Forum:Advertisement

Spam or sponsor?

 * This discussion is moved from Wowpedia talk:Village pump. -- 12:50, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Druid PvE guide has an update that is a horribly intrusive spam ad right in the middle of the thing... but the edit comment says "(adding sponsor link - see http://www.wowwiki.com/WoWWiki:Working_with_Wikia for details)". I didn't remove it due to that, but if we have to have stuff like this, could it be put at the bottom or something, instead of right in the middle? --Azaram (talk) 01:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Fandyllic and Murph are our representatives working with Wikia on some new advertising techniques. They'll probably see your message here, but you might want to mention it on one of their talk pages as well. -- 04:18, 1 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I noticed this yesterday. What concerns me is that the whole decision was so hush hush. I visited WoWWiki alot in January but I dont recall seeing a header on a page I was viewing or any information on the front page. The consequences of this decision affect all WoWWiki users. I really dislike seeing adds on any Wiki. I would have gladly had voted for the domain change. So, why was there no header on the pages directing the community and users to vote on this important issue? Only 15 people voted on the Wowpedia talk:Domain page, that hardly counts as a consensus. I will post something on both Fandyllic and Murph's pages. Ifandbut (talk) 14:49, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I wish you had seen it too. =) I hate seeing ads myself. I'm not sure where it was posted or how I stumbled on it. As other people mentioned on the discussion page of the vote though, there's no guarantee we could have stayed ad-free indefinitely (while logged in) if we had gone ahead with the move. Fandyllic and Murph understand our concerns and will hopefully be able to work out something reasonable. Just let them know your opinion on the stuff you see. -- 14:54, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Not sure how you missed it... it was on this page, see Wowpedia talk:Village pump, which continued to Wowpedia talk:Village pump and then Wowpedia talk:Village pump. It was never a hush hush thing. 17:47, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reply but the thing is I did not even know about the Village pump section until recently when I decided to try to get involved and start editing. Before last week I was just random user #39583 looking for some quick information. I'm sorry but something like this should have been right at the top of the main page or in an alert header on the top of every page with a dismiss button.


 * Also, I'm sure WoWWiki gets thousands of users looking at it every day. How could anyone think that 15 votes is a consensus? Ifandbut (talk) 18:30, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Because only a few of those thousands of visitors actually edit the site. Special:Wikiastats says that of all of our users, 637 have made more than 5 edits in January, and only 23 have made more than 100. -- k _d3 19:08, 3 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, however it is those thousands of visitors who have to deal with the dumb ass gides trying to trick nobies into buying them when the same information is freely found online in several places. At the very least make them blockable by ad block plus, if not then move them to the bottom of the page so that the article flow is not interrupted. Ifandbut (talk) 15:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * They're also the ones that drive the ad revenue in the first place. By the very simple fact that they are the majority of the site's visitors.  If they decide it's too obnoxious to be worth coming, WoWWiki will either be dead or a shadow of its former self in surprisingly short order.  It's already seriously lacking in Wrath updates if you hadn't noticed.  Graptor (talk) 10:14, 18 February 2009 (UTC)


 * While I'm not as drastically opposed as Graptor is, I agree with his sentiment. I feel that WoWWiki's been going downhill lately, and the sponsor ads right in the middle of the content are a good example of it.  The problem I've been seeing for even longer than that, which has been getting steadily worse, is a confusion (in policy and general direction) about what should be on the wiki and what shouldn't.  There are databases out there (like wowhead) that list out every item, quest and NPC.  There really isn't very much else out there that's a good collection of lore, connections, explanations, and tables.  There are approximitely 71,012 pages right now, and 13,014 link to Template:Stub/Box (~18%).  Of those 13k stubs, 8,726 (67%) are Item/NPC/Achivement/Object links (Template:Elinks-Stub), and of that, 6,825 (78%) are item stubs which might possibly have slightly more information than is on wowhead, but is more likely to be exactly the same or less. From personal experience (moving to observed rather than hard statistics), maybe a quarter of the item links I click on or hover over don't exist, and a bit more than half of the others are the generic item stub (i.e. basic info straight out of the game, nothing different from what you'd find anywhere else).
 * I'm not saying that this isn't useful information... but it's also stuff that doesn't benefit from being on a wiki. The Northrend Gems Table is a really useful piece of information that no other straight-from-game database site is likely to have.  The Delicate Cardinal Ruby and Delicate Bloodstone pages linked from one box in the table?  Entirely useless as far as the wiki goes.  It's not bad information, but it doesn't gain anything from being on the wiki, and probably never will.
 * I'm not even sure where I'm going with this rant. I kindof sidetracked myself and I'm too tired to bring it back on point. I think the short form is that wowwiki's falling behind on the stuff that benefits from being wikified, in favor of halfway doing stuff that other sites do much better, especially compared to a year or so ago. Sorry I'm not more coherent.  I may edit this in the morning.  --Bobson (talk) 09:14, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * One reason I haven't posted more info about the game is learning how to write these pages is very hard and requires alot of effort. The help pages do have alot of info on them thankfully but, lets face it the wiki markup language or whatever it's called is a big rock to tackle and it has to be if anyone has any hope of contributing to this site. I feel that is the biggest drawback to this site or at least it is to me. By the way is there a way to sign up for helping contribute money to wowwiki to keep ads off the site or am I just missing it?--Ewolfg1 (talk) 03:56, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

(Indent reset) The spam is getting worse... on the Twin Blades of Azzinoth page, under the Trivia heading, is a WOW SECRETS!!! spam that is larger than the actual information in the section. Now it's not even under a sponsor heading, it looks like it's supposed to be part of the section. --Azaram (talk) 01:45, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Got a screenshot for that? I'm not seeing it. -- k _d3 02:14, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Only appears while logged off.. for many pages (if not all) they can be a bit "large". 02:28, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Sigh. One more page that isn't respecting the "show ads as if you weren't logged in" pref. Off to complain. -- k _d3 04:04, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Carrying on this conversation at Wowpedia talk:Working with Wikia -- k _d3 04:16, 5 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Screenshot added there. --Azaram (talk) 07:00, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Advertisement Bullcrap

 * This discussion is moved from Wowpedia talk:Village pump. -- 12:50, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Not to flame or anything, but seeing advertisements in the middle of wiki content pages is bullcrap. I don't come to wiki to see Killerguides links slammed into the middle of a page. Infact, I come here for just the opposite, that I don't have to deal with guides or tips or insider lore for the low low price of $29.95.

Get your act together please. This is a very shocking change to wiki and if Ward Cunningham was dead, would be spinning in his packing peanut stuffed grave. Not to mention that this is not only an insult of what Wiki stands for, but the editors and thousands of viewers that come to wowwiki. In short. Are you willing to pay those that add and edit content and pages for their work that wikia is making money from?

Please read as follows.

Advertising and use of free content

Often Wikia has expanded by acquiring an existing wiki's domain name, userlists and databases from a founder or co-founder. The original wiki is then shut down without consulting its editors or wider community and the domain redirected to Wikia's version of the project. In at least two cases the content is used under a Creative Commons non-commercial license, raising the question of whether the wikis themselves can legitimately be sold to Wikia for commercial use.

Once a wiki is on Wikia, there can be problems with inappropriate advertisements or advertising in the body text area. There is no easy way for individual communities to switch to conventional paid hosting, as Wikia usually owns the relevant domain names. Those communities who have left Wikia find the company continues to operate the abandoned wiki using its original name and content, adversely affecting the new wiki's search rankings. -- Gorivan (talk) 05:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Look like it is time for me to stop editing WoWWiki. I don't want to spend hours of editing so that someone else can earn more money, or help those game guides company to trick newbies to buy their stupid guides. --WakemanCK (talk) 08:37, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I completely agree. If anything the adds should appear at the bottom of the page or in some form that can be blocked by ad block plus. I felt very in the dark about this whole thing as I stated above in the Spam or sponsor? post. I think it is only a matter of time till more people start getting angered by these ads like you Gorivan. Ifandbut (talk) 15:06, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Something getting blocked by AdBlock is really contrary to the interests of the wiki. Also, advertisers don't really pay well for ads at the bottom of pages. -- 15:09, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Well yes, I realize this. However, users (like me) of AdBlock have grown accustomed to not seeing ads on websites (you cant imagine how much I wanted to kill myself every time one of those "Congratulations, you have won a iPod Nano" ads appeared). I know it was only a matter of time before sites started to find ways around AdBlock but the LAST place I expected to see the first one was on a Wiki. Ifandbut (talk) 15:19, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but unless you want to start paying for the upkeep of the wiki there is no other way for us to raise money. -- 16:45, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Phooey! How about you ask for donations, and if that fails, pay the upkeep on your own instead of using the wiki as a form of income. Why should viewers pay for your mistake of moving it to a payed, for-profit server. Furthermore, are you willing to account for every penny spent? Money that is to be earned, from advertisements that are "for the upkeep."  The main issue is the trade of free information.  Information none the less that others input for you.  I ask, how long will it be until a premium membership is needed to view content.


 * They don't need to maintain the site, you know. Neither are they doing this for themselves. This website has been ad-free for quite a while, but it's grown and that's necessary. Even Wikipedia raises money because *gasp* bandwidth isn't free. Not for a website of WoWWiki's size. If you want the quality it provides, you'll have to deal with it. Adesworth   talk to me IconSmall Mage.gif 14:43, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


 * All of us that edit this wiki does it without getting paid, and all voluntarily. We are not forced to maintain this site, but most us that does do it because we like it. As been said before, you have no idea how much it costs for server maintenance, support etc. from Wikia.
 * I'd much rather pay donations than letting people see ads on the site - I don't except for the new ones - but sadly I don't think that's going to happen anytime soon. Wikipedia got donations in the end, maybe we'll see that in the future. Nobody knows. 09:01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I to would rather pay donations then see the ads. I am wondering why the donation option was not even considered. From what I have read, it was not. Ifandbut (talk) 14:53, 9 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't mind the ads. They're not the way to go - in my opinion - but I don't mind them. What I said a few times back still stands, however. Rather than attempting to raise more money to pay for server load, improving the software is a better investment.
 * Despite being written in a god-awful language to start with, MediaWiki is still a very good and fast platform. I don't know what Wikia did with it, but there's so much cruft that could be removed... so much room for improvement. Poke me on IRC about that if anything though, but yeah there's plenty of harmless ways towards a higher profit for wowwiki (and wikia in general). 06:35, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Usually I don't mind ads either. But Priest is just ridiculous. There should be other ways to implement ads that have no influence on the actual article. As if the ad is a part of the content.--Iggey (talk) 18:43, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah. I wouldn't mind at the bottom or maybe in a (left) sidebar or something, but reading 'useful information, useful information. ZOMG SPAM!' is annoying. As to telling them to pay for the site themselves, not really cool. We do all use it, and the money has to come from somewhere... but incredibly obtrusive ads is not the best way to go. --Azaram (talk) 13:53, 8 February 2009 (UTC)


 * You hit the nail on the head. With the ads being put right in the middle of the of actual content it ruins the flow of useful information. Even putting it at the top of the page where the "Project Page" and "Discussion" tabs are. Ifandbut (talk) 14:53, 9 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Frankly, I would find the utter death of WoWWiki better than the current situation with these in-article ads. If they aren't completely removed within about a week I'm going to leave, going to very bluntly state to the advertisers in question that I will never ever buy their crap as a result of their agreeing to place the ad, and will do my damndest to discourage everyone I know from using WoWWiki in future.  The exact opposite, in short, of what I did after I first discovered WoWWiki.  This is neither negotiable nor a request.  Ads?  Whatever.  Ads in the articles?  No.  Still trying to figure out how to delete my useraccount though.Graptor (talk) 09:36, 18 February 2009 (UTC)


 * In-line ads are still here, so I'm gone. It was a great site, but honestly, you can go to hell now.  You crossed the line.  Graptor (talk) 07:10, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I count exactly 7 edits in the mainspace (including minors) by Graptor. I hope you find a better place to get WoW info (although I suspect you will lurk here) and possibly contribute. There's always http://wotlkwiki.info/ to go to.
 * As far as donations go, WoWWiki started that way and it didn't even remotely cover the costs of running the wiki, so please don't pretend that because someone thought of it now, that it is a good answer. -- Fandyllic  (talk &middot; contr) 3:38 PM PST 17 Apr 2009

Sponsor ideas
Here are some ideas for sponsors, where I could see myself actually clicking, especially if they were having a sale or something like that:
 * Ventrilo or Teamspeak hosting
 * Guild website hosting, such as Guildomatic or others
 * Wow Web Stats (they have free and paid services)
 * Game themed clothing, like the awesome tee-shirts on ThinkGeek or Maintankadin

And I don't know if these kind of websites advertise, because they don't seem to have any paid subscription services that I'm aware of, but maybe you can find out:
 * Wow Heroes
 * WoW Jutsu
 * [~ttp://www.wowprogress.com/ Wow Progress]
 * MMO Champion
 * Curse gaming

You can use the Alexa rating (if you haven't heard of that) to get an idea of what kind of traffic these sites get. For example, Thinkgeek. 1:39 PM, 8 Jul 2009 (EDT)


 * Thanks Howbizr. I really appreciate you thinking of us.  Folks with paid services are definitely worth reaching out to (although often they are so performance focused that they won't pay much - killer guides was a rare exception but we keep testing others as we need to find more paid-relevant services).  Web sites tend to not want to advertis, although I did pitch the CURSE CEO on advertising for their new patch update software they sell - and he said no so far :-(   Keep em coming  color="Blue">Gil (color="Blue" size="1">talk) 22:17, 15 July 2009 (UTC)