Wikipedia profile

The Wikimedia movement is supported by donations and other disclosed nonprofit income.

Donations and other support fund the Wikimedia Foundation. Its FY2026–27 plan budgets $230 million revenue and $240 million expenses.

A nonprofit’s annual surplus or deficit measures resources available for its mission rather than profit distributed to shareholders.

Nonprofit or mission-locked structure; no ordinary public equity valuation.

Donations and institutional support fund a nonprofit knowledge project rather than an advertising feed.

Machine-learning tools help editors detect problematic edits and organise work. The encyclopedia’s defining mechanism remains editable articles, human discussion and inspectable references.

Wikimedia’s technical community and Foundation support the infrastructure; volunteers write and maintain articles.

The Foundation’s reader/editor policy says it does not sell personal information or share it for third-party marketing. Reading generally does not require an account; technical data can still be processed. Contributions are public and persistent, and removing a page edit is different from deleting every historical attribution.

Revision histories, talk pages, administrators and sourcing rules provide visible routes for correction.

Read the cited source and discussion history when a claim matters; you can inspect how the wording changed.

20/25 points

Citations, edit histories and discussion make Wikipedia’s production process inspectable. You can follow a claim back to its source and see how editors changed the wording.

25/25 points

The Foundation’s reader/editor policy says it does not sell personal information or share it for third-party marketing. Reading generally does not require an account; technical data can still be processed. Contributions are public and persistent, and removing a page edit is different from deleting every historical attribution.

20/25 points

An article's citations and revision history matter more than its confident presentation.

15/25 points

Read the cited source and discussion history when a claim matters; you can inspect how the wording changed.

Comparison priority: the article’s references and revision history. The most valuable next destination may be the original source linked at the bottom.

A clear explanation rewards curiosity and leads naturally to another subject.

Internal links, related topics and current events supply the next reading cue.

Free access and consistent article layouts make unfamiliar subjects approachable.

Editors, discussion pages and revision histories expose knowledge being negotiated by a community.

The pressure is intellectual rather than a sales countdown: the next link promises to close another gap in understanding.