Ever since the very beginning of wikipedia they've been insistent that the only licenses that count as "open"/"free" are ones that allow commercial use. There's

Ever since the very beginning of wikipedia they've been insistent that the only licenses that count as "open"/"free" are ones that allow commercial use. There's a ton of CC NC content out there that would have been great on Wikipedia, but hasn't been able to be used. It's essentially an MIT/BSD vs GPL debate but for text and media. It should have been extremely obvious under this paradigm that content would be reused by commercial entities! As a contributor, I don't have a problem with it. The openness of the wiki has been way way way more valuable to me than anything I've contributed back.