I think we are talking about something deeper here that the simple question of weather to put ads or not. The question, or better the fact, is that (great) majority of people don't really care about anything and thus won't give anything. It's well described with a term "Tragedy of the commons". Whether is there Wikipedia or not, they don't really care and always think someone else will do something, they don't have to bother. They will use it if they can, if they can't they will not and only thing that they'll feel is annoyance because they don't have one place to click and see the solution, now they have to google! The same goes for open source also, I personally saw many people that use such software but they don't care to give back anything at all. And if someone would sad them thay are not allowed to use it, they wouldn't care, and they would buy some commercial solution and that's it.
That's the human nature and nothing can be done against it. Wikipedia could accommodate this fact in a simple way. For all the registered users it can provide preference if they wont or don't wont ads, for all the anonymous users there is mandatory ad displayed. I believe few, if any, would resist that. The other possibility is to introduce some form of subscription for the companies.
Now, it's not the complete solution. Money makes people go crazy, so whatever solution is, it has to be carefully thought out.
Slashdot Mirror
That's the human nature and nothing can be done against it. Wikipedia could accommodate this fact in a simple way. For all the registered users it can provide preference if they wont or don't wont ads, for all the anonymous users there is mandatory ad displayed. I believe few, if any, would resist that. The other possibility is to introduce some form of subscription for the companies.
Now, it's not the complete solution. Money makes people go crazy, so whatever solution is, it has to be carefully thought out.