Proposal talk:Ads (Werbung auf Wikipedia-Seiten)/en

Ich sehe durch die Nutzung von Werbung in der Wikipedia die Unabhängigkeit und Neutralität gefährdet. Der Verlust dieser Werte ist für eine Enzyklopädie nicht hinzunehmen. Die Wikipedia steht unter festen Grundgedanken. Die Antragsteller solten sich die Selbigen noch einmal vor Augen halten. Gruß, -- Lictuel 21:14, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Finde ich eine gute Idee. Die Neutralität der Inhalte sehe ich nicht gefährdet, da die Zuteilung der Werbung ja vollautomatisch durch Google erfolgt. Im Übrigen können Firmen ja bereits heute Einfluss auf die Inhalte der Wikipedia-Artikel nehmen, indem sie entsprechende Beiträge "frisieren".

Einer Firma, von der man finanziell abhängig ist, wird man nichts ins Handwerk pfuschen. Die Bereitschaft übermäßige Werbung (von Firmenautoren) für einzelne Firmen in den Artikeln der Firmen zu entfernen und zu ahnden sinkt daher mit der Werbung. Darüber hinaus wird der Leser ohne Kontrolle der Autoren an Quellen geleitet, die für ein besprochenes Produkt positive Aussagen machen. Hierdurch ist die Neutralität meiner Meinung nach gefährdet.
Beispiel: Wenn im Artikel zur Homöopathie (der ganz eindeutig die Wirkung derselben bezweifelt) Werbung für Homöopatika erscheint, relativiert sich die gegebene Darstellung. Das ist auf den ersten Blick vielleicht "nicht so schlimm". Aber meiner Meinung nach sollten solche qualitätsmindernden Einflüsse in Artikeln ausgeschlossen werden. -- Lictuel 10:57, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Wichtiger ist doch, die Finanzierung der Wikipedia sicherzustellen, und hierzu sind Google-Ads sehr geeignet.--Dominicp 18:49, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Als ob die Wikipedia am Hungertuch nagen würde... Funktioniert bis jetzt alles bestens mit der Finanzierung 84.114.177.169 06:29, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Impact?

Some proposals will have massive impact on end-users, including non-editors. Some will have minimal impact. What will be the impact of this proposal on our end-users? -- Philippe 00:04, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

This proposal can undermine the trust in wikipedias neutral-point-of-view-policy by raising the impression that articles, dealing with a sponsors field of intrest, may not be neutral.Alexpl 13:13, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I support this idea, and hopefully others will too. Wikimedia has a lot of targeted advertising opportunities. I think it can be done, if done tastefully. --Danlev 04:38, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is free content, supported by donations. Wikimedia is a non-profit organization. Ads would not be a good thing. So, this is a massive and utter no for me.--Unionhawk 14:07, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree with the statement above. I feel that in order to conserve the belief that Wikipedia is as unbiased as possible ads must absolutely not be allowed into Wiki. I have dealt with ads in other Wiki style projects such as wowwiki and know that those implemented there are annoying at least and a complete mess at worst. This idea receives a thumbs-down from me. Rearete 02:49, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Agree. Completely oppose this proposal. We're working hard on neutrality here. 149.169.43.194 23:32, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

• I am, quite bluntly, ideologically opposed to this. It is virtually impossible for adverts to be served up to any set of users without compromising their privacy. Google Adsense? Relies on knowing the page (i.e. URL) a user is looking at to select the targeted ad. You're jumping through nasty technical hoops to get away from this, and to get away from even linking a user referred to an advertiser with the content they read. Would you want someone reading about abortion asked if they're interested in pregnancy tests and a list of the local abortion clinics? Would you want shady offshore Viagra sellers knowing a prospective customer had just finished reading up on Male impotence? No, just no. A move such as this would open the door to relentless commercial pressure for editorial influence. --Brian McNeil 00:53, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

A Very Valuable Compromise

We can have our cake and eat it too. That is, we can get Advertising Revenue, and lots of it, if we let the individual user decide if they want to receive ads or not, and tailor what kind of ads they receive. Those who don't want ads won't get any! But if I, and millions more, choose to support Wikipedia by allowing Ads to get through to us, then why not. Someone has to make the decision on Ads. Why not let each user make the decision, instead of a constant "war" amongtsdt the top level decision makers.

Adblock Plus

Let us not forget that with the wide availability of Adblock Plus, which is currently even a recommended add-on for Firefox, the more advanced users won't even see the advertisements. That would result into a situation where only those who are unexperienced with computers and thus Wikipedia, and unfamiliar with the concept of advertisement, would see the ads in the hypotetical situation they are unaware of the existence of ad blocking software. Hence, Wikipedia would discriminate less experienced users by annoying them with advertisements, while the more advanced and frequent users of Wikipedia won't even notice they are there.

Furthermore, many commercial advertisement providers, such as Google Ads, only pay for ads that are effectively clicked. Since ads that are blocked by Adblock Plus or equivalent software obviously can't be clicked anymore, the most frequent users (those who probably have ad blocking software installed) will not contribute to generating revenue.

Despite its potential as a significant source of income, I believe that the majority of the community would oppose the idea of displaying ads for these, and many other reasons.

See Proposal:Users Can Choose to Take Advertising

NPOV incompatible with advertising

Even if we only inflict advertising on the less technically literate users there are other problems that come with advertising, not least the difficulty of maintaining, and near impossibility of being perceived to maintain neutral point of view when you are taking money from one side in a disputed and contentious area like medicine, investment or Genetically modified food. See Proposal:No Advertising. WereSpielChequers 22:39, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

No ads please

I would only consider this proposal as a last measure after all other options are eliminated. Let's keep Wikipedia ad-free with independent content. --87.202.15.78 19:23, 24 October 2009 (UTC)