Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-22224-20180521161500/@comment-5956954-20180528054919

You don't have to for the most part. There's an option at the bottom of Special:Preferences allowing you to "not show all ads."

Here is the real issue at hand with Oasis compared to Monobook: the overboard advertisements at points (the upcoming example is the only bad thing ads can do, meaning they're not destructive in any other unreasonable way). It's mostly a problem to non-users rather than users because they don't have this preference option to reduce the ads. They are forced to use an adblocker or sign up to the service.

This is an advertisement that pushed the Undertale Wiki's homepage down by a good margin and ruined the sidebar "spoiler warning" section by making it wrap into the center of the page. My main theory as to why this happened is because there is no way for the ad to push a MediaWiki element down, so it does this.

This advertisement is also accompanied (without a screenshot) by an advertisement that serves as a background. This makes wiki backgrounds pointless on the main page of some wikis because it would just be overwritten.

If advertisements were less destructive to the content when there are exceptions to their placement or cannot fit anywhere anyway, then that's a good reason to pick Monobook over Oasis. I still believe that with proper tuning and adblocker, Oasis is superior in every way for my needs, but I don't like that a person requires external software or tools to prevent pages breaking from advertisements.

All bad ads can be reported with this form when it fits what this says, so yeah. That's my only issue, really. Please provide this discussion with some screenshots illustrating other points as to why Monobook or Oasis are better than one another. I would like visual evidence for once.