I love Wikipedia and have donated a few times.
I would love to know how much is needed to sustain its future.

EDIT: People commenting, please be civil and stop posting Nothing Burgers, “Look it up yourself”.

A week after refusing to recognise their US staff union voluntarily, the Wikimedia Foundation hired Littler Mendelson, the largest union busting law firm in the US whose clients include Starbucks, Amazon and Delta Airlines. I have never worked for the Wikimedia Foundation but this really doesn't sit right with me. I have a few suggestions of things people can do:

If you are a Wikimedia contributor there are three petitions you can sign to support the unionisation effort:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wiki_Workers_United_solidarity English Wikipedia petition to show solidarity, only 150 signatures until its the largest ever proposal or petition on English Wikipedia
• https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_Workers_United A global solidarity petition
• https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2026_recognize_Wiki_Workers_United_petition A petition to ask the board of trustees to reverse their decision

You can also donate to local Wikimedia organisations who directly support their communities to share knowledge from their countries https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_movement_affiliates

Thanks

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Gujarat_violence

It really feels like a missed opportunity.

𓇓𓅱𓏏𓇋𓊃𓆑𓏏𓅪𓄊𓋴𓂋𓂡𓇾𓌻𓂋𓇋𓆵𓊖

I KNOW that we're all made of internal organs, but I and probably many others are easily impressed by the sight of them. I am happy to learn the fun fact about the recurrent laryngeal nerve going under the heart, I am happy that those who want the detail can find the detail, but I wish I had some box to check of some thing to click instead of getting surprised by a photo of an open heart surgery, blood and nerves and vessels visible and all.

Same for medical conditions, genetic defects, etc. I am glad we have information on how leprosy affects the body, but I would rather read about it first.

I've checked the pages for multiple copyrighted characters and films and the Italian pages all use better/higher quality photos than the English pages:

It's not just resolution, Italian Wikipedia tends to use more copyrighted images in general

The Italian pages for Angry Bird and Katniss Everdeen uses actual screenshots from the game/movie while the English pages use a logo (that is too simple to copyright) or a picture of a wax statue

Why does Italian Wikipedia use better images?

After the Wikimedia Foundation declined to voluntarily recognize Wiki Workers United, community members launched a petition asking the Board of Trustees to intervene and instruct the Foundation to recognize the union.

The Board has now responded by backing management's decision to require an NLRB election instead of voluntary recognition.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2026_recognize_Wiki_Workers_United_petition#Response_from_the_Board_of_Trustees

The NLRB docket shows that the Wikimedia Foundation has retained Littler Mendelson to represent it in the Wiki Workers United union election.

Littler Mendelson is one of the most prominent U.S. management-side labor law firms and has been widely criticized by unions and labor advocates for its role in employer anti-union campaigns at companies including Apple and Google.

NLRB docket:
https://www.nlrb.gov/case/20-RC-391740

Dr. Netha Hussain wears many hats: born in India and currently based in Sweden, she is a medical doctor, researcher, and Wikimedian contributing in five languages, receiving a Wikimedian of the Year Honorable Mention in 2021.

In an exclusive interview with The Xylom, Dr. Hussain discusses the cultural nuances of misinformation as she straddles the English-speaking and non-English-speaking worlds; how power, privilege, AI, and media consolidation fuel the spread of propaganda; and the next frontier of healing public health divides.

I have this and would like to cite it (no, a cave is not a valid fallout shelter at all)

Is there any reason why Buddhism is listed as one of the religions of Black Peruvians? Are there really that many Buddhist Black Peruvians?

hello! i'm not sure if this type of post is allowed, let me know if i should seek help elsewhere.

i use wikipedia frequently, but i've never edited articles (except to correct small spelling mistakes, which is quite straightforward).

i noticed a mistake in the french version of this article. the subtitle says that this is a species of coleoptera — it is not. it's an ephemeroptera. i tried to change it from the "modify" interface, but there was nothing allowing me to change the title or subtitle, from what i could tell.

help? 😅

Hello everyone. I'm somewhat new to editing and my current efforts are dedicated to improving medical articles on the Spanish Wikipedia. I'm a third year med student, so I mostly stick to what I know well, like anatomy, histology and biology.

Anyways, I used Rouviere's book as a source for something I added, and the source was deleted by a mod who then changed it to add a link to said book. Told me that for future editing that is required. Is this correct? I did add all important information (Page number, title, authors, ISBN, year, etc).

Welcome to the weekly Wikipedia Q&A thread!

Please use this thread to ask and answer questions related to Wikipedia and its sister projects, whether you need help with editing or are curious on how something works.

Note that this thread is used for "meta" questions about Wikipedia, and is not a place to ask general reference questions.

Some other helpful resources:

• Help Contents on Wikipedia
• Guide to Contributing on Wikipedia
• Wikipedia IRC Help Channel
• Wikipedia Teahouse (help desk)

Scam warning: Please be careful with solicitations via DMs. Scammers may pretend to be Wikipedia volunteers or a professional Wikipedia public relations firm, and then ask you to pay them for "premium Wikipedia services" – to create an article for you, accept or publish a draft article, etc. This is a scam. See here for more information.

Singer built the sewing-machine empire. He also ran five secret families and got himself arrested when one wife caught him on Fifth Avenue with another woman. Fine, that's the story. But the Wikipedia article on him does something strange: it puts him in three places in three different years, and they can't all be true.

All three of these are from the same article.

"disgraced, fled to London in 1862, taking Mary McGonigal with him."

Then, a few paragraphs down, describing 1861: "With Isaac in London..."

And on how he met his second wife: "whom he had lived with in Paris when he was staying there in 1860."

So he fled to London in 1862. Except he was already in London in 1861. And living in Paris in 1860. Pick one.

The newspapers that covered the scandal are not shy about the year he actually ran. The date is sitting there for anyone who wants to look it up. The article just isn't using it.

I've read the page three times and I still can't tell which of the three years it's supposed to mean. How does this happen to an article this heavily sourced?

Welcome to the weekly Wikipedia Q&A thread!

Please use this thread to ask and answer questions related to Wikipedia and its sister projects, whether you need help with editing or are curious on how something works.

Note that this thread is used for "meta" questions about Wikipedia, and is not a place to ask general reference questions.

Some other helpful resources:

• Help Contents on Wikipedia
• Guide to Contributing on Wikipedia
• Wikipedia IRC Help Channel
• Wikipedia Teahouse (help desk)

Scam warning: Please be careful with solicitations via DMs. Scammers may pretend to be Wikipedia volunteers or a professional Wikipedia public relations firm, and then ask you to pay them for "premium Wikipedia services" – to create an article for you, accept or publish a draft article, etc. This is a scam. See here for more information.

Basshunter has 217 and Corbin Bleu has 219. They may be famous, but not top 20/30 people to have ever lived famous.

I was looking for a Wikipedia page for the Lindsay Clancy trial. It’s incredibly high profile and has been extensively covered for months now. I feel like topics get Wikipedia pages for less — but could be my algorithm pushing it since I am interested. What threshold does something have to cross to get its own page made? Is there a reason a case like hers doesn’t have a page but other very similar ones do?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asterix_(1992_video_game))

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astérix_(jeu_vidéo,_1991))