From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Article moved from pay wall[edit]

I have moved the article here from pay wall and put a redirect there, as this is the more common usage. Sources:

A search for pay wall on Google results in the message Did you mean: paywall IainUK talk 20:40, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Plans to Update and Expand[edit]

I plan to edit this entry adding updated information regarding NYTimes paywall and its reception, local newspaper paywalls, paywall builders, and paywall dodging applications. Aebcoreno (talk) 19:31, 25 October 2011 (UTC) I just realized that the dodging paywalls section might provide users with ways to actually dodge the paywalls--which I wouldn't want to do, but there are some controversies involving such tools that I think are worth noting. Any suggestions on how to incorporate these without promoting (for lack of a better word) their use? Aebcoreno (talk) 20:43, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

I have made a number of changes- Firstly, the "Failed Paywall" part seemed a bit silly. Many of those paywalls didn't fail, they just changed and re-strategized, often to great success. The Newsday story is no longer relevant. That paper now has over 100k online subscribers, so the story about them only having 35 subscribers in 2010 is irrelevant. Besides, the paywall was never taken down and is still up. The News of the World paywall didn't fail either. The entire paper was eliminated due to ethical scandal. It is not that the paywall failed. Secondly, paywalls have been growing explosively, and real numbers needed to be added. I intend to update this as numbers climb, considering they show no sign of declining, and paywalls are being added every week, if not every day. I also intend to include the publishers now using paywalls- McClatchy, Scripps, Gannett, Lee Enterprises, Tribune, Gatehouse, Berkshire Media and others. I am going to wait a bit though. There are so many new paywalls coming on so quickly, it seems better to wait a few months, or even a year, for this rate of increase to slow. That way it doesn't need to be edited weekly. I am also going to start adding sections on paywall revenue. The New York Times individual paper has now reversed its revenue decline and started growing revenue for the first time in years. This is huge news and a sign of the paywall's success. I will wait till more numbers come out before adding this section. Gannett and Lee will have tens of millions of dollars in new revenue within the year from this. I will add these numbers when they actually come out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:40, 2 June 2012 (UTC) I also added some bits on how Clay Shirky and Felix Salmon have changed their minds on paywalls, since this is a relevant update, and the previous text stated that Felix Salmon is against paywalls. This is clearly dated, since Mr. Salmon now openly champions them. I also made small edits where the text implied that all early paywalls were failures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:10, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello, would you please create French and Spanish stubs? If you search for NY Times, you can find out that mur payant (Fr) and muro de pago is used respectively. Wikipedia would contribute to limit anglicisms. BTW, the phrases are literal translations of the English original. If I knew how, I would do it myself.

New YorkTimes - does it have a paywall?[edit]

According to this article the NYT no longer has a paywall. However New_York_Times#Pricing says it does. So which is it? Ottawahitech (talk) 23:55, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

I'd say the NYT page. I was trying to access something there today and hit a paywall. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 00:10, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Scientific press[edit]

Many science publications are behind a hard paywall, seriously limiting public access to scientific and technological progress - even if that progress is made for taxpayers' money. I strongly believe that the article deserves a section addressing this issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:34, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Two years later, and nothing about academic journals. Come on Wikipedia! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:29, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

There's no one in charge here; feel free to help as you can. Fgnievinski (talk) 01:37, 10 June 2015 (UTC)


The article mostly focuses about paywalls implemented by newspapers, but many other kinds of websites have done so. And now, YouTube is headed to follow suit:

Scholarly Research[edit]

As others have noted, this article focuses on news publications and makes no mention of scholarly publishing (including scientific presses). I'd like to reframe the article to focus on paywalls, with separate sections on paywalls in different types of publishing. Are there any objections? Megs (talk) 20:16, 21 January 2016 (UTC)


Why you have the section CRITICISM or using category Internet Censorship when it comes to Paywall? Spencer H. Karter (talk) 22:39, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Beginning of article and closed access template[edit]

This article is linked from the {{Closed access}} template: when a source is paywalled the reference may be followed by the template, which generates a padlock icon.[1] When a reader hovers the mouse over the padlock (on a suitably set up system), a link to the Paywall article, and the beginning of the article are displayed (try this on the reference I cite). It is desirable to bear this in mind when editing the very beginning of the article. In particular I have modified the text to state very near the beginning that an abstract may be available without charge. My intention: if a reader simply sees that an article is paywalled, they are likely not to bother to click it. If they know an abstract is available, they may want to refer to it.

  1. ^ Husseini, A; Slot, DE; Van der Weijden, GA (2008). "The efficacy of oral irrigation in addition to a toothbrush on plaque and the clinical parameters of periodontal inflammation: a systematic review". Int J Dent Hyg. 6: 304–14. PMID 19138181. doi:10.1111/j.1601-5037.2008.00343.x. closed access publication – behind paywall

Pol098 (talk) 14:35, 17 October 2016 (UTC) Reworded slightly 19 Nov 16

New company to consider for inclusion[edit]

Wanted to suggest the inclusion of MPP Global (, which offers paywall and access control. More information about their offering can be found here -- A reference to them as a paywall provider can be found here:

Mcaldecutt (talk) 16:50, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Paywall. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:00, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

overlong lede?[edit]

My impression is that the first paragraph is more than adequate to introduce and summarize the topic. The next two paragraphs spiral quickly into details that (I believe) would be better served in the article body rather than glibly addressed in the intro.
Weeb Dingle (talk) 14:02, 4 September 2017 (UTC)