Dear enwiki sysadmins/developers,
I would like to start Extrapedia, a catch-all wiki for stuff that can't go on Wikipedia. At first, it would only accept high-quality articles about subjects that enwiki considers non-notable.[1] I would eventually like to write some code to make it easier to move pages from Wikipedia to Extrapedia. I figure that writing-code bit will be easier for me if you admins host Extrapedia on either the Foundation servers or on some personal servers of your own.
So, would you sysadmins be willing to kindly host it for now?
Kind regards, Jason Spiro
^ [1]. Later on, I might expand it to include bad-quality articles and/or articles deleted from enwiki for other reasons. Either way, only NPOV material would be allowed.
On Sun, Dec 30, 2007 at 04:32:31PM +0000, Jason Spiro wrote:
I would like to start Extrapedia, a catch-all wiki for stuff that can't go on Wikipedia. At first, it would only accept high-quality articles about subjects that enwiki considers non-notable.[1] I would eventually like to write some code to make it easier to move pages from Wikipedia to Extrapedia. I figure that writing-code bit will be easier for me if you admins host Extrapedia on either the Foundation servers or on some personal servers of your own.
This sounds like a job for... Wikia.
:-)
Cheers, -- jra
On Dec 30, 2007 11:46 AM, Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com wrote:
On Sun, Dec 30, 2007 at 04:32:31PM +0000, Jason Spiro wrote:
I would like to start Extrapedia, a catch-all wiki for stuff that can't go on Wikipedia. At first, it would only accept high-quality articles about subjects that enwiki considers non-notable.[1] I would eventually like to write some code to make it easier to move pages from Wikipedia to Extrapedia. I figure that writing-code bit will be easier for me if you admins host Extrapedia on either the Foundation servers or on some personal servers of your own.
This sounds like a job for... Wikia.
Wikitruth seems to be a better match. In fact, they're already doing it.
On 12/30/07, Jason Spiro jasonspiro2@gmail.com wrote:
Dear enwiki sysadmins/developers,
I would like to start Extrapedia, a catch-all wiki for stuff that can't go on Wikipedia. At first, it would only accept high-quality articles about subjects that enwiki considers non-notable.[1] I would eventually like to write some code to make it easier to move pages from Wikipedia to Extrapedia. I figure that writing-code bit will be easier for me if you admins host Extrapedia on either the Foundation servers or on some personal servers of your own.
So, would you sysadmins be willing to kindly host it for now?
I imagine the answer is: "Go get the project approved like all other projects, in accordance with http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/New_project_policy, and we'll set it up." If it's in line with Wikimedia's goals, it should be an official project, and if not, why should Wikimedia spend resources to host it? But I'm not a sysadmin, just a developer and user/editor.
On 31/12/2007, Jason Spiro jasonspiro2@gmail.com wrote:
Dear enwiki sysadmins/developers,
I would like to start Extrapedia, a catch-all wiki for stuff that can't go on Wikipedia. At first, it would only accept high-quality articles about subjects that enwiki considers non-notable.[1] I would eventually like to write some code to make it easier to move pages from Wikipedia to Extrapedia. I figure that writing-code bit will be easier for me if you admins host Extrapedia on either the Foundation servers or on some personal servers of your own.
I would also like an Extrationary to include all the dictionary stuff not supported by the English Wiktionary such as proto-languages, constructed languages, programming languages, fictional characters, fictional items and words such as used in Harry Potter and translated.
Andrew Dunbar (Hippietrail)
So, would you sysadmins be willing to kindly host it for now?
Kind regards, Jason Spiro
^ [1]. Later on, I might expand it to include bad-quality articles and/or articles deleted from enwiki for other reasons. Either way, only NPOV material would be allowed.
-- Jason Spiro: corporate trainer, web developer, IT consultant. I support Linux, UNIX, Windows, and more. Contact me to discuss your needs and get a free estimate. +1 (613) 668-6096 / Email: info@jspiro.com / MSN: jasonspiro@hotmail.com
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Before you go off too far on this idea, I'm about to float something on wikien-l about a new "Trivia:" namespace...
On 31/12/2007, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
Before you go off too far on this idea, I'm about to float something on wikien-l about a new "Trivia:" namespace...
If it's encyclopaedic, it should go in the main namespace, if it's not, it shouldn't be in Wikipedia. Either way, a trivia namespace is not required.
On Dec 30, 2007 5:32 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 31/12/2007, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
Before you go off too far on this idea, I'm about to float something on wikien-l about a new "Trivia:" namespace...
If it's encyclopaedic, it should go in the main namespace, if it's not, it shouldn't be in Wikipedia. Either way, a trivia namespace is not required.
Trivia is not for non-encyclopedic stuff. It's for stuff about which notability has not achieved consensus, but which has some claim to notability.
The same rules would apply there, but instead of AFDing non-notable stuff, you do an article move to Trivia:Article. It still has to meet RS, V, NOR, BLP, etc.
In one way or in another, you WILL have to reach a consensus before moving it back to the mainspace, or before deleting the content. To me this kind of talks *are* AFDs, hence I don't see the point of a Trivia: namespace, really.
2007/12/31, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com:
On Dec 30, 2007 5:32 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 31/12/2007, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
Before you go off too far on this idea, I'm about to float something on wikien-l about a new "Trivia:" namespace...
If it's encyclopaedic, it should go in the main namespace, if it's not, it shouldn't be in Wikipedia. Either way, a trivia namespace is not required.
Trivia is not for non-encyclopedic stuff. It's for stuff about which notability has not achieved consensus, but which has some claim to notability.
The same rules would apply there, but instead of AFDing non-notable stuff, you do an article move to Trivia:Article. It still has to meet RS, V, NOR, BLP, etc.
-- -george william herbert george.herbert@gmail.com
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Mon, Dec 31, 2007 at 03:27:16PM +0100, Nicolas Dumazet wrote:
In one way or in another, you WILL have to reach a consensus before moving it back to the mainspace, or before deleting the content. To me this kind of talks *are* AFDs, hence I don't see the point of a Trivia: namespace, really.
I'm pretty sure he said that he was *going to* float it... not that he was. :-)
Cheers, -- jra
On 31/12/2007, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
On Dec 30, 2007 5:32 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 31/12/2007, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
Before you go off too far on this idea, I'm about to float something on wikien-l about a new "Trivia:" namespace...
If it's encyclopaedic, it should go in the main namespace, if it's not, it shouldn't be in Wikipedia. Either way, a trivia namespace is not required.
Trivia is not for non-encyclopedic stuff. It's for stuff about which notability has not achieved consensus, but which has some claim to notability.
That just moves the goalposts, it doesn't solve anything. You would still need notability requirements in the trivia namespace, just weaker ones. If you can do without them in the trivia namespace, you can do without them in the main namespace, and then there's no need for a trivia namespace. Whatever way you look at it, either a trivia namespace won't work, or it's not needed.
On Dec 31, 2007 10:30 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 31/12/2007, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
On Dec 30, 2007 5:32 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
On 31/12/2007, George Herbert george.herbert@gmail.com wrote:
Before you go off too far on this idea, I'm about to float something on wikien-l about a new "Trivia:" namespace...
If it's encyclopaedic, it should go in the main namespace, if it's not, it shouldn't be in Wikipedia. Either way, a trivia namespace is not required.
Trivia is not for non-encyclopedic stuff. It's for stuff about which notability has not achieved consensus, but which has some claim to notability.
That just moves the goalposts, it doesn't solve anything. You would still need notability requirements in the trivia namespace, just weaker ones.
Yes.
If you can do without them in the trivia namespace, you can do without them in the main namespace, and then there's no need for a trivia namespace.
That does not logically follow at all.
Whatever way you look at it, either a trivia namespace won't work, or it's not needed.
This does not logically follow at all.
This should go to the discussion when I post to wikien-l, but ... please think it out.
Jason Spiro wrote:
Dear enwiki sysadmins/developers,
I would like to start Extrapedia, a catch-all wiki for stuff that can't go on Wikipedia. At first, it would only accept high-quality articles about subjects that enwiki considers non-notable.[1] I would eventually like to write some code to make it easier to move pages from Wikipedia to Extrapedia. I figure that writing-code bit will be easier for me if you admins host Extrapedia on either the Foundation servers or on some personal servers of your own.
So, would you sysadmins be willing to kindly host it for now?
Kind regards, Jason Spiro
^ [1]. Later on, I might expand it to include bad-quality articles and/or articles deleted from enwiki for other reasons. Either way, only NPOV material would be allowed.
Going back to the topic. I had some similar ideas in the past. I think it should be done from down up. You start that wiki.->It's successful->You treat some "merging". But take into account that it's probably not so a good idea having hosted by WMF and administered by the same people. The line seems too weak. You'll want to configure transwiki from wikipedia.
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org