THREAD:
So, it's that time of the year again when Wikipedia asks people for money. But do they really need it? How much of it is used to keep the site running? And where does the rest of it go? Read on to find out.

First off, notice the tone of the appeal. They say that this is the "sixth appeal", all they ask is ₹150 and also that 98% of their readers don't donate. If this makes you feel they *need* the money, it's by design - they have a 8 people team to manage fundraising conversions.

But do they actually need it? Let's find out.

Let's compare the donations raised and expenses of Wikimedia Foundation over the past few years.

2012-13: Raised $44m / Expended $35m
2014-15: 72m / 52m
2017-18: 97m / 81m
2018-19: 110m / 91m

Not exactly poor, are they?

For nonprofits, having an year's worth of spending money at hand is generally advisable.

As per their last earnings report, WMF have $176m worth of assets, out of which a whopping $152m is in cash and cash-equivalents. That is almost TWICE the amount they spent this year.

But let's look at their spending again. As you'll see above, WMF went from spending $35m in 2012 to $91m in 2019. What changed?

First things first - website hosting. This has remained almost constant, going from $2.3m in 2012 to $2.5m in 2019.

Since Wikipedia is powered by the community, the platform facilitating that community is the most important value generator of the organisation. However, we can see that in 2019 - powering that platform takes less than 3% of their expenses. Where does the rest go?

As expected, staff wages is a major cost centre with $46m in 2019. We'll come back to this.

The second highest cost centre is awards and grants, which comes to $12m. What do these grants cover? Apparently, projects that "benefit the Wikimedia movement".

...except that it's only half true. When I looked at the grants, I saw multiple items that weren't very.. pertinent.

A grant of $2000 to shoot jazz concerts in Norway. $300 for a fashion museum in NZ. $650 for a women in STEM conference in Atlanta. Not very "essential", right?

To be clear, I don't think funding such projects is unnecessary. I'm sure these people are doing great work in their fields.

Guilt-tripping people from poor countries like India into paying for them is, however, very dishonest in my view.

That $2000 USD you granted to a concert photographer? It's worth six months of stipend for most Indian students.

It would be fair if Wiki clearly mentioned where our donations go. Instead, they act like they need our money to keep the lights on and then do as they wish with it.

Coming back to the staff costs. The median salary at WMF is $96,500. Their perks include gym memberships and catered lunches. In context, the median personal income in US is $31,600.

I'm sorry, but students contributing to pay executive salaries doesn't sit right with me.

I have donated to Wikipedia in the past. I might donate again depending on the cause. However, their reckless rise in spending which outstrips all inflation figures is worrying - and their subtle guilt trips are downright immoral.

I'd request you to think twice before donating.

Sources:

https://wikimediafoundation.org/about/financial-reports/

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/Browse_applications