Hi Pine- We are definitely trying to disrupt the user experience as little as possible, while still reaching the fundraising target. It is a bit of a balancing act. We have looked into the issue of the size of the banner some. Of course, A/B tests show the larger banners raise more donations, more quickly. We have also looked into reader opinions of the intrusiveness of the banner. Readers found the larger banners only slightly more intrusive than the smaller ones. Those findings are here (slide 24): https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Wikimedia_2014_English_Fundraiser_Survey.pdf&page=24 <https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Wikimedia_2014_English_Fundraiser_Survey.pdf&page=24>
We also know that most donors give the very first time they see a banner. The donation rate drops off significantly on each subsequent impression, so lengthening the campaign has a diminished return. Here is the data on that from last December: https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Fundraising_Quarterly_Review_-_Q2-1415.pdf&page=12 With these learnings, we use a large banner on the first impressions and then switch to the smaller banner for later impressions. Not everyone visits the site everyday, so the first banner impressions happen over the course of weeks. Also, we have a new banner running now – with a lightbulb graphic. Let us know what you think. Thank you, Lisa On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:21 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Lisa. > > More directly on the topic of fundraising banners, I appreciate that the > wording has been tweaked this year to address the major integrity concerns. > I can appreciate that fundraising is necessary for Wikipedia. It would be > nice to disrupt the user experience as little as possible, so one issue I > think should get a look going forward (if it hasn't already) is the size of > the banner in proportion to viewer screen size. Others have mentioned the > color issue. I suppose that the trick is to get the reader's attention > while minimizing the disruption to the content experience. It seems to me > that a moderately longer campaign in exchange for less intrusive banners > might be a good tradeoff. > > I'm also continuing to hope that WMF will have a top-line budget freeze for > next year, which could take some pressure off of the online campaigns to > continue to grow income. > > Pine > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > 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 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
