[WikiEN-l] LA Times article / Advertising in Wikipedia

[Tony Sidaway]

On 11/03/2008, David Gerard <dgerard at 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.