Denis Beauregard wrote: >Asking money to support wikis? They are made of stealing material, so why would someone who accept to use stolen material accepts to pay for it ? No one is asking for money for wikis. A wiki can be set-up for free and have whatever policies or editors it wants. Also, I have no idea what you mean by "stealing", but I can not think of anything being discussed which amounts to stealing. If citation of other sources is "stealing" then all researchers are "stealing". If what you are talking about is the need for proper citations of sources, then this seems to me to come under the general category of quality control, which also has other aspects to it. (For what it is worth, many well-known wikis have policies that all material should be properly cited. Policies do not always equate to reality of course.) I think there is a false equation between "big online genealogy" and wikis. Big online genealogy includes things like ancestry, geni, familysearch etc, which are NOT wikis. That these are problematic for good genealogy is a well-known concern. Wikis are united only by the kind of software they use. A wiki can be set-up by academics or doctors or within one organization. They do not even need to be on the internet. Using the software does not turn good researchers into bad ones. :) For what it is worth, I do not see any pattern whereby the wikis being used for large scale online genealogy (such as Werelate and Wikitree) are worse than things like Geni. I would actually argue that their quality tends to be better? Regards Andrew