Except those three projects don't have the same model at all... Wikipedia isn't a small print book that can fund a website. It's not part of a larger software project that receives donations ample enough to defray and costs of maintenance. (mediawiki is the underlying software, but it's not the project itself) Lastly, it can't have "private" articles like GitHub does. You can't just say "I'd prefer they not did this" while completely ignoring why they do it and without presenting any valid alternatives or models.
You still try to win the argument by presenting logical paradoxons instead of arguing. Having a different model is a possible, acceptable solution. Just not being annoying liers may result in success as well. Without the lies they would have made not as much profit, but they would have probably survived at the necessary level to continue providing the service.
