Ads on Wikipedia?

My problem is with how it appears, if adds were on Wikipedia would people regard it as less balanced? People who are reading the page on Windows Vista while having a MS advert might think both the advert and the text are connected. If people think this they may move away from Wikipedia, and thus Wikipedia would lose value...

dylunio

It could be that some people who don't know so much about what wikipedia really is may regard it as such, but those who know that everyone can edit those pages would also know that it is then hard to make its content biased. The only portion of the Vista page that would be biased is, naturally, the ad.

So now it depends on how many people really know wikipedia well enough to know how biased or unbiased its content can be, based on its nature, but something tells me that those who don't know wikipedia is an encyclopedia everyone can edit would have these misconceptions with or without advertising being shown on it.

Ideally, wikipedia would probably be better off without ads, but Jimmy is making a point of how much money they are missing out on that could be invested into good causes.. which is a valid point (especially if they are getting really lucrative ad requests which they currently have to deny).

Maybe they could set up a prominent advertising policy that would show both advertisers and readers what all rules ads must comply to? This might inspire enough trust to keep it worthwhile.

A few years ago, it was discussed in Denmark to put ads on ambulances. It would give the money for more ambulances. The same for notebooks for school children to be passed out in schools.
I really, really, really, really disagree with this mindset.
Yes, the Wikipedia is missing out on a source of revenue. But it would be nice to keep it to the point, and it is not exactly an uncluttered interface as it is.