[akrolsmir]

I'm seeing a lot of comments that say things like "so what should I do instead?" The article doesn't specify, but the forum it's posted on (effectivealtruism.org) has a lot to say about this topic. One simple recommendation would be to look at https://www.givewell.org/charities/top-charities instead.

A sketch of the argument: If you think donating is important, it's because on some level, you're hoping to bring about some good in the world. You donate to Wikipedia hoping to encourage Wikipedia to continue existing, and more work to go in to the effort of building Wikipedia.

But I'll bet that you care about other good things in the world as well: saving sick children, preventing climate change, fighting unjust policies. There's a lot of things you could make an impact on donating. How do you decide?

Effective Altruism states that not all donations are equally effective. One charity might take your $1000 and use it to buy a dying child an all-expenses-paid vacation to Disneyland. Another might use it buying bed nets to prevent the spread of malaria, in expectation keeping one more child alive than would have died. And given that your budget is limited and you can't afford both, you must decide which is more valuable to you.

So this article roughly says, "Wikipedia is a great and noble cause. But here's why it doesn't come close to the _very, absolute best_ way to use your money to help others."