why can't wikimedia publish advertisements and generate revenue and become self-reliant,self-sustainable , instead of asking for funds from user every year again and again...
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 17:17, luke lenny lennybodomas1@gmail.com wrote:
why can't wikimedia publish advertisements and generate revenue and become self-reliant,self-sustainable , instead of asking for funds from user every year again and again...
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Perennial_proposals#Advertising .
-- אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי · Amir Elisha Aharoni http://aharoni.wordpress.com "We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace." - T. Moore
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 3:17 PM, luke lenny lennybodomas1@gmail.com wrote:
why can't wikimedia publish advertisements and generate revenue and become self-reliant,self-sustainable , instead of asking for funds from user every year again and again...
I think that is called wikia.com? mike
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 3:17 PM, luke lenny lennybodomas1@gmail.com wrote:
why can't wikimedia publish advertisements and generate revenue and become self-reliant,self-sustainable , instead of asking for funds from user every year again and again...
There's a number of issues. But painting it in broad terms; although advertising might make the projects *financially* stable, it may not make their *content* stable. That's to say, a lot of contributors / volunteers / editors might leave.
I'd argue with your terminology, though.
You say that advertising would make the Foundation "self-reliant and self-sustainable". It wouldn't be though, would it? It would be reliant on advertisers and sustained by advertisers.
Bodnotbod
Also because it's good for people to have to think year by year. makes them aware and not take it for granted. People who have some investment (be it effort or money or time or whatever) value something more.
A wider community that has a reason to care is worth building - especially as the Wikimedia mission isn't just "build a website" but "make available free knowledge". In that context people willing to care matter, as an integral part of the mission.
FT2
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Bod Notbod bodnotbod@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 3:17 PM, luke lenny lennybodomas1@gmail.com wrote:
why can't wikimedia publish advertisements and generate revenue and become self-reliant,self-sustainable , instead of asking for funds from user every year again and again...
There's a number of issues. But painting it in broad terms; although advertising might make the projects *financially* stable, it may not make their *content* stable. That's to say, a lot of contributors / volunteers / editors might leave.
I'd argue with your terminology, though.
You say that advertising would make the Foundation "self-reliant and self-sustainable". It wouldn't be though, would it? It would be reliant on advertisers and sustained by advertisers.
Bodnotbod
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
I have to say, I think it is good that wikimedia is not advertising funded, because you provide a great service that is not geared to looking at advertising. Most webpages force you to look at ads, wikipedia does not. I think it is a valuable resource and worth the donations. We are working on translating the donation interface to albanian now, and hope to find sponsors in that region. mike
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 11:36 PM, FT2 ft2.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Also because it's good for people to have to think year by year. makes them aware and not take it for granted. People who have some investment (be it effort or money or time or whatever) value something more.
A wider community that has a reason to care is worth building - especially as the Wikimedia mission isn't just "build a website" but "make available free knowledge". In that context people willing to care matter, as an integral part of the mission.
FT2
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Bod Notbod bodnotbod@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 3:17 PM, luke lenny lennybodomas1@gmail.com wrote:
why can't wikimedia publish advertisements and generate revenue and become self-reliant,self-sustainable , instead of asking for funds from user every year again and again...
There's a number of issues. But painting it in broad terms; although advertising might make the projects *financially* stable, it may not make their *content* stable. That's to say, a lot of contributors / volunteers / editors might leave.
I'd argue with your terminology, though.
You say that advertising would make the Foundation "self-reliant and self-sustainable". It wouldn't be though, would it? It would be reliant on advertisers and sustained by advertisers.
Bodnotbod
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Did they add a button "Read Now" on the donation campaign banner or did I miss it earlier?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Did they add a button "Read Now" on the donation campaign banner or did I miss it earlier?
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 10:17 AM, luke lenny lennybodomas1@gmail.com wrote:
why can't wikimedia publish advertisements and generate revenue and become self-reliant,self-sustainable , instead of asking for funds from user every year again and again...
Because we prefer having Jimmy stare us down once a year to having Viagra sit in the sidebar all year long :)
-Chad
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org