Forum:Do you prefer ads at the top

We're testing a new format for the ads on this Central Wikia (www.wikia.com).

Instead of the ads being on the right hand side and reducing the width of actual page content, we're wondering what you think about having them in a small bar at the top instead. There are still four ads, but they take up less room and don't appear all the way down the page.

View some random pages on this wiki to see how they look.

You may need to refresh your stylesheet at MediaWiki:Monobook.css if you don't see them.

One current bug is that the content is not expanding to fill the now-blank gap on the right, but that will be fixed.

We're trying this on Central so we can get some feedback from the communities, so please add a comment below.

Angela (talk) 02:58, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Angela is SERIOUSLY correct about the Ads taking up less space this way. Yes they are at the top of the screen, but remember, once you scroll down to read the article, the add banner is then bypassed, leaving the rest of the screen with about 20% more space (at a low resolution) and 15% more on a high resolution. Mostly Zen  [[Image:Baby_tao.jpg]] (talk )
 * Also see this suggestion by Splarka:
 * ads above p-cactions

Comments

 * It looks odd hanging over like that, but it might work. There's also the point that many of the sites don't have such long navigation bars. Could some of the ads be put under the wikia messages?  Chadlupkes 03:07, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Support the idea to put them under messages. Maybe not a problem as Mostly Zen [[Image:Baby_tao.jpg]] (talk ) envisages (below)? Suggest the ads themselves more readable if in a column. Wider right side might then encourage more creativity in using columns to improve readability of articles as well. Philralph 14:20, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Would it be possible to only have ads at the top, of edit pages, diff pages, and histories (thereby giving much bigger edit windows) and only at the side for regular content pages? --Splarka (talk) 03:11, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Can you clarify if there's the idea to change layout for all Wikia (which might for some feel like its being imposed) or whether you're just considering this for the central Wikia? Philralph 09:59, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

No

 * I have to say for the love of crumpets no. o.O Placing the ad there would make them appear to be part of the articles on the wiki's. The only time I personally would want the ads at the top is if they are above the navigation tabs too and out of the article box! Otherwise, back to the right hand side with them. I'd rather loose width than loose the proper disconnection between article content and advertising. --Nidonocu - talk [[Image:Trans 168.png|16px|Nidonocu]] 03:12, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Above the tabs is an interesting idea... then it would looks something like this Image:Ads test 1.png -- sannse (talk) 07:31, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I like this much better than having ads between the page title and content. However, the visual layout seems unbalanced without something on the right side to balance all these boxes on the left. -- Siege(talk) 15:45, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I tend not to use the full screen for my browser window, so this pushes the content of interest down more and off the screen. This would get better after the bug is fixed so the content expands to the right.  However, I find that columns of text are often easier to read if they are not too wide.  (I think there is some psych/perception research on readability that may apply.)  Some pages are designed with columns, but many are not.  Having the ad on the right can actually be an advantage.  I've also become accustomed to adds on the right on other sites, such as Yahoo!   (On the other hand that could change too.)  One good side effect, is that if they stay at the top, I may be motivated to get better at creating my own css skin.  ;-)  --CocoaZen 03:22, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Ads on top looks awfully. I was thinking it's some punishment from Google until I get this topic. :) Some part of self-contained wiki got ads on top or on down of the site and always looks like too merged with text. Ads are part of the Wikia, but let them have their own separable place. Besides some articles are written for current screen width, especially density of images location are formated for 1024x768 with right-hands ads. Correcting so huge part of text is not worth the candle. I have a feeling having ads on the right is more exclusive for Wikia. I'm also saying no to ads above tabs. It's looks like advertisement is prior than wiki. Szoferka 07:37, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Initial reaction is it's worse. Hate idea of a layout change such as this being 'imposed' on all wikia, but maybe I'm misinterpreting? If this is pursued, might be made a bit better by enclosing in a distinctive box so's is clearly not part of the article, (of the other poss below 3 looks least worst) but overall looks a very backward step. Sorry, but I hates it... for the love of crumpets, etc, please no Philralph 09:59, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * My opinion is also no. It mixes too much with the content. If it has to be on top, I think it should be above the edit buttons, too, like in this example so it can be kept separate from the content. It also takes too much space away from the edit screen. working on a widescreen laptop as I do, can't have the "edit" and the "save page" button on the same screen. That makes too much scrolling necessary. I also think it would be a good idea to put a box around the advertising, kind of like the one around the units in the left navigation bar. Regards, KainNiemand
 * I like them better on the side as well. &mdash;Silly Dan (talk) 23:16, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * No, because it is not supposed to be the content of the page. I don't believe that Google software is smart enough yet to create a better content than people. Inyuki 04:35, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


 * A world of no. Although I can't seem to see any pages on wikia right now that have ads at the top, I agree with all those who have weighed in so far to say that they think it's a bad idea. Why do the ads have to change at all? -- Scott (talk ) 00:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes... but ONLY if you want lots of pictures/infoboxes on our Wiki
It depends on a couple of factors:
 * 1) Do you want lots of pictures on your wiki? or do you want just lots of text?
 * 2) What resolution are you running at?

I am unsure... I think the best choice is Splarka's suggestion of having the Ads above the P-cactions: Because Nidonocu is correct; if the ads appear INSIDE the article page itself, they look like part of the contents.
 * ads above p-cactions

Why do I say that? Its the psychology of text layout.

I went and searched scholar.google.com for psychology articles on the effects of different screen layout. Here is the link Fulltext - Screen Design Guidelines .Pdf.

To breifly summarize, the author of that paper read 100 books on screen design, chose the best 77 books, and wrote the above paper summarising all the findings of those books. The books are varied, some by psychologists, some by graphic designers, some by web page designers etc...

Summary:
 * Have a consistent design throughout your webpage, don't change it from one page to the next.
 * Have a high contrast between text and background colour, dark text on light background is best.
 * Have about 10 words per line of text, its easiest to read.
 * (This is why CocoaZen says he cant read text so easily if its too wide)
 * Apparently this line length is less important on a computer than in a book though, as we tend to read text on the screen from further away than we do when reading a book (so the angles our eyes have to scan are smaller and easier)

Here is another paper I've downloaded: It kind of backs up the first one really, but goes into more depth.

I would say that CocoaZens comment about line length is spot on, and one of the most important factors for readability and layout, which would make me think we should stick with the ads on the right hand side. If we were just using Text only Wikis, this would be 100% correct. It would be easier with the Ads on the right.

However, most of our Wikis are using Pictures and/or textboxes (actually, am I correct in saying this?). Assuming that most of our Wikis DO use pictures and infoboxes, the best layout to have is with the Ads at the top.

Why? Because the ads at the top make a L shape, along with the Media:Sidebar, making the rest of the screen appear as a square. If we have the ads at the right hand side, the two bars make a rectangular middle section.

PICTURES
 * If we want to have lots of pictures and infoboxes, the Square shape is best (ads at top, above the edit bar).
 * If we want to have just lots of text, the rectangle option is best (ads at right hand side)

RESOLUTION (Pixels)
 * If you have a HIGH resolution, ads on the right are best
 * If you have a LOW resolution, ads at the top are best

Having said that, I just redesigned our WHOLE wiki, with new navigation templates at the TOP (yes, its my fault the Job queue increased by 18,000 last night!), because I thought the Ads on the right were there to stay. Too many templates, pictures and infoboxes (which are normally top right from wikipedia convention) squash the text horribly on lower resolutions. Try reducing your browser window size and look at this page for example.

I'd prefer to see the ads hiding underneath the Wikia messages (bottom right hand side!) but I'm guessing our Angel investors wouldn't be happy with this solution! :P

Mostly Zen  (talk ) 10:58, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Other possibilities
These tests might break if they fiddle with the ad div, but until then, see if any of these aren't too awful (you may need to purge your cache or reload the site js). Note that these pages are devoid of content, but that is okay: the javascript matches the title (so don't make them wikilinks or it will break, as it will go to the edit page). --Splarka (talk) 08:29, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
 * ads above firstHeading
 * ads above p-cactions
 * ads above global wrapper
 * Note: ad and javascript removed, so these pages no longer function. --Splarka (talk) 04:10, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Other varients on the top
Yes, if they are going to be moved to the top, I would suggest they go at the very top before the line with the user's name, etc. They should not go between the article title and the article content. Also, if they go on the top, maybe we can make the page less top-heavy by moving some of the standard controls (user's line and action tabs) to the left immediately under the logo? (I had trouble getting Sparkla's alternatives to show properly.) --CocoaZen 20:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Rationale?
I want to make sure I understand the rationale for the proposed change. It's a different discussion, depending on what the actual goal is.

The rationale that Angela stated above is that having ads at the top takes up less space than having them on the right does.

Another potential unspoken rationale is that having ads at the top makes them more prominent, and more in the reader's face. More prominent ads = more potential clickthroughs, which means more income for Wikia.

Now, I love Wikia, and I want the company to have all the money it needs, so I don't blame them for experimenting with some ad strategies that might lead to more income. I just want to think about which rationale is more important, because that makes the discussion different.

Going with goal #1 (the ads take up less space): I think it's important to recognize that ads at the top may take up less space pixel-wise, but the space that they're taking is prime eyeball real estate. Yes, they "disappear" if you page down, but they're still the first thing you see -- and therefore it's the first impression a reader gets on every single page.

If goal #2 (more prominent ads, more income) is more important, then that's a balancing act -- If the ads are more intrusive, then do readers drift away? Do you gain more clickthroughs with more prominent ads, or do you lose readers? Is there a way to increase the clickthroughs without putting ads at the top of the page? -- Danny (talk ) 18:39, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


 * The thing about them being to the side, is there is no way to scroll them away for more content space. They do not create a horizontal scroll bar (in most browsers) by being to the side, and are squeezed in forcefully via css. At the top they'd let wikia have exactly the same amount of horizontal content space as Wikimedia wikis do (more noticable on lower resolutions), and just increase the vertical height of the page. But which is better? Hard to say. --Splarka (talk) 04:55, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


 * It makes sense to give the content a little more horizontal space, if people are actually hungry for that. Another way to accomplish that would be to reduce the font size for the sidebar ads. In yesterday's tryout, the font size for the ads was noticeably smaller. If it's okay to reduce the font size of the ads like that, then maybe we could reduce the width of the sidebar, and get a little extra content space that way. -- Danny (talk ) 10:31, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry for replying to this so late, but I was giving the "taking up less room" as a potential benefit, not as a rationale. Obviously higher clickthroughs would be the benefit to Wikia, but I'd like to find a way of doing that which benefits editors and readers too. Having more relevant ads is another way of doing that since people are more likely to click ads they find interesting, and not having the same old ads for irrelevant stuff is beneficial to the people looking at the pages. We're trying alternative ad providers as well for this reason, though all I've seen from adbrite so far is the same ad for Motorola on every page... which seems far less relevant that the standard google ads, but perhaps this will improve in future. Angela (talk) 16:26, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Can communities choose?
I have another thought... If the ultimate decision is to go ahead with ads at the top, would it be possible for individual Wikia communities to choose between the two formats? I could imagine a system where the default becomes ads at the top, but individual Wikia could "opt out" and keep them on the sidebar (or vice versa).

It seems like that would be technically possible, since yesterday's format change affected only the Central Wikia and none of the others. It would be extra work for the tech folks, but it might help to encourage buy-in from the larger Wikia community. Is that a possibility? -- Danny (talk ) 10:37, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Related topic: Rewarding communities by investing in them Philralph 14:52, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


 * It might make more sense (although probably harder to implement) to have an individual opt-out rather than on a per-wiki basis. Angela (talk) 16:28, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I like the ads where they are, but I think it would be awesome if individual wikis could format them at all. Over at Wiki 24, the black-on-white stuff on the right looks godawful with our gray-and-black color scheme. Am I just missing something? --StBacchus 14:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC)


 * As long as you're not actually hiding the ads or making them too hard to read, there shouldn't be a problem with you changing the colors in your w:c:24:MediaWiki:Monobook.css if that's possible (I'm not entirely sure it is). Angela (talk) 14:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Nope, I tried that. Memory Alpha changed the colors somehow, but I figured they aren't working under exactly the same rules as the wikias. Also, the Wikia messages don't seem to be editable either. Maybe you guys could make the colors inherit instead of just making them white? --StBacchus 18:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC)


 * It can be forced, try:

div#column-google div { color:white !important; background-color: #333333 !important; border:1px solid grey } div#column-google a { color:blue !important; background-color: transparent !important } .adText {color: white !important;} .adHeadline {background-color:#333333 }
 * However, it is a bit messy. There should be a div around the adbright ads, and the ***wikia*** featurebox needs some classes to be editable, probably. Memory-Alpha is currently only using google Adsense with the colors customized by the devs in the skin via . --Splarka (talk) 05:15, 3 September 2006 (UTC)