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

Proposed Page posted for development & critique: "advertisement suppression"
Precis: The benefits of advertising to support the development of 'free' web matter and services are obvious. The benefit of subjectively intrusive, impertinent, irritating, and generally obnoxious advertising is not. In fact, the ability / willingness to provide a pleasant, user controlled browser experience, could be a boon to both the prey and the predators.
Several years ago it was possible to browse the web, without viewing any undesired advertisements, using several programs like Ad-aware (which seems to have abandoned that function). My expectation (and personal response) is that an increasing number of browser users are being driven away from purchases by the increasingly intrusive and pervasive advertisements, and that is counter-productive for everyone. On a web search for "advertisement suppression" brought up not even one browser or even security software hit. Does this mean there is no vendor or even open developer interested in this topic?
1) Re-couch the above in terms of the research necessary to validate the underlying premise.
2) Perform correlate research to gather similar ellipsis in other media services (TV, Radio, billboards, ...) such as timed or triggered blather suppression for audio or video.
Wikidity (talk) 01:27, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
The keyword is Pervasive and Intrusive - trying to filter off any kind of what we call adverts, promotion etc and getting purified clean knowledge, this is a dream of every Wikipedian and mine too. a DREAM. The matter of fact is that the task is pretty tricky: we may run a considerable risk of pouring out the baby with the bath for there is always - even if subconsciously hidden - some kind of motivation of our actions, even our common goal to be objective and impartial is driven by some aspiration, no matter if we can simply say - promotion, unambiguous promotion, concealed promotion...., promotion of objectivity or not. To my mind, after considering lots of Wiki content, which is superb because we care about this issue more than others do, among other things, that even if you consider a highly theoretical entry on a something within mathemathics you can think of the possiblity of a person who wants to promote his interpertation of this subject, his examples on the topic etc his books' publications..... There is little help adding another layer of definitions what we mean by this crime of promotion on our Wikipedia. The columns of our knowledge base are pretty strong&sound and what we all may need when proposing deletions or saving articles suspicious of promotion is the proportional, human, ethicaly (I mean not this or that system of values that this relion or community imposed on us, as a necessity of our being ZOON POLITICON - I think of some kind of healthy memes, traditions passed on that so far HAS workked, please, nothing else of higher in in my mind here) normal&neutral approach. In this common sense as we often use to call this is English percption we shall see that the red critical PROMOTION STOP THRESHOLD is e g

high level of intrusion,


psychological and emotional manipulation (typically kids, pregant women, and their well being, these must always stay suspicious of the highest level of pervasive and aggressive promotion appealing on our most deep emotions and compassions)

Aggressivity of promotion - using direct grammar form as imperatives, or by marketing gurus dearly beloved speculation construction with why followed by infinitive without 'to'.

I do aggree with you that pervasive, intrusive, aggressive, emotionally manipulative promotion has NO PLACE IN WIKIPEDIA under no circumstances.

--Capekm (talk) 02:27, 1 May 2012 (UTC)