On 11/03/2008, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
It does *wonders* for our public relations being the top-10 site which isn't plastered with ads. Wikipedia gets a LOT of slack for that - highly imperfect, but a non-profit volunteer project that continues to try hard. I fervently hope we can afford to continue this way.
I think it depends on the type. I happened to visit a certain Wikipedia userpage. the other day, and there was an animated banner ad at the top.
Granted, it was a project-oriented one rather than a commercial one. But the fact that it was trying to influence me to join a WikiProject rather than buy a car (The Guardian, The Times, The Telegraph) didn't make the ad less distracting.
On the other hand I'm now typing this email using a Google interface. There is a series of links to the right of the page, which I never look at. They never blink, never appear in garish colors. But presumably some people click on such links and there are people who are prepared to pay for those links in the expectation that this will happen.
So all the problems I'm told will come to Wikipedia with advertising are already there, at least on some pages, and yet there exist commercially run websites that carry advertising that does not intrude upon the reading experience.
Advertising should be cautiously considered, I think, as a way of providing Wikipedia with a viable economic model.