Wikipedia Begging, Needs New Revenue Model

When all is said and done, Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales’ legacy is secured. He created one of the best resources of information in history. Keeping that legacy alive, though, may require a new revenue model.

Across the top of collective knowledge, Wales has placed a banner asking for donations. Clicking over to $30 minimum, are the primary ways Wikipedia funds itself, in addition to grants and gifts, but advertising is still not on the table as an option. Wales is transparent about special protection to one’s Wikipedia entry for a sizable donation, along with his alleged luxurious lifestyle. And yet, no advertising allowed.

“Wikipedia is different,” writes Wales. “It's the largest encyclopedia in history, written by volunteers. Like a national park or a school, we don't believe advertising should have a place in Wikipedia.”

Jacqui Cheng at Ars Technica posits the traditional pitfalls of user-generated content and advertising: “what big-time brand wants to take a chance on appearing above unvetted and potentially libelous entries that could, at any moment, have key words replaced by terms for genitalia?”

I wonder if this question is out of date. Surely advertisers are getting past this guilt-by-association game in this day and age. If they haven’t gotten past this, they need to. But it doesn’t have to big name advertisers either. If Wales wants to keep it as pure as possible, why not become an ad haven for mom-and-pops, small businesses, enviro-friendly pursuits, other nonprofit organizations (they do, advertise, you know). As many caveats as one likes could be produced.

Or, if special protections are sometimes okay—as a couple of people have alleged in recent years—why not a sister service where people and companies can pay for a Wikipedia page of their own where they can tell their own stories? Why can’t, at the top of the community-edited page, a link be provided to the subject’s own version of events? It's a form of special protection, just more transparent.

The revenue paths for a site as popular and beloved as Wikipedia are potentially limitless, yet Wales wishes to rely on, well, charity.