Lunduke
News • Science & Tech
The Wiki Piggy Bank
Wikimedia grows rich as Wikipedia donations are used for political causes
August 20, 2023
post photo preview

Over the last two decades, Wikipedia has become one of the most visited -- and most referenced --websites on Earth.

And nearly every one of us is familiar with Wikipedia's regular requests for donations, often including urgent-sounding text along the lines of "protect Wikipedia's independence" and "without reader contributions, we couldn’t run Wikipedia."

Sounds pretty dire, right?  Wikipedia must be in pretty rough shape!  They need those donations right away!  If I don't donate, they might need to shut down!  Surely they run a pretty tight ship, with some pretty lean and mean operations... right?  And surely -- surely -- the funds they have are being handled in a transparent way!

You know what?

Just for kicks, let's take a look at the finances of Wikipedia -- using all publicly available sources of documentation (including IRS filings, annual reports, and audits) -- and see what the real financial state of Wikipedia is like.

Because this is The Lunduke Journal.  And that's what we do.

Spoiler: It's all really, really weird.  And highly sketchy.  Also a ton of money donated for Wikipedia... isn't used to run Wikipedia.

The Wikimedia Foundation

The financial core of Wikipedia is the Wikimedia Foundation.  The Foundation, itself, is responsible for running the actual Wikipedia servers -- and that is where everything else branches out from.

Let's start with the most basic piece of information we need:

How much money does The Wikimedia Foundation receive, in donations, every year -- from people who believe they are directly funding the Wikipedia servers?

According to the most recent IRS filings (2021)... roughly $164 Million USD for the year.

Public Donations to Wikimedia, per year.  Source: 990.

Year-on-year, Wikimedia is seeing significant growth -- with each year recording record donations.  Up an additional $9 Million between 2020 and 2021 alone.

While those numbers seem large, at first glance, they really only tell a small part of the story.

What if -- for example -- Wikipedia needs even more than $164 Million, every single year, to operate?  What are the various expenses of Wikipedia?

Luckily, we have a high level breakout of expenses in the yearly Wikimedia Foundation audit.

Turns out, the costs associated with the server hosting of Wikipedia for 2021 was just shy of $2.4 Million.

But server hosting costs are only part of the equation, right?  There's also other wages, travel, and all manner of expenses.  So let's add it all up.

Revenue and Expenses.  Source: 2021 Audit.  Note: The numbers shown for 2022 are not final and are likely to be wildly different than the numbers published in the official 2022 audit.

After all is said and done -- and all revenue and expenses are taken into consideration -- The Wikimedia Foundation received over $50 Million dollars more than they spent in 2021.

They made $50+ million in profit.

Doesn't sound like an organization that is hurting for funding... does it?

Let's take a look back over the last few years (starting in 2015) and chart out the yearly financials of Wikimedia.  It shows some absolutely astonishing growth in terms of total assets (such as money in the bank).

Sources: Yearly 990's and Public Wikimedia Audits

A few items worth noting:

  • Server Hosting related costs for all Wikipedia related sites was $2 Million in 2015.  It has remained mostly flat (compared to income and other costs) only raising to $2.4 Million as of 2021.
  • As of 2021, Wikimedia has over $231 Million in assets.  And growing... rapidly.  Just look at that blue line!
  • Assets and profit are growing, despite a massive increase in Salaries and Wages: from $26 Million in 2015... to $67.8 Million in 2021.

So.  Let's answer a burning question:

Q: Does Wikipedia desperately need your donations in order to continue operating?

A: No.  Not by a long-shot.  If donations dropped significantly, there would be no hit to Wikipedia operations.  Certainly not for quite some time.

When Wikipedia tells you they need your $5 donation to keep running?  They are lying to you.

In fact... this is just the tip of the iceberg.

There are also two unique financial entities, related to Wikimedia, that are... extremely strange: The Wikimedia Endowment and The Knowledge Equity Fund.

Let's take a look at those.

The Wikimedia Endowment

Back in 2016, The Wikimedia Foundation establed "The Wikimedia Endowment" -- with a goal of stockpiling $100 Million dollars worth of funding within the endowment.

So what is the stated goal of The Wikimedia Endowment? 

"The Wikimedia Endowment is our enduring commitment to a world of freely shared knowledge, now and in perpetuity."

Ok.  Vague.  But that tends to be the way with these sorts of foundations.

What sort of work actually gets funded by this Endowment?  According to their website... they only give a list of "select projects".  Not a complete list.  And we also don't have any details of how much this Endowment spends on any given project.

Source: wikimediaendowment.org

Not specific.  Not transparent.  No amounts given.  Or dates.  Or... much of anything.

But we do know that the Endowment has met its $100 Million funding goal (and still growing) as of 2021:

"as of December 31, 2021, the Endowment held $105.4 million ($99.33 million in an investment account and $6.07 million in cash), with an additional $8 million raised in December 2021 due to be transferred to the Endowment in January 2022."

Now... here's where The Wikimedia Endowment starts to get... weird.

From the time the Endowment was created, in 2016, to 2021... The Wikimedia Foundation deposited $5 Million dollars (of Wikipedia donations) into the Endowment.  Totalling $30 Million according to the most recent Wikimedia Foundation Audit.

Source: 2021 Audit

But... wait.  Wait.  Wait.

Two big questions crop up from that paragraph from the 2021 audit:

  1. If Wikimedia Foundation only contributed $30 Million (from user donations) to the Endowment... who contributed the rest of the money?  A company?  Rich benefactor?
  2. And what is this "Tides Foundation"?

Turns out, the benefactors of this Endowment are absolutely fascinating.

Source: Wikimedia Endowment Benefactors

You read that right.  George Soros.  Yes, that George Soros.  (Also Facebook & Google).

As for "The Tides Foundation", they run and manage the entire Wikimedia Endowment.  All $100+ Million of it.

Here is a very intereting bit, from Wikimedia:

"The funds may be transferred from Tides either to the Wikimedia Foundation or to other charitable organisations selected by the Wikimedia Foundation to further the Wikimedia mission."

Go ahead.  Read that sentence again.

That Wikimedia Endowment money?  That 100 Million bucks?  Could go to "other charitable organisations".  What are those?  Who knows!  There's close to zero transparency about it.

Whoever the heck "Tides" is... they have an awful lot of power here when it comes to this "Wikimedia Endowment" money.  Let's go further.

What, exactly, is Tides?

This is what Wikipedia says about Tides (it seemed an approriate place to reference):

"Tides Foundation is an American public charity and fiscal sponsor working to advance progressive causes and policy initiatives"

Yep.  The Tides Foundation is a specifically political organization... for funding, organizating, and pushing specific political agendas.

Editorial Note: Here at The Lunduke Journal of Technology, we try our best to stay away from politics.  As such, we will not be discussing some of the many, and varied, political stances of The Tides Foundation in any detail here.  But, since Tides (and, as we will see, Wikimedia) are making pointed political statements and investments... The Lunduke Journal will be including those and letting you, the reader, make up your own mind about any political ramifications.

Is it strange that Wikipedia donations are being sent, by the Millions, to be handled by a political orgainzation?  Yes.  That is, most definitely, strange.  Considering Wikipedia has repeatedly stated the importantce of neutrality... incredibly so.

But it gets... even weirder.

Neither Wikimedia nor The Tides Foundation publish details about how those funds are being used.  It appears to be a secret.  But, considering what The Tides Foundation does, it is something political.  And only on one side of the political spectrum.  Not neutral, like Wikipedia says they must be.

And the ties between Tides and Wikimedia go way, way beyond just managing a hundred million dollars...

In 2019, The Wikimedia Foundation hired a new General Council.  Where did that person work in her previous job?  You guessed it.  The Tides Foundation.  Seriously.

What do we know?

  • The Tides Foundation manages and runs all $100+ Million of the Wikimedia Endowment.
  • Donations to Wikipedia paid for roughly $30 Million of that Endowment (with the remainder coming from unknown sources).
  • The Tides Foundation exclusively does political work for one part of the political spectrum.
  • The connections between Wikimedia and Tides run deep.
  • Neither Tides, nor Wikimedia, have published how that money is being used.

Which brings us to yet another area where Wikimedia is investing Wikipedia donations... in ways that are extremely political.

Once again: The Lunduke Journal of Technology is not going to tell anyone what they should think about any particular political views.  The official stance of The Lunduke Journal is that extreme politics -- of any kind -- tend to not be a positive force in the running of software and other computing projects.

Knowledge Equity Fund

Let's talk about one more way that Wikipedia donations are spent.  This concerns a much smaller amount of funds than we previously talked about with the Endowment... but the stated goals around it warrant documenting.

According to Wikimedia:

The "Wikimedia Foundation Knowledge Equity Fund" is a US $4.5 million fund created by the Wikimedia Foundation in 2020, to provide grants to external organizations that support knowledge equity by addressing the racial inequities preventing access and participation in free knowledge.

Here are some quotes, from the same Wikimedia page, to provide clarity around their goals:

"The Wikimedia Foundation defines racial equity as shifting away from US and Eurocentricity, White-male-imperialist-patriarchal supremacy, superiority, power and privilege"

 

"Racial equity aims to promote ... non-White, non-US ... communities"

Whatever your thoughts around any of those statements, it should be noted that Wikimedia is spending $4.5 Million dollars worth of Wikipedia donations to further those goals.  Money that is not being spent on running Wikipedia.

In fact... it is worth noting that the dollar figure being allocated towards this "Knowledge Equity Fund" is twice the size of the yearly Server Hosting costs for all of Wikipedia.

What does all this mean?

Regardless of what any of us think about the specific political spending of Wikimedia, one thing is crystal clear:

A significant portion of donations -- solicited for the stated purpose of the running of Wikipedia -- are being spent furthing political goals.  Not on running Wikipedia.  All while Wikipedia is claiming to be barely surviving.

And Wikimedia is getting rich in the process.


Like this type of 100% independent Tech reporting?  Be sure to subscribe to Lunduke.Locals.com.  Even a free account is a good idea.

Here are a few other articles you might also find interesting:

community logo
Join the Lunduke Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
13
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
Open Source Leftists Attack Leftist Open Source Conference

"All Things Open", one of the most Leftist of all Tech conferences, is
under attack by... Leftists and Trans Activists. With talk of boycotts.

More from The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.com/

00:12:16
September 05, 2025
Brian Kernighan: Rust is "a pain"

The C and UNIX legend says the Rust programming language is "incomprehensibly big and slow", "I don't think it's gonna replace C".

Bonus: What Kernighan thinks of NixOS.

More from The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.com/

00:05:35
September 05, 2025
"32-bit Linux is Obsolete."

The plan to phase out 32-bit support for Linux outlined at Open Source Summit Europe last month.

More from The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.com/

00:17:38
November 22, 2023
The futility of Ad-Blockers

Ads are filling the entirety of the Web -- websites, podcasts, YouTube videos, etc. -- at an increasing rate. Prices for those ad placements are plummeting. Consumers are desperate to use ad-blockers to make the web palatable. Google (and others) are desperate to break and block ad-blockers. All of which results in... more ads and lower pay for creators.

It's a fascinatingly annoying cycle. And there's only one viable way out of it.

Looking for the Podcast RSS feed or other links? Check here:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4619051/lunduke-journal-link-central-tm

Give the gift of The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4898317/give-the-gift-of-the-lunduke-journal

The futility of Ad-Blockers
November 21, 2023
openSUSE says "No Lunduke allowed!"

Those in power with openSUSE make it clear they will not allow me anywhere near anything related to the openSUSE project. Ever. For any reason.

Well, that settles that, then! Guess I won't be contributing to openSUSE! 🤣

Looking for the Podcast RSS feed or other links?
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4619051/lunduke-journal-link-central-tm

Give the gift of The Lunduke Journal:
https://lunduke.locals.com/post/4898317/give-the-gift-of-the-lunduke-journal

openSUSE says "No Lunduke allowed!"
September 13, 2023
"Andreas Kling creator of Serenity OS & Ladybird Web Browser" - Lunduke’s Big Tech Show - September 13th, 2023 - Ep 044

This episode is free for all to enjoy and share.

Be sure to subscribe here at Lunduke.Locals.com to get all shows & articles (including interviews with other amazing nerds).

"Andreas Kling creator of Serenity OS & Ladybird Web Browser" - Lunduke’s Big Tech Show - September 13th, 2023 - Ep 044
September 01, 2025
post photo preview
Fired Microsoft Employee Encouraged Corporate Sabotage
Leaked screenshots from a Microsoft whistleblower reveals efforts, by a "Worker Intifada" organizer, to disrupt Microsoft business and send spam propaganda email to thousands.

This last week, members of the Microsoft “Worker Intifada” claimed that some of their members were fired by Microsoft in an attempt to silence the speech of pro-Palestinian employees.

Thanks to an internal Microsoft whistleblower, we have gained additional insight into the real reasons at least one of the “Intifada” organizers was fired.

Including mass emailing thousands of Microsoft employees with anti-Microsoft messages, and building internal, corporate websites dedicated to disrupting company business. Over the course of months.

And, of course, we’ve got screenshots.

The Microsoft “Intifada”

The Microsoft’s “Worker Intifada” held a press conference, on August 28th, at the office of CAIR — a response to a Microsoft’s Media briefing held 2 days earlier.

The topic of both press events being the “Intifada” actions of the previous week — including vandalism, breaking and entering, and public demonstrations against Jewish people (with chants of “Go away, Jews!”).

A key topic being the firing of 4 Microsoft employees related to the “Intifada”.

One of those fired employees is Nisreen Jaradat, seen here speaking at the press conference at CAIR on August 28th:

 

Thanks to leaked Microsoft material, we can get a glimpse into the anti-Microsoft activity of Nisreen Jaradat… going back several months.

Anti-Microsoft Microsoft Employee

Nisreen created an internal website — on the Microsoft corporate Intranet — entitled “PledgeForPalestine”.

 

On that website, Nisreen encourages employees to take a pledge declaring that employees will “not support genocide”, specifically demanding that Microsoft no longer interact with Israel in any way.

It should be noted that, as of just a few days ago, this website was up within Microsoft.

Nisreen’s website also includes a list of ways where employees could sabotage internal corporate work.

 

Nisreen encouraged employees to:

  1. Refuse to work on support tickets that involve Israel (and sabotage any tickets worked on by others).

  2. Refuse to work with other employees on tasks which may involve Israel — or any Israeli Microsoft employees or customers.

In July, Nisreen sent internal Microsoft Teams messages to thousands of employees encouraging them to sign that anti-Israel and anti-Microsoft pledge.

 

But this wasn’t the first time Nisreen spammed Microsoft employees with pro-Palestinian propaganda.

Back in May of this year, Nisreen sent an email to over 8,000 Microsoft employees entitled “You can’t get rid of us.”

 

Within that email, she declared that her employers have “shown their true face, brutalizing, detaining, firing, pepper spraying, threatening and insulting workers and former workers protesting.”

Surprise, She Got Fired

Protesting your bosses and accusing them of “genocide” while encouraging thousands of other employees, in spam emails, to sabotage corporate work?

Now, think what you will about Microsoft… but I can’t imagine any company not firing someone who takes those actions internally.

In fact, I would suggest that it is wild that Microsoft put up with the actions of this “Intifada” organizer for so many months.


If you would like to be a Tech whistleblower — or would like to support the work of The Lunduke Journal — head to Lunduke.com. All of the information is there.

Read full Article
post photo preview
Lunduke's Week in Tech - Aug 30, 2025
GNOME Loses Another Executive, Microsoft's Intifada, & 4Chan + KiwiFarms Sue the UK

Yet another absolutely insane week of Tech News has wrapped up.

From more Microsoft troubles with their “Intifada”… to the 4Chan & KiwiFarms lawsuit against the UK, it’s been one seriously nutty week.

Oh! And the GNOME Foundation lost yet another Executive Director! This one only lasted 4 months on the job! Crazy! All of the stories are linked below (and free for all to enjoy).

And, once again, it is amazing how many of these stories were almost completely ignored by Brand X Tech News outlets.

One story we did not see this week was the final ruling on the remedy for USA v. Google. The case that could determine wether Mozilla Corporation can continue to receive 80% of their income from Google.

That ruling was expected by yesterday… but, so far, all is quiet. I checked in with sources at both Google and Mozilla… and neither has heard a peep about it. Will we see the ruling from Judge Mehta this coming week? Who knows!

Stories This Week

Note: All articles, videos, & podcasts are free for all (subscribers and non-subscribers alike).

Note 2: Links for the stories are all to Substack. You can also find links to all other platforms — X, Rumble, Locals, YouTube, etc. — which The Lunduke Journal publishes to, at Lunduke.com.

As always, thank you to all of the subscribers to The Lunduke Journal. Thanks to you, we can remain 100% ad-free and Big Tech free. Couldn’t do it without your support.

-Lunduke

Read full Article
post photo preview
GNOME Foundation Executive Director Out After 4 Months
His 4 month reign highlighted by GNOME attacks on Jews and visually impaired users, an expanded "Pride Month", pledging fealty to the UN, and defense of a registered sex offender.

As of today, the GNOME Foundation has lost yet another Executive Director — Steven Deobald, who lasted a short 4 months.

The previous executive director, Holly Million, lasted a grand total of 9 months in the role.

To say things have been chaotic within the GNOME Foundation, would be a wild understatement — with last year seeing GNOME elections overturned in secret meetings and massive cashflow issues.

The last 4 months, since the new Executive Director took the position, hasn’t exactly been smooth sailing. Here’s a quick timeline of just some of the strange activity since then.

And now today, August 29th, their new Executive Director is out. After only 4 months on the job. Did any of those events contribute to the departure? GNOME isn’t saying.

In fact, the statement from Allan Day, the new Acting GNOME Executive Director, is incredibly vague regarding the reason for the change.

“Steven Deobald has been in the post of GNOME Foundation Executive Director for the past four months, during which time he has made major contributions to both the Foundation and the wider GNOME project. Sadly, Steven will be leaving the Foundation this week. The Foundation Board is extremely grateful to Steven and wish him the very best for his future endeavors.”

According to the outgoing Executive Directors own statement — entitled “So short, and thanks for all the flinch”:

“As the board announced earlier today, I will be stepping down from the Executive Director role this week. It’s been an interesting four months.”

That reads to me like a firing (or a forced layoff due to lack of funds). But, unless someone speaks up, it’s unlikely we’ll know for sure.

The following was posted by Deobald (outgoing Executive) and Allan Day (new acting Executive) on the GNOME Foundation’s Matrix chat channel.

 

The statement, “I feel like I’ve been glued to an Emacs buffer for 3 straight days” suggests 3 days of discussions (or waiting) leading up to this change.

What will happen next for the GNOME Foundation?

With multiple years of absolute chaos — including financial troubles and an inability to have leadership last more than a few months (not to mention an obsession with attacking The Lunduke Journal) — it’s hard to imagine the next few months being anything other than a continuation of the insanity at GNOME.

Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals