 | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article or a Wikipedia policy, as it has not been reviewed by the community. |
One rhetorical device that arises with some frequency during discussions on Wikipedia is a claim that "I was going to donate a lot of money to Wikipedia, but now that I see how you other editors are acting, I'm not going to", or "I have been donating in the past, but now I am going to stop". This is most commonly used by editors who are new to Wikipedia and have been looking to use it to promote a favorite business, person, or cause, or otherwise influence a Wikipedia discussion. If you've been directed to this page, perhaps you have used it yourself.
This is not an effective gambit.
The reasons why this statement fails to have the intended impact include:
- Nobody believes you about your donations. There is nothing cheaper than to say that you were going to donate but won't, or that you have donated before but are now going to stop. It costs you nothing, so it's recognized as an easy boast. There is no way for other editors to verify your claim.
- The people you are addressing would not have been helped by the donation. In the vast majority of cases, what you're saying is not being seen by anyone who is actually employed by the Wikimedia Foundation that receives financial donations. The editing and deletion discussions are attended by unpaid volunteers instead. Your donation would not have changed their income or the comfort of their work in any way.
- The different treatment you desire would not be worth the donation. The editors you are talking to are not likely to want a Wikipedia stripped of proper editorial review or to be a more promotional site influenced by financial donations.
- A Wikipedia that was influenced by financial donations would have access to far more money than whatever you are claiming you would have donated. Imagine a Wikipedia where the willingness to donate was allowed to control content and discussions. This is a heavily-trafficked site with high Google ranking on almost any subject it covers. The amount it could make allowing companies to pay for control over their own articles is huge. But then, it wouldn't be Wikipedia any more and would lose its credibility. After all, the richest man in the world has tried and failed to influence Wikipedia with an offer of one billion dollars.
- The people you are talking to have donated far more than you would have. The amount of time that has been spent editing Wikipedia articles is estimated to be in the hundreds of millions of hours, including much effort by experts in their fields. That's billions of dollars worth of time, donated for free.
So don't act as if you're financially punishing Wikipedia for being Wikipedia. Instead, try to find ways in which Wikipedia goals are in line with your personal goals, and work with other editors toward those shared goals.