The criticism that too much goes to fundraisers is meaningless without an explanation of how much would be optimal. If spending an additional $1m on fundraising meant an additional $1.1m in donations, then that's $100k more for Wikipedia that wouldn't have been there before.
If huge profit-making companies like Disney, Coca-Cola and McDonald's spend so much on marketing and sales, then it must be profitable. Similarly, there's no reason that fundraising spend wouldn't be financially advantageous to a non-profit.
If you support Wikipedia enough to donate, then it makes sense to want them to raise as much as they can. In which case you should enthusiastically support them running like a business-savvy organization.
If huge profit-making companies like Disney, Coca-Cola and McDonald's spend so much on marketing and sales, then it must be profitable. Similarly, there's no reason that fundraising spend wouldn't be financially advantageous to a non-profit.
If you support Wikipedia enough to donate, then it makes sense to want them to raise as much as they can. In which case you should enthusiastically support them running like a business-savvy organization.