Note that the topic of not interacting with cryptocurrencies has become quite popular recently. In particular, in January the developers of Mozilla browser managed to suspend the acceptance of digital assets, which initially added support for Dogecoin to receive donations, but then faced criticism from the community. In doing so, the latter, judging by the comments, are not particularly knowledgeable about blockchain, decentralisation and mining. All they say is that the high electricity costs required to power cryptocurrencies and their networks are not worth it. On top of that, mining is allegedly destroying the planet.

However, Elon Musk is not paying attention to such criticism. Today he announced on his Twitter that Tesla fans can buy Tesla merchandise using DOGE.

Accordingly, his possible disapproval of the crowd is hardly a concern.

Crypto without Wikipedia

White presented three key reasons why the platform should close to crypto-enthusiasts. Firstly, she argues that “acceptance of cryptocurrency demonstrates an endorsement of the cryptosphere by members of the Wikimedia movement. By doing so, the organisation is allegedly “doing its bit” to harm the environment.

It also claims that cryptocurrencies “may not be consistent with Wikimedia’s commitment to environmental sustainability”. In addition, the organisation is allegedly harming its reputation by dealing with crypto. So far, the author’s proposal is under discussion at Wikimedia, which means its final status is still unknown.

The cryptocurrency donation page for Wikipedia

Incidentally, at the organization itself, the adoption of proposals does not happen after a majority vote. Representatives of Wikimedia note that the decision is based on “the importance of the arguments of the disputing parties” and not on the votes of its members. But this does not matter as Decrypt’s sources say that the majority agreed with White’s arguments. Here’s a quote from a Wikimedia member on the matter.

It’s about time. The adoption of cryptocurrency makes Wikimedia’s commitment to environmental security a joke.

There were also critics of the majority viewpoint in the discussion. For example, one member noted that cryptocurrencies “coincide with Wikimedia’s principles of freedom and affordable software”.

Cryptocurrencies

Another innovation that Wikipedia is trying to implement regarding the realm of unique NFT tokens. A group of editors at the portal voted against equating NFTs with a form of art. Debate on this began in late December, but so far, even after discussing the issue, the editors of the articles have decided to postpone a final resolution of the issue. Here’s a quote from an editor under the nickname jonas on the matter.

Wikipedia really can’t decide what counts as art and what doesn’t, so including NFT as art objects or not in their own category makes it much easier.

What does this bring to the field of NFT specifically? Wikipedia will most likely not label unique tokens only as objects of digital art. In general, it’s a matter of wording rather than recognising the phenomenon as such. We think this is partly correct – after all, NFT can be used for more than just art.


We believe that completely abandoning interaction with digital assets is the wrong decision. Still, at the very least platform representatives could start accepting Proof-of-Stake consensus cryptocurrencies, which consume much less electricity. The current action, on the other hand, looks like an unwillingness to understand the topic, but also a desire to protect itself from possible condemnation by the crowd. Either way, it's far from the best argument for refusing to engage with the money of the future.

What do you think about it? Share your opinion in our millionaires’ cryptochat. There we will discuss other important topics that affect the world of blockchain and decentralisation.