88
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by nutomic@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

Let's say someone created a Wikipedia clone with Activitypub support, so you can freely read and edit articles on other servers. Basically the same way that Lemmy works. What would be a good name for such a project? Bonus points if the name goes with a cute animal mascot.

Edit: Here you can see the names of existing Fediverse projects.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] fishos@lemmy.world 129 points 10 months ago

As it stands now, you can download all of Wikipedia for offline viewing. It's not restricted in any way. And since Wikipedia is looking for objective truth, not opinions, I'm not sure what benefit federation would do. You want it centralized, not broken up. What happens when two instances decide that their version is the only correct one?

I just don't see any benefit. This feels like when everyone was slapping "blockchain" on things because it was the current buzzword. What is Wikipedia failing at currently that decentralizing it would make better?

[-] nix@merv.news 23 points 10 months ago

It doesnt have to be a federated “wikipedia” it can be a federated wiki. Look at the fandom controversy right now where a bunch of games are now moving to their own wikis. A federated wiki software would let all those game wiki host their own wikis but still contribute to eachother without making an account on each wiki.

I want to subscribe to the minecraft and the terraria wikis from my garrys mod wiki account to get notifications on new pages and i want to contribute to them without making an account on each. Federated wikis would be cool

Also i DEFINITELY want a full fledged wiki page available on lemmy so each community can have a wiki with multiple pages and nice linking and a WYSISWYG editor like wikipedia

[-] fishos@lemmy.world 29 points 10 months ago

This isn't talking about "wikis". This is talking about an online encyclopedia of knowledge. I don't want 15 versions of the "physics wiki". I want one centralized source. So again, what does Wikipedia currently fail at that decentralizing it would solve? No one is stopping you from making an account right now and making edits.

What you're describing about seeing updates is just an RSS feed.

This is just slapping "federization" on something that doesn't need it because cool new thing.

[-] lud@lemm.ee 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Agreed, a decentralised wiki wouldn't make much sense.

How would it even work?

Do you join one wiki and that wiki federated with other wikis to make one bigger wiki?

Would you then have to choose which version of duplicate articles you want to read.

I imagine vandalism would be much easier if moderation is spread over many independent servers.

No, it just seems like a pain.

Someone mentioned a wiki which uses something like pull requests instead of edits and that seems much better.

Because Wikipedia is also so incredibly big, I feel like it would be very hard to get people to use the wiki if you actually want it to have only objective and provable facts. You could probably attract a crowd that likes alternative facts. Like: alternative medicine, flat earth, pseudoscience. Basically, I think it would be hard to attract people unless you make it ConspiracyWiki, which would obviously be a bad idea.

[-] dessalines@lemmy.ml 18 points 10 months ago

What is Wikipedia failing at currently that decentralizing it would make better?

Just like reddit (and many other services), its a centralized US-based service, has a history of scandals and conflicts of interest, has ties to the US state department, and is dominated by a small group of editors (despite its perception as being a universal unbiased knowledge store).

There's definitely a need to decentralize knowledge, move it away from US control, and allow the collaboration that activitypub provides.

[-] fishos@lemmy.world 12 points 10 months ago

Federation, by it's very nature, is "if I don't like you, I can just make my own instance and do whatever I want". How will you find objective truth when people can't even agree within their own country? You really think we won't just end up with LeftyWiki and RightyWiki and CommieWiki and FacistWiki? Because federated code would encourage this. You're literally adding problems when your problem is people based, not code based.

[-] dessalines@lemmy.ml 9 points 10 months ago

Why is having alternative sources of information that can collaborate a bad thing?

Why are you even on lemmy, rather than reddit, if you'd rather have a single isolated source of communication?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] nutomic@lemmy.ml 8 points 10 months ago

There are plenty of Wikipedia articles which are not objective, particularly when it comes to politics or history. Of course federation means there would be many different wikis. That makes sense, for example different countries should have their own independent wikis, instead of using one controlled by a different nation.

[-] fishos@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Yes, we can have a US wiki, a Russia Wiki, a China Wiki, a North Korea Wiki, and none of them will agree with each other and you will have reduced an encyclopedia into worthless anecdotes and opinions.

[-] ademir@lemmy.eco.br 3 points 10 months ago

you will have reduced an encyclopedia into worthless anecdotes and opinions.

It is Wikipedia then.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] jorgesumle 10 points 10 months ago

I agree, that's a big issue. The US regime hires people to influence the Wikipedia organization, they choose the "reliable news sources", mark some news outlets as fake news, and they edit articles about wars and so on to disseminate their propaganda. Also, the PATRIOT Act... As I wrote a couple months ago, we should end digital colonialism.

Scientific articles about math and stuff like that are fine.

[-] nutomic@lemmy.ml 7 points 10 months ago

Wikipedia has very major problems, but almost nobody is aware of them. Give this article a read to get an idea.

[-] lud@lemm.ee 10 points 10 months ago

I don't have the time to read all of that, but everyone should know that alternative medicine is another word for not medicine.

It's bizarre that people still believe stuff like that and other pseudoscience.

All the bad conspiracy theories around ADD, ADHD, Autism, and it's various medications are really getting on my nerves.

And it feels like it will just keep on getting worse. It's insane how much (at least apparent) movement the anti vac crowd are getting.

Sorry for the rant.

[-] fishos@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Let's pretend I agree with the article. You'd still be in the same boat with a federalized wiki. It'd still be hundreds of thousands of volunteer contributors, and that's where all the corruption supposedly lies. Except now it's broken up amongst many many many places, and moderation is that much harder now. So, for the upteenth time, what exactly is Wikipedia THE PLATFORM failing at, and why is the fediverse a solution to that specific problem? What part of wikipedias code or implementation is broken and what will the equivalent federated code/setup look like to combat this? Because if you're just going to point to corrupt people, I have a whole world for you to take a look at. Corruption isn't a uniquely Wikipedia problem and isn't caused by their code.

[-] nutomic@lemmy.ml 8 points 10 months ago

It sounds like you didn't read the article at all, because it clearly explains how Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales himself is involved in many such cases of corruption and manipulation. The code is not the problem, but the fact that a single organization has full control over the site and can decide which contributions get accepted or rejected.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] dessalines@lemmy.ml 4 points 10 months ago

You completely ignored the article, because it answers your question directly.

[-] saigot@lemmy.ca 4 points 10 months ago

Those seem to be the same criticism almost everyone levels at the org, and that are more or less intrinsic to an open platform. mainly that anyone can edit it. How does federation solve these issues, seems to me it would make them much much worse.

[-] fishos@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Dude admitted higher up that it's not the code, it's the people in charge who are the problem. So all they're really advocating for is starting their own Wikipedia. But of course, theirs will be "the real truth" when in actuality we will just end up with another version.

Relevant XKCD

[-] dessalines@lemmy.ml 5 points 10 months ago

Dude admitted higher up that it’s not the code, it’s the people in charge who are the problem. So all they’re really advocating for is starting their own Wikipedia.

Replace wikipedia with reddit, and you just discovered the reason lemmy exists. The problem is not just the people, but the code too.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 44 points 10 months ago

Fedipedia?

I wouldn't worry about a mascot so much as making the name instantly recognizable as an online encyclopedia. Keep it simple.

[-] nutomic@lemmy.ml 7 points 10 months ago

Yes the mascot is not mandatory, thats why I said bonus points. Fedipedia is too boring though, and too similar to Wikipedia.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] kometes@lemmy.world 23 points 10 months ago

Wiki McWikface

[-] Diabolo96@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Ibis ? Each article would be a parchment of knowledge. Check the myth and legends section : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_sacred_ibis

[-] nutomic@lemmy.ml 6 points 10 months ago

I like this, although it feels a bit too short.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Khanzarate@lemmy.world 18 points 10 months ago

Encyclopedia is "general education", referring to its broad scope. Wikipedia added wiki as a reference to the source, so the best one would be {source}pedia.

Fedepedia isn't awful but feels... bland, in my opinion.

Something like consolidate is a good synonym for it, but consolipedia also doesn't feel right to me, so if we're not referring to the federated part, we'd have to refer to the decentralized part. Decentropedia is fairly decent, but I'm fond of Micropedia, because the root word is very common, and I feel it's catchier than decentropedia. Either of those are good though.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] dessalines@lemmy.ml 13 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Some ideas: Fediwiki, Wikiverse, PlanetWiki...

But its also a good idea to use codenames and go with an animal mascot like we did with lemmy, because you never know if the scope of your project will change (either limiting it, or expanding it).

Also fediverse.observer has a bigger list of software.

[-] lil@lemy.lol 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Capybarawiki, Copybora

[-] detectivemittens@beehaw.org 3 points 10 months ago

Fedipedia? I guess you want the wiki bit in the name, but Fedipedia really rolls off the tongue.

[-] QuentinCallaghan@sopuli.xyz 10 points 10 months ago

OwlEyrie. It refers to owls as symbols of wisdom and to a group of owls.

[-] Zombiepirate@lemmy.world 15 points 10 months ago

And then everyone can call it O RLY

[-] kakes@sh.itjust.works 5 points 10 months ago
[-] Mishmash2000@lemmy.nz 10 points 10 months ago

Kleiopedia. Named after Kleio the Greek muse of History. Alternate spelling derived from her Latin spelling is Cliopedia but I personally prefer Kleiopedia. She was often depicted with a scroll or a chest full of books.

[-] kavin@feddit.rocks 10 points 10 months ago

Here's some that I thought about:

  • Wikipub
  • Wikihive (A bee mascot)
  • Academoo (A cow mascot)
  • LinkLynx (A lynx with a magnifying glass maybe?)
  • Encyclonet
[-] MargotRobbie@lemm.ee 9 points 10 months ago

I like "Escargot", because snails are cute and it rhymes with "Margot".

🐌

I've expressed this before, but there needs to be a federated alternative to challenge Fandom, especially after they bought out every single independent wiki like Memory-Alpha and WowWiki, and then filled them with ads.

[-] DharmaCurious@startrek.website 8 points 10 months ago

Thothpedia, with a little chibi thoth as the mascot. Thoth is the god of writing.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] dgkf@lemmy.ml 8 points 10 months ago

A few animal-inspired names that I think have a nice ring to them

  • Dodopedia (extinct like Mastadons, similar vowel rhythm to "wiki")
  • Hippopedia
  • Komodopedia
[-] hallettj@beehaw.org 7 points 10 months ago

Allow me to share, Federated Wiki. I don't think it uses ActivityPub, but otherwise I think it's close to what you described. Instead of letting anyone edit articles it uses more of a fork & pull request model.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] jonny@neuromatch.social 6 points 10 months ago

@nutomic
Ward and co. Are already off to the races with fedwiki

[-] HootinNHollerin@sh.itjust.works 6 points 10 months ago

Wikifedia, Fediwiki?

[-] Landmammals@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Clusterfuckipedia

[-] ademir@lemmy.eco.br 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Kiwipedia. With a kiwi as mascot.

[-] nix@merv.news 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2023
88 points (100.0% liked)

Asklemmy

43771 readers
997 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS