Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

[Peter Southwood]

Pageviews by the same user directly following an exposure to the banner would 
give some idea of whether readers are being lost.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
AntiCompositeNumber
Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 4:11 PM
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

Pageviews isn't a good metric for this, because it isn't measuring the
people who load a Wikipedia page, see an obnoxious banner, and then
click away without reading the content. That's still a pageview and a
reader lost.
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 1:17 AM Peter Southwood
 wrote:
>
> It is slightly less repellent than some I have seen in the past, but in 
> general I concur.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf 
> Of MZMcBride
> Sent: 11 December 2018 03:20
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads
>
> James Salsman wrote:
> >For those of you who have not seen the mobile fundraising banner this
> >year, and thus are uncertain of what all the fuss is about, here is an
> >example:
> >
> >https://i.imgur.com/wL4Y5dl.png
>
> Hi.
>
> This type of advertising is noxious and unacceptable. It should be revised
> or taken down as soon as possible.
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

[James Salsman]

Thanks, Seddon.

Why aren't the two mobile banners listed on
https://frdata.wikimedia.org/campaign-vs-amount.csv -- or am I just
not finding them?

Also, how do you feel about measuring the extent to which you would
have to run more single-line banners to match the donation volume of
larger banners? I have a feeling that optimizing mobile might be in
the smaller direction than either of the two you're presently running,
and that very few people will care if they see single-line banners
days to weeks after having dismissed them (e.g. with "not now".)

Finally, was there a decision on measuring NextDoor, Reddit, and Google Ads?

Best regards,
Jim



On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 11:47 AM Joseph Seddon  wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
>
> The fundraising team genuinely hears and appreciates all the feedback we've
> received about this mobile banner. For the past week and a half  - for the
> majority of our mobile campaign - we have been extensively working and
> acting on that feedback to reduce the length of this banner, emphasize the
> ability to skip the content, and improve accessibility across the board.
>
>
> For our mobile large banners, we've been focusing on three things:
>
>
> * Removing the bottom fixed element reminder banner - DONE
>
>
> * Reducing the length of the banner ---In Progress--- Last week we make
> some changes to the text reducing the appeal by 5% and over the weekend we
> reduced the overall length of the banner by 18% on phones through extensive
> but subtle design changes. There are more changes to come in this area.
>
>
> * Making it clearer to users that they are able to SKIP the banner ---In
> Progress--- We've already altered the language in the toolbar. There are
> more potential changes and tests to come in this area
>
>
> * Ensuring that the banners are suitable for users who access us through
> accessibility software. - DONE - The same options to skip the banner were
> always presented to users of accessibility software. We've also made
> changes to the underlying structure of the banner to improve navigation by
> these users.
>
>
> The fundraising team works extensively in a data driven manner but I must
> emphasise that doesn't mean that we don't listen to community feedback. The
> very opposite. It means that we work very hard to ensure that the changes
> the community seeks drives our work and this feedback has been the main
> focus of our work for much of the last week.
>
>
> I’ll update on further changes asap.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Seddon
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 4:52 PM GorillaWarfare <
> gorillawarfarewikipe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey all,
> >
> > I feel a little bad raising this because I know there was some community
> > vetting of fundraising initiatives that I ignored, but please forgive me. I
> > brought this up in the Wikimedia Weekly Facebook group asking where best to
> > raise the issue, and it was suggested I post here.
> >
> > I was looking something up on my phone just now, apparently not logged in
> > to Wikipedia, and I discovered that mobile users in the US (and presumably
> > elsewhere) are being shown enormous ads. It took four full page scrolls for
> > me to reach the content of the article I was hoping to read. Even once I
> > made it past the ads at the top of the page, I was greeted with a pop-in
> > banner from the bottom of the page, as if I could possibly have not noticed
> > the four pages of text asking me to donate. (Screenshots attached).
> >
> > I understand that we need donations to keep the site running and all, but
> > this seems excessive. I particularly worry for people who use assistive
> > technology who are having to listen to or try to skip through four pages'
> > worth of text-to-speech before they can get to what they want to know. The
> > WMF needs donations, but I think we need to weigh the need for cash against
> > the goal of providing free and accessible information to our readers. A
> > couple of page scrolls might not seem like much, but I assume if they're
> > off-putting to me (a reader with good vision and generally high tolerance
> > for WMF money pleas) they'll be off-putting to others.
> >
> > So much of this text could be cut out. I work for a marketing/sales company
> > in a non-marketing role, and I've heard from colleagues that it's
> > frustrating when people writing copy like this hear from people who are not
> > educated about appealing to people, so I don't pretend to know better than
> > you at the WMF or your consultants about how to write good donation copy.
> > But to my (admittedly uneducated eye), copy like "It's a little awkward to
> > ask you, this Friday, as we're sure you are busy and we don't want to
> > interrupt you." and "We can't afford to feel embarrassed, asking you to
> > make a donation—just like you should never feel embarrassed when you have
> > to ask Wikipedia for information." seems like at best it's not adding
> > anything besides more words to have to scroll past, and at worst it's
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

[Joseph Seddon]

Dear all,


The fundraising team genuinely hears and appreciates all the feedback we've
received about this mobile banner. For the past week and a half  - for the
majority of our mobile campaign - we have been extensively working and
acting on that feedback to reduce the length of this banner, emphasize the
ability to skip the content, and improve accessibility across the board.


For our mobile large banners, we've been focusing on three things:


* Removing the bottom fixed element reminder banner - DONE


* Reducing the length of the banner ---In Progress--- Last week we make
some changes to the text reducing the appeal by 5% and over the weekend we
reduced the overall length of the banner by 18% on phones through extensive
but subtle design changes. There are more changes to come in this area.


* Making it clearer to users that they are able to SKIP the banner ---In
Progress--- We've already altered the language in the toolbar. There are
more potential changes and tests to come in this area


* Ensuring that the banners are suitable for users who access us through
accessibility software. - DONE - The same options to skip the banner were
always presented to users of accessibility software. We've also made
changes to the underlying structure of the banner to improve navigation by
these users.


The fundraising team works extensively in a data driven manner but I must
emphasise that doesn't mean that we don't listen to community feedback. The
very opposite. It means that we work very hard to ensure that the changes
the community seeks drives our work and this feedback has been the main
focus of our work for much of the last week.


I’ll update on further changes asap.


Regards

Seddon




On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 4:52 PM GorillaWarfare <
gorillawarfarewikipe...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> I feel a little bad raising this because I know there was some community
> vetting of fundraising initiatives that I ignored, but please forgive me. I
> brought this up in the Wikimedia Weekly Facebook group asking where best to
> raise the issue, and it was suggested I post here.
>
> I was looking something up on my phone just now, apparently not logged in
> to Wikipedia, and I discovered that mobile users in the US (and presumably
> elsewhere) are being shown enormous ads. It took four full page scrolls for
> me to reach the content of the article I was hoping to read. Even once I
> made it past the ads at the top of the page, I was greeted with a pop-in
> banner from the bottom of the page, as if I could possibly have not noticed
> the four pages of text asking me to donate. (Screenshots attached).
>
> I understand that we need donations to keep the site running and all, but
> this seems excessive. I particularly worry for people who use assistive
> technology who are having to listen to or try to skip through four pages'
> worth of text-to-speech before they can get to what they want to know. The
> WMF needs donations, but I think we need to weigh the need for cash against
> the goal of providing free and accessible information to our readers. A
> couple of page scrolls might not seem like much, but I assume if they're
> off-putting to me (a reader with good vision and generally high tolerance
> for WMF money pleas) they'll be off-putting to others.
>
> So much of this text could be cut out. I work for a marketing/sales company
> in a non-marketing role, and I've heard from colleagues that it's
> frustrating when people writing copy like this hear from people who are not
> educated about appealing to people, so I don't pretend to know better than
> you at the WMF or your consultants about how to write good donation copy.
> But to my (admittedly uneducated eye), copy like "It's a little awkward to
> ask you, this Friday, as we're sure you are busy and we don't want to
> interrupt you." and "We can't afford to feel embarrassed, asking you to
> make a donation—just like you should never feel embarrassed when you have
> to ask Wikipedia for information." seems like at best it's not adding
> anything besides more words to have to scroll past, and at worst it's
> pretty cringey to read. Are you really expecting people will read all four
> pages?
>
> – Molly (GorillaWarfare)
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 



-- 
Seddon

*Community and Audience Engagement Associate*
*Advancement (Fundraising), Wikimedia Foundation*
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

[Amir Sarabadani]

Even I agree we need more donations from mobile but more aggressive banners
doesn't usually lead to more donations coming. At least, if it's more
aggressive than a certain threshold and I think these banners pass that
threshold by far.
Best


On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 5:00 PM David Gerard  wrote:

> I've had people complaining to me personally about the multiple-page
> fundraising banners on mobile, like I can do anything about them ...
> this is really deeply pissing people off.
>
> On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 at 15:03, Joseph Seddon  wrote:
> >
> > Hi James,
> >
> > As I mentioned in my original reply to Molly, Desktop page views have
> been
> > in decline for the past 2-3 years from 4.36 billion (Oct 2016) to 3.64
> > billion (Oct 2018). Likewise, the relative effectiveness as of mobile as
> a
> > fundraising platform has historically been substantially lower compared
> > with desktop. So with future budget growth in mind and a desktop
> > fundraising environment that will become increasingly difficult, we’ve
> been
> > working hard to ensure that as user behaviors shift we are well prepared
> > and that the future of the movement is safeguarded.
> >
> > Regards
> > Seddon
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 5:14 AM James Salsman 
> wrote:
> >
> > > For those of you who have not seen the mobile fundraising banner this
> > > year, and thus are uncertain of what all the fuss is about, here is an
> > > example:
> > >
> > > https://i.imgur.com/wL4Y5dl.png
> > >
> > > The fundraising message literally takes 4.5 screens that have to be
> > > scrolled through to get to the article. I don't think its accurately
> > > reflected with how desktop browsers render the example given by the
> > > Fundraising team at
> > >
> > >
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA?banner=B1819_0701_mlWW_mob_p1_lg_template=1=US
> > > which is only a little over one screenful before the article text on
> > > typical landscape-shaped desktop browser rendering.
> > >
> > > In years past, it seemed like the fundraising team was more
> > > forthcoming about their choices and the reasons for making them. Has
> > > anyone inside or outside of the Foundation seen any explanation of why
> > > so much text, with such odd formatting, is necessary on mobile this
> > > year?
> > >
> > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 8:44 AM Samuel Klein  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I love the focus on mobile and smaller format interfaces, quite
> > > generally;
> > > > it's increasingly how I use the projects too!
> > > >
> > > > A)  This banner-text-series is clearly impactful, gave me a bit of a
> jump
> > > > scare, and got me to read it to find out why. I'm still not sure how
> I
> > > feel
> > > > about it.
> > > > ~ Visual effect: Messages that flow smoothly in and out of the
> reading
> > > > experience are even nicer.
> > > > ~ Message: Is there an estimate of the total impact on all readers,
> as
> > > well
> > > > as total effective fundraising?  If there is a very effective
> > > > compact/delightful banner, and an even more effective
> large/ambivalent
> > > > one, is there some internal calculus about the overal impact of
> running
> > > the
> > > > former for longer vs. the latter for a short period?
> > > > I'd like to think the best possible messages inspire and delight
> and
> > > > draw on positive emotions while raising funds, including for those
> who
> > > > don't donate, even if they do not yield the most donations per view.
> > > >
> > > > B)  The tracking of whether I've donated, when choosing to show or
> not
> > > show
> > > > me banners, is definitely lacking.  Part of this is that we have
> taken an
> > > > overly-paranoid approach to gathering and anonymizing user data.  It
> is
> > > > entirely possible to cluster users for the purposes of
> > > > not-continuing-to-show-banners (maintain a dictionary of
> > > > user-fingerprint-hashes-already-seen, check to see if the current
> user is
> > > > in there, don't show banners if they are) without being able to see
> what
> > > > pages a given user is viewing.
> > > >
> > > > I wrote more about this here:
> > > >
> > >
> https://blogs.harvard.edu/sj/2018/07/25/anonymizing-data-on-the-users-of-wikipedia/
> > > >  Please consider doing this; it is really hurting the
> user-experience of
> > > > the wiki projects (not only in this instance -- in so many other
> basic
> > > > instances of usage stats + testing over time!), for no benefit to
> anyone.
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

[David Gerard]

I've had people complaining to me personally about the multiple-page
fundraising banners on mobile, like I can do anything about them ...
this is really deeply pissing people off.

On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 at 15:03, Joseph Seddon  wrote:
>
> Hi James,
>
> As I mentioned in my original reply to Molly, Desktop page views have been
> in decline for the past 2-3 years from 4.36 billion (Oct 2016) to 3.64
> billion (Oct 2018). Likewise, the relative effectiveness as of mobile as a
> fundraising platform has historically been substantially lower compared
> with desktop. So with future budget growth in mind and a desktop
> fundraising environment that will become increasingly difficult, we’ve been
> working hard to ensure that as user behaviors shift we are well prepared
> and that the future of the movement is safeguarded.
>
> Regards
> Seddon
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 5:14 AM James Salsman  wrote:
>
> > For those of you who have not seen the mobile fundraising banner this
> > year, and thus are uncertain of what all the fuss is about, here is an
> > example:
> >
> > https://i.imgur.com/wL4Y5dl.png
> >
> > The fundraising message literally takes 4.5 screens that have to be
> > scrolled through to get to the article. I don't think its accurately
> > reflected with how desktop browsers render the example given by the
> > Fundraising team at
> >
> > https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA?banner=B1819_0701_mlWW_mob_p1_lg_template=1=US
> > which is only a little over one screenful before the article text on
> > typical landscape-shaped desktop browser rendering.
> >
> > In years past, it seemed like the fundraising team was more
> > forthcoming about their choices and the reasons for making them. Has
> > anyone inside or outside of the Foundation seen any explanation of why
> > so much text, with such odd formatting, is necessary on mobile this
> > year?
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 8:44 AM Samuel Klein  wrote:
> > >
> > > I love the focus on mobile and smaller format interfaces, quite
> > generally;
> > > it's increasingly how I use the projects too!
> > >
> > > A)  This banner-text-series is clearly impactful, gave me a bit of a jump
> > > scare, and got me to read it to find out why. I'm still not sure how I
> > feel
> > > about it.
> > > ~ Visual effect: Messages that flow smoothly in and out of the reading
> > > experience are even nicer.
> > > ~ Message: Is there an estimate of the total impact on all readers, as
> > well
> > > as total effective fundraising?  If there is a very effective
> > > compact/delightful banner, and an even more effective large/ambivalent
> > > one, is there some internal calculus about the overal impact of running
> > the
> > > former for longer vs. the latter for a short period?
> > > I'd like to think the best possible messages inspire and delight and
> > > draw on positive emotions while raising funds, including for those who
> > > don't donate, even if they do not yield the most donations per view.
> > >
> > > B)  The tracking of whether I've donated, when choosing to show or not
> > show
> > > me banners, is definitely lacking.  Part of this is that we have taken an
> > > overly-paranoid approach to gathering and anonymizing user data.  It is
> > > entirely possible to cluster users for the purposes of
> > > not-continuing-to-show-banners (maintain a dictionary of
> > > user-fingerprint-hashes-already-seen, check to see if the current user is
> > > in there, don't show banners if they are) without being able to see what
> > > pages a given user is viewing.
> > >
> > > I wrote more about this here:
> > >
> > https://blogs.harvard.edu/sj/2018/07/25/anonymizing-data-on-the-users-of-wikipedia/
> > >  Please consider doing this; it is really hurting the user-experience of
> > > the wiki projects (not only in this instance -- in so many other basic
> > > instances of usage stats + testing over time!), for no benefit to anyone.
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
> Seddon
>
> *Community and Audience Engagement Associate*
> *Advancement (Fundraising), Wikimedia Foundation*
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

[Joseph Seddon]

Hi James,

As I mentioned in my original reply to Molly, Desktop page views have been
in decline for the past 2-3 years from 4.36 billion (Oct 2016) to 3.64
billion (Oct 2018). Likewise, the relative effectiveness as of mobile as a
fundraising platform has historically been substantially lower compared
with desktop. So with future budget growth in mind and a desktop
fundraising environment that will become increasingly difficult, we’ve been
working hard to ensure that as user behaviors shift we are well prepared
and that the future of the movement is safeguarded.

Regards
Seddon



On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 5:14 AM James Salsman  wrote:

> For those of you who have not seen the mobile fundraising banner this
> year, and thus are uncertain of what all the fuss is about, here is an
> example:
>
> https://i.imgur.com/wL4Y5dl.png
>
> The fundraising message literally takes 4.5 screens that have to be
> scrolled through to get to the article. I don't think its accurately
> reflected with how desktop browsers render the example given by the
> Fundraising team at
>
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA?banner=B1819_0701_mlWW_mob_p1_lg_template=1=US
> which is only a little over one screenful before the article text on
> typical landscape-shaped desktop browser rendering.
>
> In years past, it seemed like the fundraising team was more
> forthcoming about their choices and the reasons for making them. Has
> anyone inside or outside of the Foundation seen any explanation of why
> so much text, with such odd formatting, is necessary on mobile this
> year?
>
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 8:44 AM Samuel Klein  wrote:
> >
> > I love the focus on mobile and smaller format interfaces, quite
> generally;
> > it's increasingly how I use the projects too!
> >
> > A)  This banner-text-series is clearly impactful, gave me a bit of a jump
> > scare, and got me to read it to find out why. I'm still not sure how I
> feel
> > about it.
> > ~ Visual effect: Messages that flow smoothly in and out of the reading
> > experience are even nicer.
> > ~ Message: Is there an estimate of the total impact on all readers, as
> well
> > as total effective fundraising?  If there is a very effective
> > compact/delightful banner, and an even more effective large/ambivalent
> > one, is there some internal calculus about the overal impact of running
> the
> > former for longer vs. the latter for a short period?
> > I'd like to think the best possible messages inspire and delight and
> > draw on positive emotions while raising funds, including for those who
> > don't donate, even if they do not yield the most donations per view.
> >
> > B)  The tracking of whether I've donated, when choosing to show or not
> show
> > me banners, is definitely lacking.  Part of this is that we have taken an
> > overly-paranoid approach to gathering and anonymizing user data.  It is
> > entirely possible to cluster users for the purposes of
> > not-continuing-to-show-banners (maintain a dictionary of
> > user-fingerprint-hashes-already-seen, check to see if the current user is
> > in there, don't show banners if they are) without being able to see what
> > pages a given user is viewing.
> >
> > I wrote more about this here:
> >
> https://blogs.harvard.edu/sj/2018/07/25/anonymizing-data-on-the-users-of-wikipedia/
> >  Please consider doing this; it is really hurting the user-experience of
> > the wiki projects (not only in this instance -- in so many other basic
> > instances of usage stats + testing over time!), for no benefit to anyone.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 



-- 
Seddon

*Community and Audience Engagement Associate*
*Advancement (Fundraising), Wikimedia Foundation*
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

[AntiCompositeNumber]

Pageviews isn't a good metric for this, because it isn't measuring the
people who load a Wikipedia page, see an obnoxious banner, and then
click away without reading the content. That's still a pageview and a
reader lost.
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 1:17 AM Peter Southwood
 wrote:
>
> It is slightly less repellent than some I have seen in the past, but in 
> general I concur.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf 
> Of MZMcBride
> Sent: 11 December 2018 03:20
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads
>
> James Salsman wrote:
> >For those of you who have not seen the mobile fundraising banner this
> >year, and thus are uncertain of what all the fuss is about, here is an
> >example:
> >
> >https://i.imgur.com/wL4Y5dl.png
>
> Hi.
>
> This type of advertising is noxious and unacceptable. It should be revised
> or taken down as soon as possible.
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> https://www.avg.com
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

[Peter Southwood]

It is slightly less repellent than some I have seen in the past, but in general 
I concur.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
MZMcBride
Sent: 11 December 2018 03:20
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

James Salsman wrote:
>For those of you who have not seen the mobile fundraising banner this
>year, and thus are uncertain of what all the fuss is about, here is an
>example:
>
>https://i.imgur.com/wL4Y5dl.png

Hi.

This type of advertising is noxious and unacceptable. It should be revised
or taken down as soon as possible.

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

[MZMcBride]

James Salsman wrote:
>For those of you who have not seen the mobile fundraising banner this
>year, and thus are uncertain of what all the fuss is about, here is an
>example:
>
>https://i.imgur.com/wL4Y5dl.png

Hi.

This type of advertising is noxious and unacceptable. It should be revised
or taken down as soon as possible.

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

[Dan Garry (Deskana)]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 at 11:44, vermont--- via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Entering Wikipedia while not logged in, from both a PC and mobile device,
> lead to an insane amount of large, bright red banners asking for donations.
> Statistics may show that this sort of advertising gains the most clicks
> and donations. That should not be the only metric by which donation
> requests are decided.
>
> We are losing readers because of this.
>

Whilst there are certainly anecdotes to this effect, there's no evidence at
present that we're losing any more readers than normal. For example, page
views to the Simple English Wikipedia

(I chose this wiki because you linked to it in your email) are relatively
stable. Now, eyeballing page view graphs like I did is not really
scientific, but it gives a better indication than relying on isolated
comments.

Criticism of the fundraising banners (and there is plenty of it) will be
better received by the Fundraising team if we all stick to the facts, and
avoid extrapolation and hyperbole.

Dan
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

[James Salsman]

For those of you who have not seen the mobile fundraising banner this
year, and thus are uncertain of what all the fuss is about, here is an
example:

https://i.imgur.com/wL4Y5dl.png

The fundraising message literally takes 4.5 screens that have to be
scrolled through to get to the article. I don't think its accurately
reflected with how desktop browsers render the example given by the
Fundraising team at
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA?banner=B1819_0701_mlWW_mob_p1_lg_template=1=US
which is only a little over one screenful before the article text on
typical landscape-shaped desktop browser rendering.

In years past, it seemed like the fundraising team was more
forthcoming about their choices and the reasons for making them. Has
anyone inside or outside of the Foundation seen any explanation of why
so much text, with such odd formatting, is necessary on mobile this
year?

On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 8:44 AM Samuel Klein  wrote:
>
> I love the focus on mobile and smaller format interfaces, quite generally;
> it's increasingly how I use the projects too!
>
> A)  This banner-text-series is clearly impactful, gave me a bit of a jump
> scare, and got me to read it to find out why. I'm still not sure how I feel
> about it.
> ~ Visual effect: Messages that flow smoothly in and out of the reading
> experience are even nicer.
> ~ Message: Is there an estimate of the total impact on all readers, as well
> as total effective fundraising?  If there is a very effective
> compact/delightful banner, and an even more effective large/ambivalent
> one, is there some internal calculus about the overal impact of running the
> former for longer vs. the latter for a short period?
> I'd like to think the best possible messages inspire and delight and
> draw on positive emotions while raising funds, including for those who
> don't donate, even if they do not yield the most donations per view.
>
> B)  The tracking of whether I've donated, when choosing to show or not show
> me banners, is definitely lacking.  Part of this is that we have taken an
> overly-paranoid approach to gathering and anonymizing user data.  It is
> entirely possible to cluster users for the purposes of
> not-continuing-to-show-banners (maintain a dictionary of
> user-fingerprint-hashes-already-seen, check to see if the current user is
> in there, don't show banners if they are) without being able to see what
> pages a given user is viewing.
>
> I wrote more about this here:
> https://blogs.harvard.edu/sj/2018/07/25/anonymizing-data-on-the-users-of-wikipedia/
>  Please consider doing this; it is really hurting the user-experience of
> the wiki projects (not only in this instance -- in so many other basic
> instances of usage stats + testing over time!), for no benefit to anyone.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

[Samuel Klein]

I love the focus on mobile and smaller format interfaces, quite generally;
it's increasingly how I use the projects too!

A)  This banner-text-series is clearly impactful, gave me a bit of a jump
scare, and got me to read it to find out why. I'm still not sure how I feel
about it.
~ Visual effect: Messages that flow smoothly in and out of the reading
experience are even nicer.
~ Message: Is there an estimate of the total impact on all readers, as well
as total effective fundraising?  If there is a very effective
compact/delightful banner, and an even more effective large/ambivalent
one, is there some internal calculus about the overal impact of running the
former for longer vs. the latter for a short period?
I'd like to think the best possible messages inspire and delight and
draw on positive emotions while raising funds, including for those who
don't donate, even if they do not yield the most donations per view.

B)  The tracking of whether I've donated, when choosing to show or not show
me banners, is definitely lacking.  Part of this is that we have taken an
overly-paranoid approach to gathering and anonymizing user data.  It is
entirely possible to cluster users for the purposes of
not-continuing-to-show-banners (maintain a dictionary of
user-fingerprint-hashes-already-seen, check to see if the current user is
in there, don't show banners if they are) without being able to see what
pages a given user is viewing.

I wrote more about this here:
https://blogs.harvard.edu/sj/2018/07/25/anonymizing-data-on-the-users-of-wikipedia/
 Please consider doing this; it is really hurting the user-experience of
the wiki projects (not only in this instance -- in so many other basic
instances of usage stats + testing over time!), for no benefit to anyone.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

[vermont--- via Wikimedia-l]

Hello all,

Please see: 
https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=6334670=6327710=source

This is not an isolated incident. I've seen it on-wiki in other locations, 
although did not record the links.

Entering Wikipedia while not logged in, from both a PC and mobile device, lead 
to an insane amount of large, bright red banners asking for donations. 
Statistics may show that this sort of advertising gains the most clicks and 
donations. That should not be the only metric by which donation requests are 
decided.

We are losing readers because of this.

Thanks,
Vermont

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l  On Behalf Of James 
Salsman
Sent: Saturday, December 1, 2018 1:56 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

Seddon, thanks for addressing this.

What are your thoughts about measuring the extent to which you would have to 
run a minimalist banner to achieve current goals, as per 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising/2018-19_Fundraising_ideas#Design
?

Both of the "small" banners in the set of four (total?) you are testing -- 
linked from the top of that page -- seem to be as big as the average banner was 
ten years or so ago. Is that a fair statement?

Do you agree with Yair's sentiment that you should have never measured the cost 
per donation on Facebook as expressed at 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising/2018-19_Fundraising_ideas#Technical
?

Best regards,
Jim




On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 2:47 PM Joseph Seddon  wrote:
>
> Hey Molly,
>
> Thank you for your feedback, it is really appreciated. There are a 
> fair few points you’ve raised so I will do my best cover them all. For 
> some background, mobile fundraising is vitally important. Desktop page 
> views have been in decline for the past 2-3 years from 4.36 billion 
> (Oct 2016) to
> 3.64 billion (Oct 2018). Likewise, the relative effectiveness as of 
> mobile as a fundraising platform has historically been substantially 
> lower compared with desktop. So we’ve been working hard to ensure that 
> as user behaviours shift we are well prepared and that the future of 
> the movement is safeguarded.
>
> We show two types of banner to users on both desktop and mobile. The 
> first banner is larger and shown only once to user in their browser 
> followed by a second banner that is show to the user typically up to a 
> maximum of 9 times and is substantially smaller.
>
> Our mobile large banner changed last November from a splash style 
> banner to the current text message style. Since then one of the things 
> that has constantly surprised us, is that people seem to genuinely 
> read the extra content. We’ve repeatedly tested over the past year 
> removing content and every time, the shorter banners loose. Now this 
> could just imply that it’s length that was producing move effective 
> banners. So we decided to confirm if people were actually reading our 
> banners. We tested two banners of similar length, one with our best 
> copy and one where we replaced some of the lower paragraphs with copy 
> had historically lost out in previous testing. Our best copy won and 
> confirmed that people are actually invested in reading our banners. So 
> the copy is long and we are continuing to try and shorten it but we 
> genuinely believe its not just impactful of genuine value to our readers and 
> donors.
>
> When we implemented this style of banner we made sure to add a toolbar 
> to the top that enabled users to skip straight to the article. You 
> mentioned on facebook that you didn’t notice that we will look to see 
> if we can make the toolbar a little more visible to users.
>
> Regarding the bottom red banner, that is something that was retained 
> from previous versions of this banner. We actually have just 
> instrumented our banners so that we could track the effectiveness. We 
> got data that this additional call to action was not performing as 
> originally expected, most likely due to the format of the banner 
> having changed since last year. We re-tested removing this and the 
> effect was minimal and so we have removed this in our large banner on the 
> first impression.
>
> We completely agree that it’s vitally important to ensure our readers 
> who use assistive technologies are supported and we are going to look 
> at how we can improve our banner content to ensure compatibility and 
> provide a good experience including improving descriptions, providing 
> better descriptions and maybe look at suppressing some content for 
> screen readers to reduce some of the impact for them.
>
> I will copy this to your cross post on wiki too :) Thank you again for 
> your feedback, it is genuinely appreciated and the fundraising team 
> are actively acting on it.
>
> Regards
>
> Seddon
>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

[James Salsman]

Seddon, thanks for addressing this.

What are your thoughts about measuring the extent to which you would
have to run a minimalist banner to achieve current goals, as per
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising/2018-19_Fundraising_ideas#Design
?

Both of the "small" banners in the set of four (total?) you are
testing -- linked from the top of that page -- seem to be as big as
the average banner was ten years or so ago. Is that a fair statement?

Do you agree with Yair's sentiment that you should have never measured
the cost per donation on Facebook as expressed at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising/2018-19_Fundraising_ideas#Technical
?

Best regards,
Jim




On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 2:47 PM Joseph Seddon  wrote:
>
> Hey Molly,
>
> Thank you for your feedback, it is really appreciated. There are a fair few
> points you’ve raised so I will do my best cover them all. For some
> background, mobile fundraising is vitally important. Desktop page views
> have been in decline for the past 2-3 years from 4.36 billion (Oct 2016) to
> 3.64 billion (Oct 2018). Likewise, the relative effectiveness as of mobile
> as a fundraising platform has historically been substantially lower
> compared with desktop. So we’ve been working hard to ensure that as user
> behaviours shift we are well prepared and that the future of the movement
> is safeguarded.
>
> We show two types of banner to users on both desktop and mobile. The first
> banner is larger and shown only once to user in their browser followed by a
> second banner that is show to the user typically up to a maximum of 9 times
> and is substantially smaller.
>
> Our mobile large banner changed last November from a splash style banner to
> the current text message style. Since then one of the things that has
> constantly surprised us, is that people seem to genuinely read the extra
> content. We’ve repeatedly tested over the past year removing content and
> every time, the shorter banners loose. Now this could just imply that it’s
> length that was producing move effective banners. So we decided to confirm
> if people were actually reading our banners. We tested two banners of
> similar length, one with our best copy and one where we replaced some of
> the lower paragraphs with copy had historically lost out in previous
> testing. Our best copy won and confirmed that people are actually invested
> in reading our banners. So the copy is long and we are continuing to try
> and shorten it but we genuinely believe its not just impactful of genuine
> value to our readers and donors.
>
> When we implemented this style of banner we made sure to add a toolbar to
> the top that enabled users to skip straight to the article. You mentioned
> on facebook that you didn’t notice that we will look to see if we can make
> the toolbar a little more visible to users.
>
> Regarding the bottom red banner, that is something that was retained from
> previous versions of this banner. We actually have just instrumented our
> banners so that we could track the effectiveness. We got data that this
> additional call to action was not performing as originally expected, most
> likely due to the format of the banner having changed since last year. We
> re-tested removing this and the effect was minimal and so we have removed
> this in our large banner on the first impression.
>
> We completely agree that it’s vitally important to ensure our readers who
> use assistive technologies are supported and we are going to look at how we
> can improve our banner content to ensure compatibility and provide a good
> experience including improving descriptions, providing better descriptions
> and maybe look at suppressing some content for screen readers to reduce
> some of the impact for them.
>
> I will copy this to your cross post on wiki too :) Thank you again for your
> feedback, it is genuinely appreciated and the fundraising team are actively
> acting on it.
>
> Regards
>
> Seddon
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 4:52 PM GorillaWarfare <
> gorillawarfarewikipe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey all,
> >
> > I feel a little bad raising this because I know there was some community
> > vetting of fundraising initiatives that I ignored, but please forgive me. I
> > brought this up in the Wikimedia Weekly Facebook group asking where best to
> > raise the issue, and it was suggested I post here.
> >
> > I was looking something up on my phone just now, apparently not logged in
> > to Wikipedia, and I discovered that mobile users in the US (and presumably
> > elsewhere) are being shown enormous ads. It took four full page scrolls for
> > me to reach the content of the article I was hoping to read. Even once I
> > made it past the ads at the top of the page, I was greeted with a pop-in
> > banner from the bottom of the page, as if I could possibly have not noticed
> > the four pages of text asking me to donate. (Screenshots attached).
> >
> > I understand that we need donations to keep the site running and 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

[Joseph Seddon]

Hey Molly,

Thank you for your feedback, it is really appreciated. There are a fair few
points you’ve raised so I will do my best cover them all. For some
background, mobile fundraising is vitally important. Desktop page views
have been in decline for the past 2-3 years from 4.36 billion (Oct 2016) to
3.64 billion (Oct 2018). Likewise, the relative effectiveness as of mobile
as a fundraising platform has historically been substantially lower
compared with desktop. So we’ve been working hard to ensure that as user
behaviours shift we are well prepared and that the future of the movement
is safeguarded.

We show two types of banner to users on both desktop and mobile. The first
banner is larger and shown only once to user in their browser followed by a
second banner that is show to the user typically up to a maximum of 9 times
and is substantially smaller.

Our mobile large banner changed last November from a splash style banner to
the current text message style. Since then one of the things that has
constantly surprised us, is that people seem to genuinely read the extra
content. We’ve repeatedly tested over the past year removing content and
every time, the shorter banners loose. Now this could just imply that it’s
length that was producing move effective banners. So we decided to confirm
if people were actually reading our banners. We tested two banners of
similar length, one with our best copy and one where we replaced some of
the lower paragraphs with copy had historically lost out in previous
testing. Our best copy won and confirmed that people are actually invested
in reading our banners. So the copy is long and we are continuing to try
and shorten it but we genuinely believe its not just impactful of genuine
value to our readers and donors.

When we implemented this style of banner we made sure to add a toolbar to
the top that enabled users to skip straight to the article. You mentioned
on facebook that you didn’t notice that we will look to see if we can make
the toolbar a little more visible to users.

Regarding the bottom red banner, that is something that was retained from
previous versions of this banner. We actually have just instrumented our
banners so that we could track the effectiveness. We got data that this
additional call to action was not performing as originally expected, most
likely due to the format of the banner having changed since last year. We
re-tested removing this and the effect was minimal and so we have removed
this in our large banner on the first impression.

We completely agree that it’s vitally important to ensure our readers who
use assistive technologies are supported and we are going to look at how we
can improve our banner content to ensure compatibility and provide a good
experience including improving descriptions, providing better descriptions
and maybe look at suppressing some content for screen readers to reduce
some of the impact for them.

I will copy this to your cross post on wiki too :) Thank you again for your
feedback, it is genuinely appreciated and the fundraising team are actively
acting on it.

Regards

Seddon


On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 4:52 PM GorillaWarfare <
gorillawarfarewikipe...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> I feel a little bad raising this because I know there was some community
> vetting of fundraising initiatives that I ignored, but please forgive me. I
> brought this up in the Wikimedia Weekly Facebook group asking where best to
> raise the issue, and it was suggested I post here.
>
> I was looking something up on my phone just now, apparently not logged in
> to Wikipedia, and I discovered that mobile users in the US (and presumably
> elsewhere) are being shown enormous ads. It took four full page scrolls for
> me to reach the content of the article I was hoping to read. Even once I
> made it past the ads at the top of the page, I was greeted with a pop-in
> banner from the bottom of the page, as if I could possibly have not noticed
> the four pages of text asking me to donate. (Screenshots attached).
>
> I understand that we need donations to keep the site running and all, but
> this seems excessive. I particularly worry for people who use assistive
> technology who are having to listen to or try to skip through four pages'
> worth of text-to-speech before they can get to what they want to know. The
> WMF needs donations, but I think we need to weigh the need for cash against
> the goal of providing free and accessible information to our readers. A
> couple of page scrolls might not seem like much, but I assume if they're
> off-putting to me (a reader with good vision and generally high tolerance
> for WMF money pleas) they'll be off-putting to others.
>
> So much of this text could be cut out. I work for a marketing/sales company
> in a non-marketing role, and I've heard from colleagues that it's
> frustrating when people writing copy like this hear from people who are not
> educated about appealing to people, so I don't pretend to 

[Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

[GorillaWarfare]

Hey all,

I feel a little bad raising this because I know there was some community
vetting of fundraising initiatives that I ignored, but please forgive me. I
brought this up in the Wikimedia Weekly Facebook group asking where best to
raise the issue, and it was suggested I post here.

I was looking something up on my phone just now, apparently not logged in
to Wikipedia, and I discovered that mobile users in the US (and presumably
elsewhere) are being shown enormous ads. It took four full page scrolls for
me to reach the content of the article I was hoping to read. Even once I
made it past the ads at the top of the page, I was greeted with a pop-in
banner from the bottom of the page, as if I could possibly have not noticed
the four pages of text asking me to donate. (Screenshots attached).

I understand that we need donations to keep the site running and all, but
this seems excessive. I particularly worry for people who use assistive
technology who are having to listen to or try to skip through four pages'
worth of text-to-speech before they can get to what they want to know. The
WMF needs donations, but I think we need to weigh the need for cash against
the goal of providing free and accessible information to our readers. A
couple of page scrolls might not seem like much, but I assume if they're
off-putting to me (a reader with good vision and generally high tolerance
for WMF money pleas) they'll be off-putting to others.

So much of this text could be cut out. I work for a marketing/sales company
in a non-marketing role, and I've heard from colleagues that it's
frustrating when people writing copy like this hear from people who are not
educated about appealing to people, so I don't pretend to know better than
you at the WMF or your consultants about how to write good donation copy.
But to my (admittedly uneducated eye), copy like "It's a little awkward to
ask you, this Friday, as we're sure you are busy and we don't want to
interrupt you." and "We can't afford to feel embarrassed, asking you to
make a donation—just like you should never feel embarrassed when you have
to ask Wikipedia for information." seems like at best it's not adding
anything besides more words to have to scroll past, and at worst it's
pretty cringey to read. Are you really expecting people will read all four
pages?

– Molly (GorillaWarfare)
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,