Talk:JustGiving

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Excessive fees

I'm slightly skeptical of Justgiving's business model. I suspect the main author of this article Guernica79 is a Justgiving employee given that they have only contributed to this article, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Guernica79

This article fails to discuss the DISADVANTAGES of Justgiving.

``Justgiving charges a 5% transaction fee on donations made through its website. But since it automatically reclaims 28% Gift Aid on all donations from UK Taxpayers, the charity ends up receiving almost 120% of the value of the original donation after the deduction of fees.[3]"

This is marketing spiel. If I were to collect donations myself, it would also be possible to collect gift aid. Thus, by using justgiving I am depriving my charity of 5% of the donation each time!!

Also the figure seem slightly bizarre... £100 donation less 5% transaction fee = £95 + 28% = £121.6. £121.6 is not `almost 120%' it is `over 120%.'

Furthermore ``Charities have to be registered with Justgiving to receive donations. Charities could initially register with Justgiving for free, but on 1 April 2002 the company introduced subscription fees of £15 per month for charities using its website." Thus charities are required to pay £180 a year... Okay, this seems relatively low, but Justgiving already make a significant profit with their 5% transaction charge.

Well, there're other excellent for-profit fundraising companies to choose, like World Wide Charity. They charge some fee from each donation, but they dont' require any subscription fee. Which means you need pay nothing if you haven't receive donation. And since it's located in Switzerland, the tax deduction is near zero. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.222.37.21 (talk) 08:01, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Justgiving logo.gif

Image:Justgiving logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:01, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

6th Jan 2013 Clean Up

Moved from JustGiving to Talk page due to Spamy, Out of Scope Nature &/or Lacking Citations

* In 2012 UK-based YouTube media group "The Yogscast" raised £201,180 during the month of December by livestreaming video game "let's plays" on twitch.tv to raise money for Oxfam's Plan Bee.

Rename

I suggest the page be renamed to "JustGiving" instead of JustGiving being a redirect to "Justgiving". -- 109.76.224.250 (talk) 18:36, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(belated, for the record:) Nope. WYSIWYG. Not going to happen. Per MoS, for consistency and an encyclopedic style, despite styling/branding (upper/lower/camelcase), proper spelling with leading capital is used to create entry in Article space with a re-direct from improper/misspelt/alternative variations as necessary. WurmWoode^T 22:28, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@WurmWoode: Wrong, both spellings can be used and JustGiving would indeed be preferred as it reflects general usage and trademark, see MOS:CAMELCASE. — kashmiri ^TALK 21:46, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

some reorganisation

I am going to reorganise a few things. Here is what and why:

1) Delete from under "reception" the sentence that says:

"Charityfacts states that fundraising typically costs UK charities between 15% to 25%,[13] however, because JustGiving are an e-commerce company their overhead costs are likely to be lower than a traditional bricks and mortar charity.[14]"

It does not seem to be directly relevant to how Justgiving have been received. Rather, it seems to have been put in with the intent of putting the 5% Justgiving fee into context, but it is a flawed comparison because "fundraising costs" would include things other than donation processing, such as organising fundraising events and maintaining contact with supporters, and in any case the article is not the place to speculate on why the fees are set at the level they are.

2) Move various references to fees that do not directly relate to the sections that they are listed under into a new separate section about fees.

3) Likewise consolidate references to Gift Aid into a new separate section.

4) Remove some duplication that becomes apparent when consolidating stuff.

5) And also remove the section heading "Fundraising Tools", which is left with no remaining content under it after doing the above.

6) Finally, what this leaves under "Products" (outside of subsections) is a sentence about small charities benefitting the most. It turns out that this is said by the CAF. Moving it to the Reception section to accompany the existing CAF quotation. I then remove the (slightly confusing) "Products" section heading, and turn any subsections (===) into sections (==).

Money money tickle parsnip (talk) 12:18, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

fees

Given that the fees are a noteworthy issue - see particularly the bit that says In 2008, The Guardian reported Kharas as acknowledging that "the commission charged by justgiving.com is controversial".[3] - I think it is reasonable to state what the fees actually are in order to put this into context. However, now that I have created a section about the fees, I think it is excessive to repeat information about fees in other sections as well. I therefore removed discussion of fees from the section on gift aid processing. Hope this is fair.

Money money tickle parsnip (talk) 18:01, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on JustGiving. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120330072449/http://blog.justgiving.com/community/1-billion-raised-through-justgiving/ to http://blog.justgiving.com/community/1-billion-raised-through-justgiving/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:37, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Some proposed changes

Part of an edit requested by an editor with a conflict of interest has been implemented.

Information to be updated in Fees section: JustGiving removed its 5% platform fee in March 2019. Donors are instead asked whether they would like to make a voluntary contribution to support the operation of JustGiving’s platform.
Explanation of issue: Information about JustGiving's fees is out of date.
References supporting change:
- Company announcement: https://blog.justgiving.com/platform-fee-free/
- Media coverage: https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/justgiving-platform-fee-charity-donation-uk-a8839871.html and https://fundraising.co.uk/2019/03/26/justgiving-ends-platform-fees-for-uk-charities/

Information to be updated in JustTextGiving section: After eight years on JustGiving, JustTextGiving by Vodafone was deactivated in April 2019 after seeing a decline in the use of the service from 2014 onwards.
Explanation of issue: Information about the JustTextGiving service is out of date
References supporting change:
- Company announcement: https://www.vodafone.co.uk/help-and-information/just-text-giving and https://help.justgiving.com/hc/en-us/articles/360000579597-We-re-saying-goodbye-to-JustTextGiving
- Media coverage: https://www.civilsociety.co.uk/news/justtextgiving-donation-service-will-close-next-year.html

Information to be updated in Reception section: In 2017, JustGiving won Most Committed Company to the Sector at IoF National Fundraising Awards
Explanation of issue: Additional award/recognition received
References supporting change: https://www.institute-of-fundraising.org.uk/news/iof-national-fundraising-awards-winners/

Salleeann (talk) 10:52, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reply 16-JAN-2020

Edit request partially implemented

Y The fee being made voluntary was added to the article.
Y The section on JustTextGiving was omitted.
N The award was not added because it does not appear to be independently notable in Wikipedia.

The COI editor is reminded that if they receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution they make, they must disclose their employer, client, and affiliation to comply with Wikipedia's terms of use and the policy on paid editing.

Regards, Spintendo 18:34, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]