User talk:Ocaasi/Corporate collaborations

Wikipedia is an immense and precious global asset. It has an unparalleled reputation. It is entirely independent, community driven, and massively successful. This project is designed to look at ways in which we can leverage our position by collaborating with good companies who can advance our core mission without compromising our principles or neutrality.

The idea of informal relationships with corporations is not without precedent, although it is still relatively new. In 2010 and 2011 Credo Reference donated 400 free "Credo 250" accounts to Wikipedia editors, and in 2012 HighBeam Research offered up to 1000 free 1-year accounts to editors.

Doing anything which is perceived to compromise our neutrality is not to be undertaken lightly or at all. Wikipedia is not a commercial project; further, it's an explicitly non-commercial project, and fiercely so. There are thousands of companies who would love to leave their logo or brand association on Wikipedia, but Wikipedia's independence is a primary concern. In many ways it is simply non-negotiable.

Although Wikipedia maintains such strict neutrality and independence in its operations, collaborations with corporations have the potential to enhance the core mission of the encyclopedia. If they are done right, they can be beneficial and pragmatic, addressing major areas of site operations without compromising Wikipedia's objectivity or giving undue privileges to any company.

The bold vision is that Wikipedia editors, who provide a phenomenal and valuable service to the entire world, should be armed to the teeth with good sources, and the best tools for managing content. Although free, open source, and community-generated resources are always preferable, we should acknowledge where we need help and seek it from those who would mutually benefit from an association with us.

Existing collaborations

 * WP:CREDO, Credo Reference donated 400 accounts in 2010 and 2011.
 * WP:HighBeam, HighBeamResearch donated 1000 1-year accounts in 2012.
 * JSTOR requests

Pending collaborations

 * Turnitin

Potential collaborations

 * Questia
 * Lexis Nexis
 * NYTimes.com
 * Bloomberg
 * Thomson Reuters
 * JSTOR
 * Cengage
 * Gale