back to article Google gifts Wiki millions

Google is giving the Wikimedia Foundation a $2m donation, meaning the online fact dump can continue to serve up instant research to hard-pressed college students and broadcast researchers. There's no official announcement but Jimmy Wales and Mitch Kapor, also on the board, spilt the beans on Twitter. The Foundation funds …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Google pays 2M$ to hide pagerank failure

    2M$ is pretty cheap for the billion dollar company to hide the fact that if Wikipedia did not exist then everyone would notice that pagerank or whatever else they have tried does not work.

  2. criscros

    I like this

    A very honourable gesture from Google. Wish more companies would do this sort of thing more often.

  3. Bilgepipe

    Not Surprising

    "the site still faces the problem of a decline in the number of footsoldiers willing to edit the site for free."

    Given how snobbish and egotistical some of the Wikinazis can be, I'm not surprised. I saw a note on a page recently basically stating the content of a page about a computer game was given in the form of a fictional account. No sh*t, Sherlock.

  4. OhFFS
    Dead Vulture



    No bitchy strapline?

    You're slipping...

    What is teh evil angle here, again?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Not bitchy or even funny. And all on Ms Bee's day off...

      allow me to proffer my own meagre effort: "Wiki wonga from the Chocolate Factory"

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Thumb Down


      I wouldn't edit that pusbucket, even if they paid me.

      I don't stick around forums that are managed by snotty pricks so full of themselves that there's no room for anything like common sense.

      I use Wikipoopy-ya as a quick "layman's explanation" of things, but it's completely worthless for anything serious. Just trawl through some of the page edit histories of things that you know about. You'll be slugging Scottish beer and crying your eyes out within a half hour.

    3. garetht t


      The evil angle..? That's easy. A site as large as wikipedia - would be a lovely purchase for Google, surely.. Think of all the data they can mine from edits, impressions, etc..

      Oh! They can't buy Wikipedia..? Well, how about they do the next best thing then, and graciously give them a bundle of cash. Then 10 years later, Google will be the *only* ones giving them substantial cash, which will put them in quite a nice position to start dictating terms..

      do no evil =/= increase shareholder revenue

  5. Anonymous Coward


    ... why don't they give a similar amount to Wikileaks?

    Or would that upset the Chinese...?

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Whatever happened to Knol?

    I thought that was going to sound the death knell for Wikipedia?

    1. Anonymous Coward

      Death Knol


  7. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Up

    Good News

    This is genuinely good news.

    When Google start paying people to edit content then I'd be really worried.

    Nothing wrong with Wikipedia articles coming top in Google's research - there is no ulterior motive and Google's rakning formula is secret - if you don't like it use Bing or Yahoo. Of course, if Wikipedia start pushing adverts on their site then this would be very sinister (of course, then they would not need the money).

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Up

    Editing pages

    My little Wiki edit some years ago remains in place, serving as a constant reminder to myself that if *that* piece of nonsense can remain un-checked after several years (and, rather pleasingly, has now propogated itself around the web), then I should not rely on anything I read elsewhere on Wiki.

    It remains, on the whole, a good resource though. And bless Google's little evel-free socks for their donation.

  9. Anonymous Coward

    Lack of editors

    The lack of people willing to edit articles is entirely their own fault. If they throw away all the edits ever contributed, even those by experts in the field, what do they expect?

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    Wish they'd do the same for Wikileaks :)

  11. Neil Greatorex
    Paris Hilton

    Clueless admins

    I removed a reference to a "Notable former resident" from my village wikipedia page, I used (Getting your baps out hardly counts as "notable") as a laugh. Someone tried to add it back the next day, but was removed for "No reference" or some other bollocks. Our notable former resident is still missing from the page now.

    <hangs head>

    Our notable former resident is/was Abi Titmuss.....

    </hangs head>

    Nicer tits than Paris.

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Paris Hilton

    C'mon MS, Apple, HP, ...

    C'mon MS, Apple, HP, Dell, ...

    Do your bits dudes.

  13. James Woods

    maybe they can stop begging for money now

    I was getting sick and tired of reading the "we need money" everytime I went on wikipedia.

    Hey Jimbo, alot of us webmasters provide websites for free, some spending hundreds of dollars a month (of their own money) to keep a site up for the public. If people find your cause worth donating to, they will donate to it.

    I've read so many user pages of old wiki admins that have quit/resigned because of the politics and other nonsense that goes on at wikipedia. It's ashame it doesn't run out of money and disappear.

    At least google and it's people will secure non-biased wiki pages for awhile with this fruit basket.

    I could seriously do without wikipedia.

  14. Anonymous Coward

    The Wikinazies rule the roost!

    I have to say I he posted pages, edited pages and contributed content only to have the Wikinazie police slap me down, revert and redirect...

    So we have people monitoring the content creation when they don't have the knowledge of the content being created, for instance we created an entry for premedia for them to state that it doesn't cite any references (well that was after I reverted back their relink to prepress... If it was prepress then we would have edited prepress... pricks!) so because a new term doesn't have any references - what the hell were we creating in Wikipedia! Emmm that be the reference!

    Googles donation can only be a good thing, maybe in time the site will become more dynamic!

  15. Anonymous Coward

    I must be stupid

    I have added just a few wee lines to some entries. I would like to do more but I haven't a 'kin clue about how to format some baffling looking things and I can't be arsed to wade through some "help" pages to learn what to do. - now that's much easier.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019