Forum:Advertising Overload

Original Thread Topic
This was done to make the topic easier to read I noticed today that the ads on a number of wiki's is spamming all over the articles. Sometimes with 4 or 5 ads per page. It appears that the rules are changing on the ads. The Ads spawn after Heading 2 style is used twice, and it now repeats down the Article. I found this to be the case at Ghostbusters Wiki, Batman Wiki, and apparently at all the wiki's that have large articles. Any thoughts or where they explain this change? Am I the only one noticing this? Devilmanozzy 22:51, 3 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi! Thanks for your post.  As Sannse explained elsewhere, over the next few months, we will be experimenting with different ad placements to determine what combinations of ads and ad placements perform the best with the fewest compromises with regard to user experience.  Today we removed some advertisements from the sidebar and added them elsewhere within the page.  These changes are ongoing, so it is possible that you may see some more tweaks as time goes on.


 * We spent a lot of time writing collision detection logic to help ensure that these advertisements do not interfere with page structure or layout, but that code may not be perfect yet. If you see anything unusual, please let us know so we can take a look and refine how it works.  Anyone who prefers not to see most advertisements is welcome to create a free account and log in.


 * Thanks! --KyleH (talk) 00:46, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply, Yeah I understand why this is happening as bills need to be paid and all. I think that this sort of system may not be working right yet, however if there is a silver lining in at least the Ghostbusters Wiki, is that the ads are for sony's Ghostbuster official site which the wiki already promotes. I also linked to the message here on Ghostbusters Wiki Ads so they can read this and understand. Devilmanozzy 01:32, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I honestly don't understand why this is happening. It has maybe been a year since this ad system was implemented in the first place. This is how I'm viewing it:


 * 2 permanent ads in the main page implemented
 * A box or banner on every page implemented
 * An ad in the sidebar
 * Wikians told that the ads wouldn't be incredibly distracting, but let's face it, they are distracting
 * A couple months ago a report was released and everything was on the up and up.


 * Thus, the question is, if everything is working out as that report said it was, why is even more advertising necessary? -- LordTBT Talk! 16:52, 5 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Because of some changes in the global economy ? — TulipVorlax 19:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi LordTBT,


 * As TulipVorlax suggested, a lot has changed over the past year. According to a report from PubMatic, a company that specializes in ad optimization, overall online ad revenue was down over 50% in 2008, and the downward trend seems to be continuing in to 2009.


 * Wikia has been affected by this trend, but the impact hasn't been quite that dramatic. As Danny mentioned to you a few months ago, Wikia has more editors than ever before, who are all creating amazing wikis which are attracting more page views than ever before.  This growth, along with some other measures we have implemented, has helped offset the decline.


 * Nonetheless, while we're healthy, we still need to keep trying different options to figure out the mix of ads which provides the best compromise for all of our customers--the contributors who build the site, the readers who view it, and the advertisers who pay for it.


 * Thanks,
 * KyleH (talk) 22:56, 5 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for responding Kyle. Basically, you just re-iterated what I stated: Everything seems to be hunky dory at Wikia, yet additional ads are going to be infringing on wiki content anyway. If Wikia was not doing so well 1 year after the implementation of this ad program, I might have different thoughts, however considering that everything was not only good, but great according to Danny (considering monthly revenue doubled), this is another territory we're crossing into. I mean honestly, once we add all this additional advertising, is it ever going to go away? The obvious answer is no. Danny had said this format is helping to find a balance, but adding more advertising makes it another new format. -- LordTBT Talk! 05:47, 6 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I think they are trying to stay ahead of the game, also advertisers may get more demanding on the conditions to keep the same payment as thats a normal trend of business, i understand the need to do it as Internet companies are rather fragile and can go from honky donkey to kaput, so i agree with wikia in terms that is best to try when one is economically sound so one can choose the best option, than choose the one that look good but at the end was a bad idea because you dont have time/economy to test it. And for the ads to disappear i dont think that will happens unless people start paying for their host servicing like i wondered in this thread and i even got a tentative answer from Angela. At the end its all about the money so the question is, is your wiki willing to pay to be ad-less? as wikia is exploring ideas and testing them i can bet they will test this if there are enough people that are willing to pay ... in other way i fear this idea because what would it mean for the non paying wikis... Dont take me wrong i understand your point for the Dofus wiki its a pain the ads, why? because many those are flash!! Dofus is a flash based game, already very demanding in resources, so many players cant play the game and browse wiki at the same time and they have to choose calm spots to be able to cope with the slowness browsing wikia produces to their game experience and i had to handle lots of complains more when the problem report extension appear but seems people has get use to the idea ... --


 * I just spent a good deal of time re-reading Forum:Wikia's New Style, and as I said before, it's been only a year and a lot has been forgotten. Allow me to refresh some memories.


 * According to Danny, the ad program was an "experiment" that couldn't properly be judged until we had data informing us of how effective it was; that is why I asked him for a report on this experiment a few months ago. Danny's report was very positive on how everything was going. Last year, Danny also said that as we learned from this data, a "better system" would be able to be developed.


 * It is approximately 1 year from the implementation of the ad program, and instead of a "better system", we are seeing more ads. Last year, Danny described the system as "intrusive", "annoying, disruptive and ugly", and stated "putting an ad into the article area feels like an invasion", as well as that Wikia was "not happy about taking up content space". If that's how he truly felt regarding 1 ad per page, I'm curious as to Danny's opinion on multiple ads on one page, depending on the length, which could be anywhere from 4-6 ads, or more.


 * Danny also said many times that Wikia spoke with the ad people, and that Wikia couldn't "hide ads at the bottom of the page", which is oddly enough how the new system works. The ad people said they would not be interested in purchasing ad space because they wouldn't "know whether people are scrolling down to look at the ad".


 * So, have the ad people changed their minds one year later? Now they want to buy ads all over the pages regardless of whether or not people are scrolling down? Considering last year's uproar over infringement of article content, as well as the continued statements of how Wikia knew we were unhappy with the disruption of pages, I am shocked that more article content ads is the best line of thought. -- LordTBT Talk! 08:48, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * First off, I didn't mean to start another thread of "bash wikia" thing. I love wikia, and overall things are not as bad as they could be. Second, as I noted, the ads sometimes work to the benefit of the wiki like say the sony ads for the official Ghostbusters site. Third, lets face it, wikia needs money to stay online, and ads are the best way to do it. So I encourage you to, come up with better suggestions, or adjust to this. Devilmanozzy 19:59, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not bashing Wikia and I don't appreciate any suggestion that I am. I'm asking what I believe to be are fair questions based on the information previously given to us. If you read the New Style thread, you would know Wikia isn't open to any suggestions, thus making them is fruitless. -- LordTBT Talk! 03:20, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Quite honestly, while everyone hates ads, they are a necessary part of any venture like Wikia. Now, the thing is, the anons (the only ones that see the ads) honestly won't care all that much - there are advertisements all over the web, and there are relatively few on Wikia. The only people who really notice these ads are us, and since we don't see them, I don't see why this is such a big deal. Wjxhuang, the 888th Avatar  {Talk} 04:07, 7 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Some of us have ads turned on to make sure something inappropriate isn't being displayed on the wikis they run. And believe me, I've reported many ads. But that's not the point. One thing was said, another thing is going on. -- LordTBT Talk! 04:18, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I also have the ads on as well to know what is being promoted. Its just good common sense to see the pages as guests see them. As far as for what wikia promised or simply stated, I take everything with a grain of salt. That and as noted the economy is really making it hard for web companies that are ad based to keep going.Devilmanozzy 14:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Am I being ignored? It's been over a week. -- LordTBT Talk! 19:16, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi LordTBT,


 * I apologize if you feel like you're being ignored--that certainly isn't the intention. I just wasn't quite sure what the specific questions are that you were asking. I think that I understand where you're coming from now.


 * As you mentioned, Danny's report earlier this year was very positive--despite the ad changes, the number of people who edit on Wikia is growing faster than ever. And, he said that the new ads have "contributed a lot to the overall financial stability of the site, although we're still working to get to a point where our revenue matches our costs". To be clear: things are going better, but last month (May), it still cost more to operate Wikia than we made in ad revenue.


 * As I mentioned before, there are a number of reasons why the previous ad placements didn't meet our revenue expectations: 1) The economy has suffered significantly over the past year. Across the Internet, each ad generates significantly less revenue than the same ad did this time last year. When we made the changes, our revenue forecasts were based on a stable ad market. And 2) We are continually learning about what advertising options generate the most revenue with the fewest compromises regarding user experience. The previous ad placements didn't perform quite as well as we had hoped, and unfortunately, the only way for us to truly understand which options work best is for us to actually try them out.


 * So, basically, things are going well, but we haven't reached sustainability yet. The advertising market has changed a lot in the past year--advertisers are asking for different things than they did a year ago, and we are learning what performs best for us--so we need to be able to adapt to these changes.


 * Thanks, --KyleH (talk) 23:12, 16 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Kyle, you still have to admit this isn't a "better system", but a worse system. Maybe better in terms of revenue, sure. But better in terms of content infringement, as was alluded to last year? No. We were told numbers would be crunched to get there, and the whole thing has now devolved despite the positive numbers. It was made very clear that advertisers would not purchase ad space on the page where there are now ads. I'm having trouble seeing how putting ads there is an "option" in the first place unless all these companies entirely reversed their position on buying ads when they don't know if someone is scrolling down or not. Did this happen? Why did they change their minds all of a sudden? When it was also made clear last year that Wikia was really unhappy about infringing on wiki content with 1 ad-per-page, and now it is multiple ads-per-page, it just makes Wikia look disingenuous about really being unhappy about it, do you see? -- LordTBT Talk! 08:19, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


 * LordTBT,


 * At this point, I think we need to agree to disagree. I've answered all of your questions as best I can. In an ideal world, we wouldn't have to make any compromises at all with regard to user experience -- it certainly doesn't make us happy to do so -- but ads pay for Wikia and we need them in order to provide the services we do. The previous ad placements didn't work well enough, so we made changes that allow us to be more flexible. We'll continue to experiment until we find the right balance that serves both users and advertisers. In the mean time, if you see places where advertisements cover up content or behave unexpectedly, please let us know using Special:Contact so that we can investigate and improve the system.


 * Thanks! --KyleH (talk) 20:23, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Times are tough. I think most editors understand this, and will live with the ads no matter where they are placed. For those who just can't stand the ads I suggest this idea:
 * Optional ads. WikiHow model.
 * I like how WikiHow makes it clear that they need people to leave the ads turned on in order to pay the bills, but is willing to let people turn the ads off for awhile when they happen to be going ballistic that day over seeing ads. :)


 * I suggest that Wikia make it clearer which images on a page are ads. Sometimes it is hard to separate ad images from content images.


 * I leave the Wikia ads on because I want to see what readers are seeing, and because I want to support Wikia. I even try to click on a few ads of some interest.


 * I have Flashblock installed on my Firefox browser too. It allows me to toggle Flash on and off on all pages with a single click. Flash can slow down page opening, previewing, and editing when I am opening and editing a lot of pages in tabs. When Flash is off all new pages do not open Flash files. There is an arrow to turn on Flash at all the spots where there were Flash ads or videos. So I can look at YouTube videos if I choose to without having to turn on all the Flash ads. --Timeshifter 18:29, 17 June 2009 (UTC
 * Timeshifter,


 * Thanks for your feedback! That is a very interesting case study.  It's very similar to what we found as well.  As you know, we already allow people to remove most ads by logging in (a process which doesn't even require an email address), but it's interesting to learn how some sites are making that even easier.  I'll add your comments to our notes as we explore what works best for the community.


 * Thanks! --KyleH (talk) 20:23, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Ads on Talk Pages
Is this another test?


 * "we're not showing any ads on the "content-producing" pages -- talk pages, edit pages, etc" - Danny


 * "User pages, talk pages and special pages don't have any ads." - Danny


 * "Special pages and talk pages also have no ads" - Sannse


 * "There are no ads on special pages, user pages or talk pages" - Danny

-- LordTBT Talk! 00:01, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Right now, you shouldn't be seeing ads on talk or special pages. That's a bug and should be fixed soon. --KyleH (talk) 00:31, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Examples of advertising overload problems would be nice
I actually boycotted Wikia for a month over the first site-wide ad changes, so I'm not unwilling to take a stand when I see something is wrong, but I honestly think until I see some screenshots or links to examples of so called "advertising overload", it is all just whining to me. -- Fandyllic  (talk &middot; contr) 5:27 PM PST 24 Jun 2009
 * I'm not sure why it's a problem for you to turn ads on in your settings, but enjoy an article with 5 ads: -- <font color="Green">LordTBT  <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 03:00, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * It seems 5 ads might be the max now but i'm pretty sure last week that page had more : Page capture. — TulipVorlax 05:29, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh and i forgot; what is bugging me on that page is the first ad block to the left of the text. — TulipVorlax 05:30, 25 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Another thing that is bugging me is that banner ads are placed right after the heading of a section as if they were the content of the section. I would really prefer them at the end of sections even if that mean showing a bit higher (before the heading instead of after). — TulipVorlax 05:37, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


 * A) Why would I want to turn on ads?
 * B) Look at some other wikis. Not all of them have that many ads.
 * C) The ads in content area thing has been beaten to death. Wikia needs them to make money.
 * -- Fandyllic  (talk &middot; contr) 12:38 PM PST 2 Jul 2009


 * When you ask to see what Wikia's ad system looks like, you are fully capable of turning ads on yourself, instead of asking someone else to go out of their way to take a screenshot for you, that's why. And yes, all of them do, as I patrol many wikis. That was just 1 example. Considering you don't have ads turned on, you wouldn't know, would you? -- <font color="Green">LordTBT <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 03:32, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

It's costing us users
http://guildwars.wikia.com/index.php?title=GuildWiki:Request_assistance&diff=1491360&oldid=1491310 -- ◄mendel► 22:20, 26 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I really hate people that talk like that. They dont even understand how things works and yell at the wrong people. They dont even give us the chance to explain to them where they're mistaking. It's only my point of vue but i would leave an angry message on that IP's talk page if something like that would happen on fr.guildwars. Not so angry maybe but i would anyway waste my time explaining to "him" that he just have to make an account and that the ads comes from the hosting, not the sysops of the wiki and that every free bigs sites in the world have ads, begining with Hotmail, per example.
 * But that's just me. — TulipVorlax 06:37, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * These people understand that we need ads, but they don't understand that they have to register (and remember a password) just to read (pretty much nobody wants to do that), and they don't see why Wikia needs so many ads. So they just use our ad-free competitor. -- ◄mendel► 12:24, 28 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I dont even know my own password (using Keepass) but i uderstand the problem that normal people have with the mutliplication of accounts and pass to remember; it was the same for me some years ago when i first had access to the Internet; i was reusing passwords from a pool of about ten of them, sometime adding someting to the end and most of them were containing a real word and could lead to dictionary attack.
 * But Keepass dont solve all problems. The database (even if it's encrypted) could be stolen and it dont protect against keyloggers. — TulipVorlax 03:38, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The "Remember me" button doesn't work? It works fine for me, I'm always logged in. -- <font color="Green">LordTBT <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 03:54, 29 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm almost always logged in too. But normal users dont come to Wikipedia or GuildWiki everydays.
 * It's not the reason to use Keepass anyway, the reason is to have passwords like this : "9Q[+*J:>;n[R". — TulipVorlax 05:18, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I ended up making a "wiki ads" page on the popular wiki I moderate and I point to this thread. If that doesn't deal with IP users, then perhaps they are not worth having at the wiki. I'm sorry, but good editors sign up to wikia, and while I leave the door up (and try to respect IP users), if they complain about things like ads, they can go somewhere else then. I'm tired of IP users expecting me to bend over backwards for them. Devilmanozzy 13:14, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe we just ought to tell them that Wikia needs the ad revenue to pay for the new Wysiwyg editor that makes editing so simple for you! -- ◄mendel► 13:57, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Armchair
Wikia spent 2mil on ArmchairGM. Yet they still don't have ads, and it's obviously a high traffic site. Why isn't this being utilized to Wikia's advantage? -- <font color="Green">LordTBT <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 22:15, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Box Ads at the bottom of main pages
I'm seeing box ads now at the bottom of wiki main pages. Why? -- <font color="Green">LordTBT <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 21:50, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Any link ? Screenshot ? — TulipVorlax 18:17, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Don't need to give a link, I'm seeing it at the bottom of every wiki's main page. -- <font color="Green">LordTBT  <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 18:32, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


 * This one too ? — TulipVorlax 22:50, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * There's one on GuildWiki, so i guess it's mostly bigs english wikis because i dont see that elsewhere. — TulipVorlax 22:52, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't even see the regular box ad on that wiki. -- <font color="Green">LordTBT <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 23:16, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Response please Wikia? Why am I seeing box ads at the bottom of main pages? -- <font color="Green">LordTBT <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 19:14, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Those aren't regular ads but spotlights, links to other Wikia wikis.--AB 19:38, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * LordTBT means the box ad about World of Warcraft. I also see that bottom box ad, and also this --Ciencia Al Poder (talk) -WikiDex 19:52, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * My bad.--AB 20:21, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm now seeing Double Box Ads at the bottom of main pages, giving for a total of 5 ads per main page. And Wikia continues to ignore this question. -- <font color="Green">LordTBT <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 16:55, 10 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Hello? -- <font color="Green">LordTBT <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 21:02, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * What do you want as a response? This seems the new Wikia's New Style. And that's only the beginning. --Ciencia Al Poder (talk) -WikiDex 15:47, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * First, when I ask Wikia something, I don't expect 2 weeks of total radio silence. Second, the New Style said 2 ads per main page, than we went to 3, now it's 5. I expect some sort of statement on that, considering it's the main pages we are talking about here. The entry portal to wikis are now filled with ads. If you were browsing a new site and came across this many ads on the first page, would you stick around? -- <font color="Green">LordTBT <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 19:22, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Let's compare..
 * How many ads is there on :
 * http://www.msn.com/
 * http://www.yahoo.com/
 * http://www.lycos.com/
 * http://www.wikio.com/
 * But most of thoses sites doesn't ask the users to make the content. So, it's not entirely the same. — TulipVorlax 02:36, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * But most of thoses sites doesn't ask the users to make the content. So, it's not entirely the same. — TulipVorlax 02:36, 16 July 2009 (UTC)


 * MSN: 1 box ad. Yahoo: 1 box ad. Lycos: 0. Wikio: 0. I'm not sure what your point is really, considering 1 box ad doesn't turn me off as a browser. 5 ads do. -- <font color="Green">LordTBT <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 02:53, 16 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Maybe i was seen more ads on thoses sites that there really is. Surely someone could find a better example. I would have post a Forumactif forum in the list since Forumactif is a bit like Wikia but with forums instead of wikis, but...
 * Another i though i had after poster my previous comment is that most of thoses sites are runned by compagnies who doesn't need ad revenu from the site anyway (it's at least the case for MS).
 * My "point" ? I'm not there to make points but only to talk. As i just said i was "seen" a lot more ads on thoses site. What i mean is that to me there's a lot more that can be considered as ads, even though it doesn't looks like ads. Taking MSN per example, it has many links to others sites with wich they are exchanging links. For me, it's an ad. They even call that a "campaign" in some analytics software (like Piwik).
 * So, the amount of ads (thoses been trues ads or been considerate as an ad by the visitor) one can tolerate can variate a lot from people to people. Factors like ads placement (at the top or the bottom) or even the age of the visitor influence that. I think some young ones would tolerate more the ads than olders one since young are maybe more used to them.
 * On Forum:Advertising kills wiki‎, Gil talked about a way to estimate how much money Wikia is earning with the wisitors of a perticular wiki.
 * I'm not really defending the overlaod of ads here. But, most french or inactives english wikis doesn't get Wikia much money.
 * One last though, if more ads mean less users and less visitors...
 * — TulipVorlax 03:15, 16 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Oh, by the way, on MSN, there's two times the grey word "Advertisements"; one at the top and one at the bottom (both to the right). — TulipVorlax 03:19, 16 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Dear Wikia, it's now been over a month since my inquiry as to why box ads are at the bottom of main pages, totaling in 5 ads per main page, which is one heck of an ugly welcome mat for any random browser. When you fail to respond like this, I can only determine you are ignoring me. Thus I have to accept that your real interests are not what's best for the community and the advertisers, but what's best for the advertisers, and that's really disappointing. -- <font color="Green">LordTBT <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 16:24, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi LordTBT. I apologize for the delay in response, but I wasn't watching this page anymore.  As I mentioned above, we are experimenting with different ad placements to find the right balance between user experience and the revenue required to operate the site.  The boxes on the homepage are part of this experimentation, and it is possible that you may continue to see changes (sometimes more ads, sometimes fewer) as we continue experimenting.  If you have any specific comments about these changes, please contact us using this form so that we can consider your thoughts as we evaluate our different options. --KyleH (talk) 17:10, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm dealing with the millions of ads everywhere else Kyle, I'm dealing with it. Obviously I have no choice. But the main page? No one likes that many ads on the main page for any website. If that's the first thing I see, huge turnoff. -- <font color="Green">LordTBT <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 20:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Don't be evil
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_be_evil

From the Wikipedia page on the Google slogan "Don't be evil" is this quote from the Google founders that I like:

"We also display advertising, which we work hard to make relevant, and we label it clearly. This is similar to a well-run newspaper, where the advertisements are clear and the articles are not influenced by the advertisers’ payments."

The only problem I have with some of the ads on Wikia is that it is frequently not clear that they are ads, and not article content.

It can be discouraging at times to think that some readers will think the wrong thing about a wiki. --Timeshifter 21:10, 5 July 2009 (UTC)


 * In some publications here at Montréal, i often see ads disguised as real article of intesrest about something. In fact, i dont always see right away that's it's an ad. I begin reading. I'm always a bit chocked when i finally understand that they sucess in tricking me to read their stupid ad. And this is happening in paper publications. (Newspapers, magazines...) — TulipVorlax 01:47, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Especially when the ads look just like a YouTube video clip sitting there on the page, those are annoying. -- <font color="Green">LordTBT <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 03:36, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Falses links that show ads
This evening, i'm horrified to discover the most stupid type of ads on Wikia. And that on a wikia wich is not supposed to have ads (non-english) :



This is the kind of ads that i hate the most among all kind of ads that we see on the Internet. — TulipVorlax 04:59, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * And the worst of all : they are clickables !! BAD ! — TulipVorlax 05:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Found more infos : Forum:Infolinks.
 * Glad it wont stay.
 * But i fear it might return someday... — TulipVorlax 05:23, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, seems like Wikia is going to use this new advertisements (probably maintaining also the old ones). They have created an extension for that so it's serious.
 * Every day Wikia is stepping forth in adding more obtrusive advertisements. Those links thing is one of the most obtrusive advertisements a wiki could get, because of the nature of a wiki, having normal links everywhere. This is getting pretty annoying. Not for me, because I get no ads with my adblockers, but for our readers and other contributors.
 * Wikia lets users to be excluded from ads. Good, and that's done because we are who complain about the ads and who get annoyed with those ads, and then we forgot about the normal readers and anonymous users who get every day more and more ads, and Wikia only give them the chance to "get an account"... But anons don't complain about ads. If they got annoyed, they simply leave our wikis, stop editing, and such.
 * In my country there's one saying... la avaricia rompe el saco (greed breaks the bag). Please, don't play with us. --Ciencia Al Poder (talk) -WikiDex 09:05, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * A way around this would be to make your wiki really really image heavy. =p -- <font color="Green">LordTBT <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 18:41, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Considering Kyle said Wikia is "healthy" I'm curious as to why we see new types of infiltrating ads almost weekly now. -- <font color="Green">LordTBT <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 18:45, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I think i remember reading that Wikia was currently loosing some money.
 * But i would really prefer an ad block that this.
 * I wonder if Wikia could accept an "opt-in" thing for non-english wikis that would choose to have the ad block. — TulipVorlax 19:54, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Don't worry, you'll have a box ad, but also link ads. Is the way Wikia works. --Ciencia Al Poder (talk) -WikiDex 19:58, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Sure, Wikia needs money. I get that.  I'm fine with having quite a few ads in pages.  You can have banner ads, sidebar ads, corner box ads, even ads that separate sections of content in the middle of a page.  You can have reasonably animated flash ads.  But I draw the line at ads that make a page awkward to use.  There seem to be three main types of such ads: ads that make sounds when you want a computer to be quiet, ads that cover up content that you were trying to see, and ads that disfigure text to make it awkward to read.  The ads that create links with pop-up ads in text manage to do two out of the three at once, and I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if that type of ads starts making sounds, too.
 * I realize that there are some other sites that use the text link ads, too. But there aren't that many, because of what they do to a site:  make nearly everyone leave, or at least nearly everyone who doesn't already have the ads disabled.  Quizzical 01:25, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * LordTBT: You should change your signature, or nobody would click on it :) --Ciencia Al Poder (talk) -WikiDex 14:04, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Category bottom box ads
Is this a bug? -- <font color="Green">LordTBT <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 00:01, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Is it costing Wikia links?
A big factor in getting google rankings is how much other people link to you. Myself, I'd rather post a link on a forum or website if the site I am linking to looks respectable, because my reputation rides on that as well. Wikia wikis used to look respectable, with sidebar and banner ads. With the in-content box ads and, if they happen, infolinks, that would turn around, and while the revenue might increase in the short- and mid-term, as google ranking would drop it would inevitably go down as well. To regain that trust and these links would be a long-term effort. -- ◄mendel► 13:49, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Ad Revenue
According to websiteoutlook.com, Wikia generates approximately $12,500/day in ad revenue. Is this accurate? -- <font color="Green">LordTBT <font color="Green" size="2">Talk! 08:20, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I can't talk specifics about our revenue, but I can say with certainty that the number on websiteoutlook.com is not accurate. I'm not really sure where that number comes from--it seems to make some pretty big assumptions based on our Alexa rank, an inaccurate estimate of pageviews, and other factors, most of which have only marginal influence on ad revenue.  --KyleH (talk) 02:27, 13 August 2009 (UTC)