lcrocker(a)nupedia.com wrote:
>They also
seem to not like the fact that a "American for-
>profit .com company that wants to establish a presence in the
>educational market* controls Wikipedia (the .com part may be a
>directed toward wikipedia's URL and not Bomis - my Spanish is
>rusty and the fish ain't much help).
>
Getting our 501(c)3 status will help, and I doubt anything short
of that will, so I hope that gets moved up on Jimbo's priority
list a bit.
For the benefit of non-Americans unfamiliar with the Internal Revenue
Code governing U.S. tax law I would point out that 501(c)(3) refers to
organizations that are tax-exempt because they are non-profit and doing
things for the public good. Wikipedia would likely qualify because of
the educational work that it does.
As much as it may be a beneficial move, I don't know if a move from a
".com" to a ".org" would do the trick since these are both seen as
American even if such designations are available world-wide. The
uncommon use of ".us" domains probably adds to the perception that they
imply an American organization. These issues have become even more
sensitive since President George III has been fanning the flames of
anti-Americanism. This makes the ".es" domain more attractive.
There may also be another international sensitivity at play in this
issue that does not involve Americans. What proportion of the
participants in Spanish Wikipedia and Enciclopedia Libre are from Spain
rather than from its former colonial empire. I suspect that many latin
americans may be just as resentful of ".es" domains as they are of
".com". It is important to look at Spanish Wikipedia as Spanish
language rather than Spanish nation.
Eclecticology