[inigyou]

You guys do realize that part of money laundering is making it look like you're just bad at business, yeah? "Oops we accidentally overpaid some incompetent guys for this data center" is a smokescreen for "I am taking your data center money and giving it to my cousin"

[estearum]

How about you just state clearly yes/no:

Are you accusing Wikipedia of actual money laundering?

If you are accusing them of being bad at business or bloat (which is all that's alleged in the article you linked to), then the answer is NO. So you should just say NO.

If you are accusing Wikipedia of actual money laundering, that is concealing the source of illegally gotten money, then the answer is YES.

Please reply YES or NO so we can have a single conversation about the claim being made.

[lcnPylGDnU4H9OF]

From a strict "anti-money laundering" standpoint (how the bank thinks), money laundering is taking money that is suspected as being proceeds of criminal activity ("dirty" money) and making it indistinguishable from "clean" money. "Being bad at business" in a way that matches the definition of nepotism is not money laundering. There is a necessary component that the money is "dirty" and needs to be "cleaned", hence it is "laundered".