Why can't Wikipedia use advertisements and leave us in peace?

Yeah, we need to figure out who gives them money and beat them up, dox them and make them lose their job so they stop wasting money.

>sup wikipedia, McDonald's here. Remember all those ads we bought? Yeah? Remember that recent controversy about us using human meat to make our burgers? Yeah? Are you sure? It sure seems like a campaign of trolling to us. Certainly, you don't want to come off as a website that just lets any story get posted, right? We don't want our ads on sites like that, do we?

Anyone have that image that shows that 70% of what it sends is JavaScript?

>>57948810
Well, maybe if Wikipedia would allow countries to fund it, this shit wouldn't be necessary.

But no. It has to go full libertarian and pretend that only the individual should be allowed to pay them. Because Wikipedia has no problem with editor cliques and politics as is, amirite?

>>57949069
At least it would be possible to make proper changes unlike now with the autists

>>57949069
Th.. That surely doesn't happen, right?

>>57949581
Of course not, goy, McDonald's™: Eat Fresh™® would never dream of censoring any knowledge of wrongdoing! In fact, it doesn't even have any wrongdoing to know about!

>>57949581
Of course it does, lol. There was a gaming magazine once. Had ads about a certain game all over the site. Some writer wrote a review for that game and gave it a shit score (cause it was a shit game). Got fired on request of the game's publisher.

>>57949581
No, it's a silly story. They're no-where near that subtle.
It's usually direct instructions.