Bewertung
2,7
Durchschnittlich · von 5 Sternen
Bildungseinrichtungwikimedia.org
Wikimedia Erfahrungen
2,7von 5 · Durchschnittlich
Nicht beansprucht Beanspruchen Antwortet blitzschnell
Stimmen
7
3 in den letzten 12 Monaten
Bildungseinrichtung
0%
Anteil 5-Sterne-Bewertungen
Bewertungen (7)
3 in 12 MonatenIhre Stimme
Erfahrung zu Wikimedia schreiben
Jerry Vasilatos
Verifizierte Bewertung
Legitimate edits gatekept; documented bribery solicitation unanswered
I've engaged Wikipedia in two capacities — as a contributor and as a complainant. Both led to the same structural conclusion. AS A CONTRIBUTOR: In October 2021, I attempted to add my father's 1970 IIT graduate thesis "The Citizens' Two-Way Telecom Network" — a six-year research project archived at the Smithsonian (call number TK6553.V33 1970a) and catalogued in WorldCat (OCLC 11000761) — to the History section of the article on text messaging. The thesis predates and architecturally parallels later commercial SMS specifications by over a decade. The edit was scrubbed within hours. Volunteer editors dismissed the Smithsonian catalog entry, dismissed IIT as the academic publisher, dismissed the Google Books summary review (which meets Wikipedia's own published definition of a secondary source), and offered no path by which pre-digital academic work could ever satisfy their sourcing standard. The exchanges remain on public talk pages. Four years later, in November 2025, I returned to submit a draft article on a film I had directed — sourced to a national Lifetime broadcast, period press listings, festival awards documentation, and contemporaneous coverage that met WP:NFILM on its face. Within 72 hours, at least seven editors descended on the submission: one accused me of paid editing without evidence, two declined successive appeals, and an administrator indefinitely blocked the account citing "serious lack of competence related to LLM use" — the modern shorthand for using AI to help compose responses. The block rationale was cultural, not substantive. After I documented the experience publicly, one of the involved editors followed me to another platform, sent repeated harassing private messages overnight, attempted to expose my real identity, and was ultimately suspended by that platform's administrators for the harassment — discipline that Wikipedia itself declined to impose. AS A COMPLAINANT: In March 2026, I filed a formal report with the Wikimedia Foundation, attaching a complete email chain in which a commercial reputation management company's sales representative wrote to me in his official capacity: "A part of the fee that we charge you goes directly to the Wikipedia Administrators in approving your page. So we offer 100% approval rate." The same company described manufacturing "independent" sources across a 150+ platform network and selling paid placement in major publications starting at $15,000. The pitch was made openly, in writing, as a standard service feature. I have not received a substantive response or seen visible action. The contrast is the one star. Contributors with verifiable institutional documentation are gatekept, dogpiled, and blocked over cultural pretexts; off-platform harassment by the same volunteer community gets disciplined by other platforms but not by the Foundation that hosts the editors involved. Meanwhile a commercial operator openly selling fabricated sources and claiming to pay administrators for approvals presumably continues to operate. If the company's claims about paying administrators are true, the editorial system is corrupt at the gatekeeping layer the volunteer community defends so aggressively against good-faith contributors. If the claims are false, the editorial dysfunction is so widely known that scam operators use it as a sales pitch — and contributors like me are why the pitch works. Either way, the Foundation has a documented case in its inbox and a structural question on its desk.
0
DS
Verifizierte Bewertung
Is it a scam site or not? I don't know and I usually do :)
It's unfortunate for them. I know they're run by volunteers (they say) but I'm not convinced I selected auto-renew donation and it happened for a minor amount 3x. Once I understand. 2x on the same date means auto renew. I called and emailed multiple times to no avail. What saved me these days was contacting my credit card company. Boom, I opened it one day and wikimedia canceled it with my specific request to my card company and stopped it the next early in the morn. I don't know if the company's legit or not. I never had this issue with wikipedia and donated small amounts a couple of times but this place ... I just don't know but until you or I do, I'd stay away from them. Check reviews in multiple places. Note that the date of experience was just the last of three charges. Losing money to wiki was easier than changing my credit card (which cc company rep suggested I do).
0
amy y
Verifizierte Bewertung
Impossible to cancel recurring monthly…
Impossible to cancel recurring monthly donation. Have attempted with their email listed online to cabcel donations, donate@wikimedia.... and attempted to cancel via their phone number, (877) 600-9454, for which you can only leave a voicemail. Do not subscribe to monthly donations!
0
Kerstin
Verifizierte Bewertung
Werbung
Wikimedia respektiert keine Abbestellung von Werbung und keine Bitte um Löschung der Daten. Ich bekam permanent penetrant weiter Werbung, statt der 24,-€, die ich tatsächlich mal zwei Jahre gespendet habe, permanent 'Bettelbriefe', doch endlich 40,-€ zu spenden. Hab dann gekündigt. Letztes Mal lag gleich ein Überweisungsschein drin. Dreist.
0
Nioclás Pól Caileán Glostéir
Verifizierte Bewertung
hypocritically misleads
More than eleven years ago Ian Hislop on Have I Got News For You on BBC1 mocked Wikipedia's lack of truthfulness because reckless rival newspapers profited by republishing a falsehood from Wikipedia. Disrespect by Wikipedia against truthfulness also exists in 2024. E.g. I emailed to Wikimedia on 29th November 2024: "Dear Vincent Rezzouk-Hammachi Esquire and Sir/Madam of Deloitte and Sir/Madam of Wikimedia: On 28th November 2024 I addressed an email to "Vincent Rezzouk-Hammachi, Bird & Bird GDPR Representative Ireland, 29 Earlsfort Terrace, Dublin2" as per [. . .] and I am highly unimpressed that you did not bother to warn me that [. . .] hypocritically misleads as the current company in 29 Earlsfort Terrace (i.e. Deloitte Ireland LLP - cf. [. . .] ) told me today that you left which both [. . .] and [. . .] support. Why does Bird and Bird underperform concerning me yet again? When will this data subject access request about a Wikipedian about me be fulfilled? This email also contains a data subject access request to Deloitte Ireland LLP to confirm by affidavit that I visited 29 Earlsfort Terrace asking for Bird and Bird on 29th November 2024 at the less than one minute I was there before you forced outwards. Add to this affidavit a complete transcript of our conversation then and supplement it with microphone and timestamped CCTV recordings and confirm that you refused to inform me as to when Bird and Bird left and as to where Bird and Bird is. Furthermore provide me with all the relevant excerpts of the disciplinary process against this Deloitte employee. Soon I shall send critical reviews to Trus[t]pilot. Cf. [. . .] Is mise le fírinníbh, Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester"
0
Die Akte
Antwortet blitzschnell
Typische Antwortzeit unter 24 Stunden.
US
Alternativen zu Wikimedia
Bildungseinrichtung-Ranking →Häufige Fragen zu Wikimedia
Ist Wikimedia seriös?
Für Wikimedia liegen bisher 7 öffentliche Bewertungen vor (2,7 von 5) — für ein abschließendes Urteil ist die Datenlage noch dünn. Zur Einordnung: Unternehmenssitz: US. Prüfen Sie zusätzlich Impressum und Vertragsbedingungen.
Welche Alternativen zu Wikimedia gibt es?
Die bestbewerteten Anbieter in der Branche Bildungseinrichtung sind FundedNext (4,5 von 5), Trinity College London (4,9 von 5), Scrum Alliance (4,9 von 5). Das vollständige Ranking mit allen Anbietern finden Sie in der Branchenübersicht auf erfahrungen.app.
Ist das Profil von Wikimedia beansprucht?
Nein. Das Profil von Wikimedia ist öffentlich, aber nicht vom Unternehmen beansprucht. Deshalb kann Wikimedia hier nicht auf Bewertungen antworten. Die Firma kann das Profil kostenlos beanspruchen.
Antwortet Wikimedia auf Bewertungen?
Wikimedia: Antwortet blitzschnell. Typische Antwortzeit unter 24 Stunden.
Kann Wikimedia negative Bewertungen löschen lassen?
Nein. erfahrungen.app löscht, versteckt oder verkauft keine Bewertungen — auch nicht für verifizierte Unternehmen. Firmen können öffentlich antworten, aber Kritik bleibt stehen.
Wir löschen keine Bewertungen.
Auch nicht für Geld. Unclaimed ist fair. Claimed gibt das Mikrofon — nicht den Radiergummi.