement if I cannot retain the option to maintain my pseudoanonyminity when making a donation to some group or organization then it is their loss.

What would stop you from inputting some random information into their donation "form" when giving them money? Or even better yet, what would stop you from putting in some information that is derived from the (planned) sending address? It is my understanding they do not validate the information you give them

[Soros Shorts]

Yea it is kind of wack for Wikimedia to require you to put so much personal information:



Kind of defeats the purpose of Bitcoin being a truly anonymous no strings attached method of payment.

They don't force you to use your real name. You only need it for tax purposes if you want to claim a tax deduction (they will email you a receipt with the information you entered). I've donated twice with fake names and bogus addresses.

I don't see what is the problem. Some people who report their Bitcoin transactions to the IRS would probably want to take a deduction.

[ChuckBuck]

Yea it is kind of wack for Wikimedia to require you to put so much personal information:

-snip-

Kind of defeats the purpose of Bitcoin being a truly anonymous no strings attached method of payment.

They don't force you to use your real name. You only need it for tax purposes if you want to claim a tax deduction (they will email you a receipt with the information you entered). I've donated twice with fake names and bogus addresses.

I don't see what is the problem. Some people who report their Bitcoin transactions to the IRS would probably want to take a deduction.

Shouldn't be that way though.  Look at Tor Project:

https://www.torproject.org/donate/donate.html.en

Nice and clean donate page, Bitcoin highly visible without filling a bunch of info, and email is optional.

No excuses for Wikimedia or Mozilla's archaic and convoluted Donate system.

[allthingsluxury]

Last I read, they are accepting bitcoins, multiple people have reported this.

[botany]

Yea it is kind of wack for Wikimedia to require you to put so much personal information:

-snip-

Kind of defeats the purpose of Bitcoin being a truly anonymous no strings attached method of payment.

They don't force you to use your real name. You only need it for tax purposes if you want to claim a tax deduction (they will email you a receipt with the information you entered). I've donated twice with fake names and bogus addresses.

I don't see what is the problem. Some people who report their Bitcoin transactions to the IRS would probably want to take a deduction.

Shouldn't be that way though.  Look at Tor Project:

https://www.torproject.org/donate/donate.html.en

Nice and clean donate page, Bitcoin highly visible without filling a bunch of info, and email is optional.

No excuses for Wikimedia or Mozilla's archaic and convoluted Donate system.

This is neat.
May be we should have these guys add a link "Donate to Wikimedia/Mozilla" on their webpage, and just pass on the donations received.

[exoton]

Yea it is kind of wack for Wikimedia to require you to put so much personal information:



Kind of defeats the purpose of Bitcoin being a truly anonymous no strings attached method of payment.

They don't force you to use your real name. You only need it for tax purposes if you want to claim a tax deduction (they will email you a receipt with the information you entered). I've donated twice with fake names and bogus addresses.

I don't see what is the problem. Some people who report their Bitcoin transactions to the IRS would probably want to take a deduction.

I guess some people are just too stubborn about wanting privacy to even consider using bitcoin with something that even asks for your personal information

[pawel7777]

Yea it is kind of wack for Wikimedia to require you to put so much personal information:

-snip-

Kind of defeats the purpose of Bitcoin being a truly anonymous no strings attached method of payment.

They don't force you to use your real name. You only need it for tax purposes if you want to claim a tax deduction (they will email you a receipt with the information you entered). I've donated twice with fake names and bogus addresses.

I don't see what is the problem. Some people who report their Bitcoin transactions to the IRS would probably want to take a deduction.

Shouldn't be that way though.  Look at Tor Project:

https://www.torproject.org/donate/donate.html.en

Nice and clean donate page, Bitcoin highly visible without filling a bunch of info, and email is optional.

No excuses for Wikimedia or Mozilla's archaic and convoluted Donate system.

OK, so now tell me how do I get proper receipt (for tax purpose) from TOR when I send donations without submitting any details?

Wikimedia's not TOR's donation option is done properly. You want a tax deduction, you get the receipt hassle free. You want to stay anonymous, just type "John Doe", it's not that hard, is it?

[MountainOfCoins]

Whats the problem? They'r accepting bitcoin, and I can confirm this... And they really deserve appreciation, since they'r really making the world better, and represent one of the most successful projects ever powered by a community.

[superresistant]

 
I agree with OP. Wikipedia is a fucking coward for not adding the Bitcoin donation button on the front donation page.
I know that they are accepting it if you do some research BUT why hiding it ??
It means that they are ashamed of Bitcoin.
Screw them. I am ashamed of Wikipedia !

[pawel7777]

...
I know that they are accepting it if you do some research BUT why hiding it ??
...

Why? Likely for the same reasons Mozilla removed bitcoin donation button. It distracted page viewers resulting in less donations.

https://fundraising.mozilla.org/bitcoin-donations-to-mozilla-17-days-in/

We received numerous requests from donors that they wanted bitcoin featured right on our primary donation form. Given the volume of page views to that form (millions during the life of the campaign), I was concerned that adding any unnecessary text would distract donors and depress non-bitcoin conversions, the source of more than 99% of all our campaign revenue. So we decided to add “Donate with Bitcoin” text, and test whether it depressed conversion or not. Here is what that looked like: [...]

The test showed that revenue per visitor drops by about $0.07 USD. Here is the Optimizely graph showing a 7.5% reduction in revenue per visitor:[...]