5 ms·

So, uh, what exactly is 'wikimedia'? How is it different from the straight-up 'Wikipedia'? This article seems like it should have been on Wikipedia, but it's on

by selmnoo 13y ago

So, uh, what exactly is 'wikimedia'? How is it different from the straight-up 'Wikipedia'? This article seems like it should have been on Wikipedia, but it's on Wikimedia. I've never seen an article of this nature being hosted on wikimedia. What's going on here?

kiba 13y ago
Wikimedia is a parent organization of wikipedia and several other reference projects.
dec0dedab0de 13y ago
wikimedia is the parent organization of wikipedia. Since this is meta.wikimedia.org I am assuming it is a site for meta discussions.
lambda 13y ago
Wikimedia is the parent project of Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Wikinews, and so on. The wikimedia wiki is used for documentation and discussion on the topic of running a wiki, and on specifically running MediaWiki (the underlying software that powers these sites). Since this is an article about a topic relevant to running wikis, it's on the meta wiki. It is unlikely to be notable enough to meet the criteria for being included in Wikipedia; in order to avoid everyone creating their own personal Wikipedia page or a Wikipedia page for their high school band or the like, which can be very hard to ensure is high quality and accurate, Wikipedia has notability and verifiability requirements. Something must be notable enough to have been published by several existing reputable sources in order to meet this guideline. It's fairly likely that Cunningham's Law does not meet those criteria. But the Wikimedia meta-wiki has less formal requirements, and its topic is explicitly discussion about running wikis, so this winds up there. If you click on the logo, you can see this described straight from the source: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page "Welcome to Meta-Wiki, the global community site for the Wikimedia projects and the Wikimedia movement in general. Meta-Wiki's discussions range from coordination and documentation to planning and analysis of future Wikimedia activities."
- anonymfus 13y ago
  Where is a right place to put Russian translation of this article?
  - 3825 13y ago
    The final version would belong at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham%27s_Law?setlang=ru https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham%27s_Law?setlang=r... The first step is to read the article at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Extension:Translate/Page_translation_administration https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Extension:Translate/Page... The complete list of steps is at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Preparing_a_page_for_translation https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Preparing_a_page_... Sorry, I didn't realize it was so complicated to do this.
    - anonymfus 13y ago
      In the spirit of this law I just added Russian translation to the end of English article in hope that somebody competent would move it. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham's_Law#Russian_Translation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham's_Law#Russian_Tra...
      - Falling3 13y ago
        2 hours later, it appears to have worked!
        anonymfus 13y ago
        Actually about 13 minutes later: http://i.imgur.com/Jl2xdpy.png http://i.imgur.com/Jl2xdpy.png
- frik 13y ago
  > It is unlikely to be notable enough to meet the criteria for being included in Wikipedia Why? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia [1], there is no need to keep the amount of pages low, storage is cheap and no one prints out Wikipedia on real paper. The "not notable enough" is a real threat to Wikipedia and the future of the project. The German Wikipedia already lost a lot of former authors (volunteers) because of admins gone crazy. They don't want anyone to edit "their" pages, and revert and ban almost every new edit/user. You can read about this serious situation on Heise.de [2]. Read also the 650+ comments of the related discussion [3]. The English version is still better in shape, but it moves in the same direction, unfortunately. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia [2] http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Blutet-Wikipedia-aus-2123766.html http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Blutet-Wikipedia-aus-... ; Translation: http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heise.de%2Fnewsticker%2Fmeldung%2FBlutet-Wikipedia-aus-2123766.html&act=url http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&pre... [3] http://www.heise.de/newsticker/foren/S-Blutet-Wikipedia-aus/forum-275514/list/ http://www.heise.de/newsticker/foren/S-Blutet-Wikipedia-aus/... Edit: I am not against "notability requirement", with a better balance it's fine. Wikimedia Foundation should have a closer look at the German branch... maybe resetting all "admin" privileges would help?
electrotype 13y ago
Wikimedia is a Microsoft project and targets small businesses.
- dsjoerg 13y ago
  You almost got me.
MatmaRex 13y ago
There is actually a page that explains the differences between Wikipedia, Wikimedia and MediaWiki: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikipmediawiki https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikipmediawiki . Naming is hard.

by selmnoo 13y ago

kiba 13y ago

Wikimedia is a parent organization of wikipedia and several other reference projects.

dec0dedab0de 13y ago

wikimedia is the parent organization of wikipedia. Since this is meta.wikimedia.org I am assuming it is a site for meta discussions.

lambda 13y ago

Wikimedia is the parent project of Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Wikinews, and so on. The wikimedia wiki is used for documentation and discussion on the topic of running a wiki, and on specifically running MediaWiki (the underlying software that powers these sites). Since this is an article about a topic relevant to running wikis, it's on the meta wiki. It is unlikely to be notable enough to meet the criteria for being included in Wikipedia; in order to avoid everyone creating their own personal Wikipedia page or a Wikipedia page for their high school band or the like, which can be very hard to ensure is high quality and accurate, Wikipedia has notability and verifiability requirements. Something must be notable enough to have been published by several existing reputable sources in order to meet this guideline. It's fairly likely that Cunningham's Law does not meet those criteria. But the Wikimedia meta-wiki has less formal requirements, and its topic is explicitly discussion about running wikis, so this winds up there. If you click on the logo, you can see this described straight from the source: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page "Welcome to Meta-Wiki, the global community site for the Wikimedia projects and the Wikimedia movement in general. Meta-Wiki's discussions range from coordination and documentation to planning and analysis of future Wikimedia activities."

anonymfus 13y ago
Where is a right place to put Russian translation of this article?
- 3825 13y ago
  The final version would belong at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham%27s_Law?setlang=ru https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham%27s_Law?setlang=r... The first step is to read the article at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Extension:Translate/Page_translation_administration https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Extension:Translate/Page... The complete list of steps is at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Preparing_a_page_for_translation https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Preparing_a_page_... Sorry, I didn't realize it was so complicated to do this.
  - anonymfus 13y ago
    In the spirit of this law I just added Russian translation to the end of English article in hope that somebody competent would move it. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham's_Law#Russian_Translation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Cunningham's_Law#Russian_Tra...
    - Falling3 13y ago
      2 hours later, it appears to have worked!
      - anonymfus 13y ago
        Actually about 13 minutes later: http://i.imgur.com/Jl2xdpy.png http://i.imgur.com/Jl2xdpy.png
frik 13y ago
> It is unlikely to be notable enough to meet the criteria for being included in Wikipedia Why? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia [1], there is no need to keep the amount of pages low, storage is cheap and no one prints out Wikipedia on real paper. The "not notable enough" is a real threat to Wikipedia and the future of the project. The German Wikipedia already lost a lot of former authors (volunteers) because of admins gone crazy. They don't want anyone to edit "their" pages, and revert and ban almost every new edit/user. You can read about this serious situation on Heise.de [2]. Read also the 650+ comments of the related discussion [3]. The English version is still better in shape, but it moves in the same direction, unfortunately. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia [2] http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Blutet-Wikipedia-aus-2123766.html http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Blutet-Wikipedia-aus-... ; Translation: http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heise.de%2Fnewsticker%2Fmeldung%2FBlutet-Wikipedia-aus-2123766.html&act=url http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&pre... [3] http://www.heise.de/newsticker/foren/S-Blutet-Wikipedia-aus/forum-275514/list/ http://www.heise.de/newsticker/foren/S-Blutet-Wikipedia-aus/... Edit: I am not against "notability requirement", with a better balance it's fine. Wikimedia Foundation should have a closer look at the German branch... maybe resetting all "admin" privileges would help?

electrotype 13y ago

Wikimedia is a Microsoft project and targets small businesses.

dsjoerg 13y ago
You almost got me.

MatmaRex 13y ago

There is actually a page that explains the differences between Wikipedia, Wikimedia and MediaWiki: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikipmediawiki https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikipmediawiki . Naming is hard.