[WikiEN-l] Re: Ads on Wikipedia?

[Steve Bennett]

> The argument in favour of ads appears to be 'if we don't use 
> them, we're throwing away a big potential revenue stream'. 
> How long before the idea of allowing advertisers 'final 
> approval' of articles on which their ads appear appears on 
> the basis that 'by not doing it, we're throwing away a big 
> potential revenue stream'?

Ah, the old slippery slope idea. IMHO, that particular slope is not
particularly slippery. Wikipedia would *not* be Wikipedia if NPOV was
sacrificed for advertising $$$. There are clear guidelines that would
clearly be breached by doing that. Wikipedia with ads doesn't cross any
lines, other than a somewhat ambiguous promise from Jimbo some years
back that it wouldn't happen without community support.

> You might argue that this is someting of a logical fallacy 
> (see, for instance, [[Slippery slope]]), but I am very 

Whoops, I just did that :)

> concerned about the idea of opening up the principles of the 
> project to anything other than 'making an encyclopaedia'. 
> 'Making an encyclopaedia while keeping our advertisers happy' 
> isn't in the mission statement as far as I'm concerned.

"Making an ad-free encyclopaedia" is also not the mission statement, as
far as I can see. In fact, if you look at the whole reasoning for using
the GFDL, the goal seemed to be making whatever concessions were
necessary and removing all restrictions to ensure the widest possible
dissemination of the work. Refusing ads seems to go against that
particular goal.

Steve