Of course the stark reality is that A/B testing on users (typically
readers, not editors) during the annual Wikimedia
Foundation fundraiser
has been a major component of the Wikimedia Foundation's growth.
In part that's a myth. The income has been increased simply by making the
banners larger, brighter, naughtier and alarming (we're in danger, bla
bla). Sometimes they take more space than is left to the article; sometimes
they can't be dismissed.
Hi Nemo - I can't agree with this at all. The banners from the 2013
campaign (the last I can readily find) are no bigger or scarier than those
from 2011. On the whole they are much less interruptive, as they are
displayed less consistently; and they attract far less third-party
attention than the "Jimmy banners".
The increase in efficiency through the banner campaign has been truly
remarkable!
If there was a way to get the same kind of result on (say) the number of
new editors who stick around and contribute more that would be great.
Chris