Just received this e-mail:
QUOTE
Thanks for posting your comment on civilsociety.co.uk. I understand that you are frustrated that your original comment was unpublished. Please be assured that the comment was initially approved for publication but was erroneously knocked off. It has now been restored. I can also assure you that Civil Society holds no “formal alliance†to the Wikimedia Foundation or any other organisation and maintains a strict policy of editorial independence. Please read our community standards (which can be found in the comments box on every article) to understand our stance on commenting.
All the best,
Niki
Niki May Young
Website editor
www.civilsociety.co.uk
15 Prescott Place
London SW4 6BS
020 7819 1206
@NikiCivSociety
Civil Society Media is an independent news, publishing and events company focused entirely on charities and other civil society organisations. Now 20 years old, we help these organisations to deliver sustainable public benefit by providing essential news, analysis, training and conferences for their employees and trustees.
Our products include Charity Finance, Governance and Fundraising magazines, and www.civilsociety.co.uk. Our events include The Charity Awards, Charity Finance Live, the Civil Society IT conference and the Charity Investment Forum.
And, my comment is now published, three days after the initial buzz on this story has faded:
QUOTE
Gregory Kohs
CEO
Wikipedia Review
7 Nov 2011
Because the Wikimedia Foundation spends only 46 cents of every revenue dollar on the program services it is chartered to uphold, I cannot think of a worse avenue of charitable "expansion" than this Wikimedia UK puppet organization. More and more waste and overhead seems to be annual mantra at the Wikimedia Foundation, but it never sinks in among the gullible donating public.