[conradlee]

Hey there, I wrote that post. It's a valid criticism you make, but the main point of the article was not to pick on Wikipedia, which is actually way ahead of most other organizations in terms of testing its content.

We made a case-study Wikipedia because their banners are a well-known example of A/B testing. Plus, because their banners make tens of millions of dollars each year, and they have an entire team of people working on the A/B tests over a period of months, I think they have capacity to use something more sophisticated. Maybe, like you suggest, they're just focused on other aspects of the fundraising campaign. I guess the only way to know would be to hear from some of the Wikipedia team!