Proposals for new projects: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Browse history interactively
← Older editNewer edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
ADM (talk | contribs)
3 edits
ADM (talk | contribs)
3 edits
Line 566: Line 566:


==US Cities in in French-language Wikipedia==
==US Cities in in French-language Wikipedia==
A bot is currently needed to create articles on US Towns and counties on foreign language wikis. Policy has already been adopted in order to counter eurocentric and francocentric editing. [[User:ADM|ADM]]
A bot is currently needed to create articles on US Towns and counties on foreign language wikis. Much of North America is absent from these wikis. Policy has already been adopted in order to counter eurocentric and francocentric editing. [[User:ADM|ADM]]

Revision as of 17:25, 13 July 2006

This page host proposals for new projects that are inline with the Wikimedia Foundation goal of spreading and promoting knowledge. Before adding a new proposal, see the New project policy. Please only make proposals on this page if you are willing to take responsibility for it; otherwise, post it on the discussion page.

If you want to propose a new language for an existing project, please do so on Requests for new languages. If you want to propose closing an existing project, see Proposals for closing projects. If you are suggesting an enhancement which requires a change to the MediaWiki software, please file a feature request in MediaZilla. If you have a proposal for any other type of enhancement to an existing project, please visit that project and attempt to gather interest there.

Information

Notes to consider

  • Hosting: Remember that the Wikimedia Foundation is not a free hosting company for any kind of wikis. If your project does not fit the Foundation's ideals, try a wiki hosting site such as Wikia or wikidev.net (see a list of wiki hosts with reviews), or download and host MediaWiki yourself.
  • History: Individuals attempting to create a new project may benefit from reading the Wikipedia timeline and Uses of a wiki.

  • Be persistent. Don't take criticism directed at proposals personally. There have been a number of mistakes made in the past in regards to starting up new project ideas, and several of the "veteran" users are afraid of repeating those same mistakes. New ideas are taken seriously, although it should be admitted that the process of going from an idea for a new project to actually turning on a server that is implementing that idea will take quite a bit of time and effort. If you are proposing these ideas, be willing to take some "arrows" in your back, a lot of criticism, cynicism, and outright disbelief that your ideas are not going to work. If it really is a good idea, there will be others who will be willing to help you out as well. Be persistent and don't give up right away.

    The last major project that made the jump from a project idea to something going on its own was Wikinews. Some veteran users are suggesting that it will be a year or two before any other project idea will be accepted as a new separate project, if ever. If you want to see how a project idea has been successful, it would be wise to see what was done to go from idea to an actual project, please look at the project proposal page for Wikinews. In particular, click on the history button and look back in time over some of the complications they went through before going "live". Any projects that don't live up to this sort of standard for coming into existance will likely not be considered as a new project by the Wikimedia Foundation's Board. Don't get discouraged, but it is not going to be easy either.

    If you see something that doesn't fit into any current Wikimedia project, could be done using MediaWiki software, can be distrbuted using the GFDL (or very similar license) for republishing, please feel free to add a suggestion below.


It has been suggested that many of the current proposals could be merged into one of the main projects below.

  • Wikipedia: One other place to strongly consider is Wikipedia's series of subprojects, WikiProject. Many of the proposals listed below could be incorporated into one of those projects, or perhaps a new WikiProject could be started instead. Wikipedia is evolving and changing over time, and there is already quite a bit that can be adapted from the content on Wikipedia, not to mention involving people who commonly use and edit Wikipedia.
  • Wikisource: Wikisource also has a similar effort for larger subprojects of Wikisource that are focused on original source material that will require quite a bit of effort to transfer to that project. This would be things like historical dictionaries, encyclopedias, or other multi-volume reference works that are of a historical nature and can be copied according to the terms of the GFDL.
  • Wikibooks: In addition, it has been suggested on many of the proposals listed below that a good place to look would be with Wikibooks. If you are trying to put together a large collection of factual information into one place, starting a Wikibook may be a good place to go. If it doesn't quite fit Wikibooks, the other editors at Wikibooks will try to help you get to the correct place as well.

Existing projects

Before proposing a new project, make sure it doesn't already exist; see the list of existing projects below (see also the full list).

Main projects

Special projects


Non-Wikimedia projects that run MediaWiki and have free/open licenses:

Also see Sites using MediaWiki.

Instructions

  1. Read the detailed information on the policy page.
  2. Create an account and a user page on this wiki, so people can address their questions to you.
  3. Create a page where you describe your plan in detail (where do you create the page??) and add this to the Proposed projects (How??) category.
  4. Add your proposal to this page using the recommended format.
  5. It is recommended that you advertise your project. Good places to do so are on Goings-on and on the Foundation-l mailing-list.

Requests with working demos

wikitextbook.co.uk - A textbook aimed specifically UK students

  • I instigated this site a year ago now and have spent a lot of time deciding upon the internal links and pages.
  • Pages have been created based upon the UK syllabus.
  • Needs content that relates specifically to the UK syllabus (this is where it often differs from wikipedia and therefore a new project was required).
  • Many pages of wikipedia are appropriate - I am thinking about adding information from wikipedia to get certain areas started - I believe this is fine according to the copyright.
  • Lots of debate about wikis in education. Most comments are very positive.
  • Free hosting has been provided by a Publisher who believes in the use of wikis (he is very web content driven)
  • Comments, thoughts, help etc etc more than welcome! (wiki@wikitextbook.co.uk)
* These are great textbooks, but why not just make them on Wikibooks, and just explicitly that all contributors must contribute based on the UK syllabus? -- user:zanimum
  • The reason for starting a new site was the fact that we wanted a site that we could shape to specifically meet the needs to UK students and teachers. It was felt that this would be easier if a whole site was dedicated to UK students rather than having to sift around a large wikibooks site that wasn't designed for them. --Wikitextbook 18:28, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is too bad that this couldn't have been dealt with by creating a UK-themed bookshelf at Wikibooks instead. There are seperate projects like Wikijunior and Wikiversity that have essentially their own user community, so this wouldn't have been that much of a difference. I'll try to integrate some links into Wikibooks from the content of this website. --Roberth 04:27, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I believe that the scope of Wikibooks should be global. As it is, lots of work remains undone at Wikibooks, and having a UK Wikibook would be un-necessary biased. The idea of Wikis I feel should be used for global collaboration. What specific kind of knowledge in Sciences, Maths and Computer Science should be different from the rest of the world?
  • Who decided that all Wikibooks had to be global in scope and nature? Many Wikimedia projects have location-specific content and orentation, including Wikinews and Wikipedia. Wikipedia in particular has location-specific Wikiprojects. For example, b:Wikijunior Math is a proposed Wikibook that would deal with the mathmatics education that follows the curriculum guidelines for the U.S. State of California. It may be adapted to other locations at a later date, but it is being developed to work with a specific location in mind. b:University of Alberta Guide is another Wikibook that is clearly very specific for a particular location. b:FHSST Physics (to cite a nearly finished Wikibook) was developed following the high school physics curriculum for South Africa. I can find others examples, but it certainly is not against Wikibooks policy to have a book that is oriented toward a specific location. I'm mainly suggesting that if this is a serious proposal to get this project adopted by the Wikimedia Foundation rather than an attempt at advertising, you need to overcome the objection as to why it can't be dealt with in Wikibooks. I appreciate that as a seperate project you would have a smaller community to work with and make decisions specific to the needs of the content you are developing. The main point here, however, is what sort of contribution to the rest of the Wikimedia projects would this proposal have and why don't the existing Wikimedia projects effectively deal with the goals of your new project proposal. --Roberth 16:18, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After some inspection, I decided that WikiTextbook is not free. To be more specific, WikiTextbook is gratis-free, but not libre-free. Unlike Wikimedia projects, WikiTextbook does not offer a license (such as the GNU Free Documentation License) that would allow me to copy content off the site, then modify it. --Kernigh 18:26, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This clearly does not merit its own project or domain. HOWEVER, it could be very useful as a book in Wikibooks. Pcu123456789 16:04, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wikibooks does have a section now aimed specifically at gradeschool children called Wikistudy, that is broken down along country lines. Books specifically for UK school children can be created in this area. --Whiteknight 18:29, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rodovid.org - Fully functional global family tree

Link to Proposal on Mailing List
[1]
Naming Suggestions
There are exists many others, but I think wiki prefix is not nessesary
Domain Name
rodovid.org + "language codes" (see details)
Scope
Rodovid is an attempt to create a free familly tree site, that anyone can use. Example of ancectors tree. 32 generations. http://engine.rodovid.org/wk/Special:Tree/5392
Details
Rodovid.org, Українська, Deutsch
Proposer
User:Baya
People Interested Joining
    • User:Bjwebb
    • User:APPER - i find this very interesting because I thought about such a project more than once and on sunday someone asked me for a free wiki-like project of this kind, and I didn't knew one...
    • User:Morais69br
    • User:Dallan
    • Trevor macinnis - I love this idea!
    • Balû 06:30, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Lhademmor
    • — Dunc|☺
    • Roberth
    • Wikiacc (talk) en.w en.w 20:13, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Red Baron 09:14, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Holden Now there is at least four different partly overlapping Wiki-projects. We need ONE that is supported by the WikiMedia Foundation. 20:30, 7 May 2006
    • hopefully they can be combined easily. Pcu123456789 16:20, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Andre Engels
    • User:mayhew18
    • User:Chaerani Chaerani 04:35, 11 July 2006 (UTC): Having tried both wikitree and rodovid, I'd like to say that I like Rodovid's user interface better. However, rodovid needs a lot to improve too, such as:[reply]
      • The rodovid server is sooooo slow. It's realllllyyyy slow.
      • Inputting a person data needs 3-4 steps, this needs to be reduced to 1-2 steps, perhaps with the help of AJAX
      • Should have option to merge two persons, rather than having to delete one person and create a new one and re-attach the person to the spot of the deleted person.
      • Should have a Special Page to track relationship between two persons
      • A person's data should have a link to his/her wikipedia page. This is where integration with other Wikimedia projects come into play, and is very important to be able to visualise family relationship of important people, such as Bush Family, British Royal Family, etc.
      • For me, the name "rodovid" does not click. It has to be something with wiki in it. Perhaps wikifamily.org or wikealogy.org
      • I'm not a programmer, but i'd like to see what i can do to translate rodovid to Indonesian
    • Ek7 21:12, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Talk:Rodovid.org
    • User JBJ from Wikipedia. What's to think about? This is a stupendous idea!
    • What an excellent suggestion! However, I think that if this project became part of Wikimedia, the name would need a bit of change.

Wikiversity

Go to Wikiversity/Modified project proposal to help make the Wikiversity proposal modifications that were requested by the Board.

Link to proposal on mailing list
[2]
Naming suggestions
Wikiversity
Domain name
"language code".wikiversity.org
Demo
Scope
An adult education center of learning using Wikimedia projects content as course material.
Details
Wikiversity
Proposer
mav (well, historically speaking... did not add here)
People interested in joining
Relevant links
Comments
    • This is currently up for a Vote for deletion due to the way it was setup in the first place. There are a number of problems with the way that this project got started, and perhaps by starting a "formal" new project proposal this will get to be started the way it ought to be done, or at least get an equal footing with other new project ideas. DO NOT start a project on Wikibooks that mimics how this project got started, as this is more an example of how not to start a new project with the Wikimedia Foundation. There are a number of very good ideas that have been brought forward regarding this project, but had it been listed on this page more recently, it would have been "archived" as an inactive new project proposal and been left in the neither regions of Meta. As it is, there is a semi-official status that seems to be connected with this project, including granting sister project status (for the German version of all things). The VfD above is to decide what the fate of the English version should be, considering that it is not really a Wikibook nor has much to do with Wikibooks specifically. --Roberth 12:02, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Update: I've set up a time table for what should happen to this proposal, according to the official New project policy of the Wikimedia Foundation. Review the deadlines for the various stages that will be needed to enable this project. --Roberth 18:03, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • mailing list. I guess we should have something for the "Link to proposal on mailing list" that is mentioned at the top of the proposal. Has there already been a wikiversity project proposal notice posted to some mailing list or is this something that should be done now? --Memenen 21:37, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Identity - Lengthy enough discussion on aspects of Wikiversity's identity, including the place or role of research at wikibooks:Talk:Wikiversity:About - yes, i know this possibly should have been on Meta. We now need to get wider input from the community on these points and include either on Wikiversity or a sub page (Talk:Wikiversity is getting a little long and rambling). Personally I think it would be good if we put our heads together on what we think is both practical in the short term and possible in the long term and how we will implement this and identify any obstacles that need addressing, eg. software needs. You are cordially invited.. Cormaggio 00:04, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • It seems it would be easier and more wiki spirited to create a place for wiki study groups (wikistudy?) where people could post questions, answers links, explanations etc. and let things grow from there, rather than attempt to create formal sylabi and class shedules with designated instructors 167.142.44.109 04:17, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Is this not also a perfect opportunity to implement Jimbo's call to "free the curriculum"? (From his speech at Wikimania.) I can't remember if he mentioned Wikiversity, though he says in his slides that this could be hosted on Wikibooks. Either way, there's real room for collaboration here. Cormaggio @ 23:16, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd like to see a classroom/grading environment added to Wikiversity. I've outlined a few of my ideas and motivations here.

Wikipubs

Link to request on mailing list
None
Naming suggestions
Wikipubs
Domain name
Currently registered http://wikipubs.org, http://wikipubs.net, http://wikipubs.com
Scope
Wikipubs seeks to provide a source for the sharing of information relating to pubs, clubs, bars and festivals throughout the world. It will achieve this by encouraging users to post information, stories, anecdotes and reviews of their local pubs, clubs, bars and festivals. Wikipubs will also encourage discussion on pubs, clubs, bars and festivals between patrons of these establishments. Thus building a database for users to refer to when planning an enjoyable night out.
Details
Wikipubs
Proposer
James mail
Demo Site
http://wikipubs.org

Wikireason (demo site)

Naming discussion
Wikireason/naming
Domain name
wikireason.org, wikireason.net (registered by User:AdamRetchless, with active demo site)
Scope
Collecting, cataloging, developing, and analyzing arguments.
Details
Wikibate (original proposed name)
Proposer
User:David Bruhn
People interested joining

Requests without demos

Wikiscope

Link to request on mailing list
See Here
Naming suggestions
Wikiscope, Wikiview, Wikiwatch (see Wikiscope/Name)
Domain name
en.wikiscope.org, de.wikiscope.org etc. (available as of 14/6/06)
Scope
A viewer (non-Wikimedian)-based page which ties together the various Wikimedia projects.
Details
See Wikiscope
Proposer
Daniel
Date
2 June 2006
People interested in joining
Comments

Sorry, I don't like this idea; too disorganized & arbitrary.

68.148.165.213 07:34, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, I do not to see the point as pages are already interlinked (you often see links to Commons, Wikispecies, Wiktionary, Wikinews, Wikisource and Wikibooks in Wikipedia articles). Computerjoe 21:34, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Same here. Regards, --Klemen Kocjančič (Pogovor - Hitri odgovor) 08:41, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but often there are topics which, for some reason, are not (and should not be) on Wikipedia. Not only this, but Wikipedia should not be something which redirects people outwards. Wikiscope would allow people to be exposed to a large number of articles, definitions, pictures, sources, quotes and so on all branching out from one topic. Dbmag9 18:17, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why should Wikipedia not direct people outwards? My primary use at the moment is in research and a starting point on the web. I have noticed a trend towards reducing useful outward bound links. If this continues I will probably go back to google as a starting point and Wikipedia will lose my minor contribution of correctional tweaks and occasional paragraphs that I know or found out something about. In my view this is taking the Encyclopedia simile too far. One of the reasons to abandon hardcopy encyclopedia for the online Wikipedia is the access to the growing body of up to date useful information online. lazyquasar

(Sorry for the delay in posting, I didn't notice your comment.) Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, I therefore think that it is not its job to direct people to other Wikimedia projects. Yes, it should link to other projects if necessary, but the main task of that should be somewhere else. Wikiscope. Each page linked to from Wikiscope would have some kind of notice which would tell people to go to Wikiscope for more information. Perhaps there would be external links on Wikiscope as well. As a side note, I don't think that Wikipedia is decreasing its external links, I think they are merely checking far more thoroughly for bad or commercial websites (which perhaps amounts to the same thing. Daniel (‽) 19:48, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the other projects have links that link to Wikipedia; say, for example, some Wiktionary entries have links to Wikipedia and vice versa.
68.148.165.213 07:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like this idea! Not sure exactly what it would involve technically, but the principle sounds good. Wikipedia shouldn't be the portal for off the other projects. Petros471 11:33, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! Please consider adding your name to the Wikiscope section of Proposals for new projects. Dbmag9 18:31, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, the other projects have links that link to Wikipedia; say, for example, some Wiktionary entries have links to Wikipedia and vice versa.
68.148.165.213 07:32, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This idea makes sense. It does seem more like a restructuring of Wikimedia than a new proposal per se. I'm not clear on what it would involve beyond extensive editing of the pages that already exist. --Ejmasicampo 05:49, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if you understand. My proposal is to have one domain (en.wikiscope.org or suchlike) which will have pages with topic headings (such as Ancient Egypt) which will direct the viewer to various projects of the Wikimedia Foundation. However, thank you for your comments and support! Please consider adding your name to the list of people interested at Proposals for new projects#Wikiscope. Daniel (‽) 16:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have mixed feelings about this idea. On the whole, I think the "battle ribbon" section of some Wikipedia articles that link to the sister projects can get out of hand in some situations. That is the current method for doing inter-project linking, but it is something that I often make fun of. It can get very much out of hand on user pages, but that is another fight for another discussion page. The positive aspect of this proposal is that it can provide a "common" source of links, perhaps even to other language versions of this content as well.

The largest problem that I see is that it isn't a "one stop" process but something that requires two or more mouse clicks to get the information. If MediaWiki could support inter-project templating (a very trickly proposition) and transclusion, this might have a little more merit. Think for example your Ancient Egypt Wikipedia article that has the inter-project links, and the list of links is on a transclusion toward the bottom of the article. The b:Wikijunior Ancient Civilizations/Egyptians article might be able to offer the same transclusion so an update on one area would be supported in both projects. There are other uses for inter-project transclusions, but this would be a good demonstration of the idea as well. --Roberth 21:24, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for you support. I do agree that the length of time (in clicks) to get somewhere would be increased, which is never good. However, I think that the advantages would be great enough for this to be useful if done well. Daniel (‽) Check out Wikiscope! 18:39, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some people are already trying to turn Commons into this "one stop" link shop. See commons:Template talk:Sisterlinks. I found this out when I found out en.wikinews' "sisterlinks" all just link to Commons categories! The reasoning is apparently that Commons already has a quite good category structure. I was quite surprised to find this out. pfctdayelise 17:36, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for telling me about that. I have not yet looked at the ideas there fully, but I already think that the problem with this is that it will dilute Commons' original purpose - to provide a repository for open-source media files. The category system, if it is as good as they make out, could easily be copyied into Wikiscope. Daniel (‽) Check out Wikiscope! 18:39, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't see how it can "dilute" the Commons, it doesn't stop or restrict people uploading in anyway. It is reasonably widepsread, I have seen a lot of them although I didn't realise this intention was behind them. I also don't think for example English Wikipedia has this practice.
FWIW I think this proposal (WikiScope) is an attempt to solve an identified problem that does need solving, but I don't think a whole new project is the best solution. I think it needs a technical fix first - bugzilla:167 or maybe bugzilla:4547. regards, pfctdayelise 03:03, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What I meant by 'diluting' is that adding this to the scope of Wikimedia Commons will make the relative amount of current Commons material less in comparison to the amount of sisterlink material, and this will inevitably reduce the overall amount of new Commons input. Commons will become more and more a repository for sisterlinks and less and less a repository for open-source media files. The creation of a whole project for these will mean that both Commons and Wikiscope remain focused. Daniel (‽) 17:29, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like an excellent experiment well worth trying. If it works well initially or starts to show some promise I will try to find some places in Wikiversity where a template or SOP on how to get started with groups studies or lesson plans include coming to wikiscope (I like name BTW) and verifying, editing or creating an appropriate page to support the participants research and study efforts. I had always envisioned this as approprate matching page to Wikipedia's article pages but perhaps this is a better solution that will make some of the purists attached to traditional encyclopedia appearance happy. Good luck! lazyquasar

Thank you very much! I'm glad you like the name (put comments regarding naming on Wikiscope/Name) and the project as a whole. I think that links to Wikiscope on Wikiversity would be great. If you want, please consider adding your name to the list of people interested in helping at Proposals for new projects#Wikiscope. Thank you! Daniel (‽) 16:16, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikiscope pages themselves might look OK, but will require a lot of maintenance. Furthermore I think this will not have the expected interproject overview on the pages of those prjects. For example w:Nile will probably not link to the Wikiscope/Ancient Egypt page. I suppose it would be more accessible if the wikiscope project would be on Wikipedia Portals, for example as a box Other wikimedia projects on w:Portal:Egyptology. I am sure there will be many objections, but it would be much more accesible. HenkvD 18:44, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it would need a lot of maintenance. However, I do not agree that a better solution is simply to use the Wikipedia portals. Ideally, the portals would be migrated to Wikiscope, and then extra information about the other projects would be integrated into them. Pages on a project would link to the appropriate Wikiscope page, and this might even (if we get developed support) be similar to the interwiki (language) linking at the moment. In any case I'm sure that it is quite easy to set up a bot which automatically links articles which are mentioned on Wikiscope. Daniel (‽) 19:43, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another problem is that, no matter what you do, WikiScope will not be the first port of call for people looking for information. The people this project is aimed at will still go to Wikipedia as their primary source. Or, more specificaly, if people want information about a particular subject they will look it up in Wikipedia. If they want a set of links related to a subject (as this project aims to provide) they will use Google. --HappyDog 18:39, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If all pages which are mentioned on Wikiscope link to Wikiscope (in a relatively obvious but non-intrusive manner) people will inevitably look at Wikiscope. They may start off going to Wikipedia, but they will, over time, start looking to Wikiscope instead. I dispute that Wikiscope pages would be mere lists of links. My example is rather sparse, but Wikiscope pages would be more like this in real life. They would function as a stepping point for people to go into various topics. Daniel (‽) 19:43, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The content of Wikiscope will need to be written. Until it is as comprehensive a resource as Wikipedia it will never take its (or Google's) place as the first port of call when looking for information. You will find it hard to persuade editors to work on what will (initially at least) be considered a partial fork of Wikipedia, particalarly when, from the point of view of a WP editor, the relevant information and links should already be present on WP. The Egypt portal you show above is a good example of a page that already has most of the functionality you are describing, or which could easily be edited to include it. --HappyDog 01:46, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I fully agree with Happydog. Addition of a few links to other projects to Portal:Egyptology would do just fine, I think. HenkvD 08:25, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Another idea would be to add external links as well, providing another route for people to take and expanding the project further. These external links would have to be regulated to avoid the obvious problems of people adding pages to it just to bump up their rank etc. Lcarsdata 16:09, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are also books called Ancient Egypt, I had one for my study but handed it in on Thursday and don't have the ISBN.
Anyway, books also should be mentioned. --Edwin10:03, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Comments
    • Davidstrauss - I proposed something very similar as "Wikicite" at Wikimania 2006. My main argument is the ability to index source reliability and POV, something unavailable via Google, Amazon, and elsewhere. What would constitute a source would be entirely dependant on importance and use. It could be anything from an author to a magazine article. --Davidstrauss 07:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like an interesting idea to me, and it could nicely integrate with sources in the Wikipedia. I am somewhat uncomfortable with its name, though. What about Wikicat, or something along those lines? Computerjoe 10:29, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"What about Wikicat, or something along those lines?"- my thoughts exactly ;) In any case, the Wikicat project has already been in development for a while now and implementation is well underway. I hope you will consider joining efforts. Jleybov 17:55, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Amazon.com already has a lot of this information in their files. I don't know if we would be able to duplicate it. I think this almost might be better as part of Wikisource, as books come into the public domain. Chadlupkes 06:59, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think this needs a more clear differentiation from Wikisource to justify being a separate project. Shouldn't we examine first what gap(s) this project would fill and whether any of them would be better integrated into the current wikisource instead. We want to preserve clear deliniations among wiki projects in order to keep it accessibly to as many users as possible, no? Disanpoter 17:30 2 Sept 06 (UTC)

Wikicite would not contain actual citable materials. It would characterize sources by their reliability, biases, age, and connections. It would provide a central coordination point for debating a source's reliability and ability to support verifiability. Currently, these discussions are spread out through talk pages, WP:RS, and WP:V. Such discussions get archived, forgotten, and repeated. Because Wikicite would be organized by source, relevent arguments and citations about a souce's reliability would persist. I envision the eventual result is linking to Wikicite from actual citation templates on the Wikipedias. This would also foster review of source reliability from Wikipedians new to articles. Currently, Wikipedians must dig deep to begin disputing a citaion.
Wikicite could help evaluate sources from all levels: individual paragraphs all the way to publishers and institutions. It would be very helpful to have a place to go instead of looking up a journal's peer review quality or whether an article has been refuted by a more credible source every time. --Davidstrauss 20:21, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this idea is great. Such a wiki would try to list all books (maybe even all standard media like magazines, dvds etc). It's different from Wikisource in the point that it would also list - not copy - copyrighted material. It would be a big catalogue. Some tags would be title, author(s), publisher, year and place of publication, ISBN, number of pages, language, crosslinks to translations, etc. - Anonymous

I agree with the problem

I do understand that I never use any other projects save Wikipedia, and I am quite a 'fan' of Wiki. I would fully back up something that did make the interface between the Projects, and I quite like the idea of having a search page / main page that would include all the Projects. If you need to contact me, please visit Wikipedia Usertalk Bhaveer

I also think that this is a great idea. I never thought about it, but the thing is, would anyone bother to help in this project? It seems a good idea, but difficult to implement and have the full library. I expect it would be less popular than Wikiversity. What about running a test first? 220.255.4.132 06:19, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata would be a better place for this now

See Wikidata. PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:11, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And Requests_for_comment/Interproject_links_interface. PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:12, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikihistory

Link to Proposal on Mailing List

None

Naming Suggestions
Wikihistory, Wikitimeline, Wikichronology
Domain Name
wikihistory.org
Scope
50,000B.C. - 31 Dec 2006.
Details
There will be a dynamic timeline starting from prehistoric extending upto current year end. Users will post historical events in the timeline on specific dates. There would be several mandatory criteria on each event like Geography, Event Type, Significance etc so that anyone can filter the timeline based on the criteria and get a customized chronological list of relevant events of interest.
Proposer
User:Armanaziz
People Interested Joining
    • User:Armanaziz
    • User:Snillet
    • User:FreshFruitsRule
Comments
Please let me know your comments

Not to derail your idea or anything, but I believe such a timeline would be a better subproject of Wikipedia itself.

I agree. Is it possible to make a dynamic timeline template to add to Wikipedia history articles? Pcu123456789 16:18, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think this would be a great idea...if it wasn't run on the MediaWiki platform. I think the best way to go about this would be to utilize (or develop, if something adequate doesn't already exist) a really good timeline interface for the web, that would allow you to

    • View specific date ranges (from the big bang to current year end, or from last Sunday to today)
    • Create events
    • Remove events
    • Change events
    • Zoom in/zoom out
    • Smooth scroll from side to side (but without a scrollbar, like you just position your cursor on the right and it scrolls to the right)

Now, as far as the details of what happened on these dates, I agree with the users above - that content should be managed on Wikipedia. So basically, the idea is to provide a superior timeline application and interface that links to Wikipedia content.--Andrewsimpson 16:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Almanac

Demo site
http://wikinac.info.tm (seems to be br
Naming suggestions
Wikinac, Wikialmanac, WikiSignifica, WikiPeople'sAlmanac
Domain name
en.wikinac.org, en.wikialmanac.org, en.WikiSignifica.org
Scope
A wiki World Almanac
WikiSignifica Scope
An almanac similar to the Book of Lists and People's Almanac created by Irving Wallace, his son David Wallechinsky, and daughter Amy Wallace. It would include interesting facts, obscure historical incidents, interesting links and other esoteric and unknown knowledge.
Details
Wikinac
Proposer
Ryan524 08:28, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Wikialmanac, proposed
--Gary123
People interested joining
Relevant links
Comments

CDT: Lets Make a Map of Wikipedia

Link to proposal on mailing list
(none)
Scope
CDT stands for Context Driven Topologies, an open source system of mathematical mapping, audio-visual presentation, and data structures to serve as a bridge between interactive thinking communities like Wikipedia, large scale digital collections and archives, and everyone with a computer.
Details
[3]
Proposer
Deborah MacPherson
People interested joining
Relevant links
http://www.contextdriventopologies.org
Comments
    • Wait, so, this would be like a map of Wikipedia, linking one page to another in different areas? As in, i could make a map that contains links to all, lets say, movie directors, and show where they are in what genre of movie they generally make (as in Sci-Fi is at top middle, Action is top left, Horror is top right, then Romance is bottom center, etc. and then chart out a point for each director's movies)? Or is this something different alltogether. I.E. I don't really understand this... --Quadraxis 00:50, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Debate/Ideas

Inclusive of political, ethical, scientific, religious, and philosophical controversies.

See wikireason (above) which has demo site. Similar proposals can be found below and on Wikibate/similar. Similar projects outside of Wikimedia can be found at Wikireason:Wikireason:related projects

Wikidea / Wikitheory / Wikipolitics

Link to request on mailing list
(none)
Naming suggestions
Wikidea, Wikitheory, Wikipolitics
Domain name
en.wikidea.org
Scope
This will be a wiki for sharing theories, ideas, and insights into how the world works.
Details
Wikidea
Proposer
User:Vikram Vaka
People interested joining
Relevant links

Wiki Theory

Naming Suggestions
Wikieory, Wikiory, Wikiry
Domain Name
www.en.wikieory.org/... (suggestion)
Scope
an open forum to develop and/or disscuss theories on science, politics, series like Harry Potter, etc., as well as discuss government systems, cultural habits, etc.(Wikitution part of Wikieory????)
Proposer
Merlin of Eragon
People intrested in joining
    • Kraken
    • Ahamay :Great idea! Wikitution should be included here
    • User: Centroles - Brilliant idea
    • This is very similar to the wikibate proposal. User:Colignatus 2005-02-25
Relevant links

Wikiopinions / Wikiexperiences

Link to proposal on mailing list
(none)
Naming suggestions
Wikiopinions, Wikiexperences, Wikomments
Domain name
en.wikiopinions.org, it.wikiopinions.org, ecc.
Scope
Giving for every concept or object described in Wikipedia own opinion or personal experience
Details
Wikiopinions
Proposer
Thom
People interested joining
Comments
      • This is very similar to the wikibate proposal: you would not mention an opinion unless it has value for the community. User:Colignatus 2005-02-25
      • I like this idea, there is already alot of this content that can be used on the usenet archives. If the name is still up in the air, its worth saying that this semester im working on a project for my bachelors thesis called "wikipinion". It is an unrelated project, and i havent decided on the name definetly either. so whatever. msg me at wikipedia talk:Spencerk if you'd like.
Relevant links

Wiki Conspiracy

Link to proposal on mailing list
(none)
Naming suggestions
Wikiconspiracy, ConspiriWiki, Wikspiracy,
Domain name
none
Scope
Ive noticed that people get upset when conspiracy theories leak into regular articles. but some topics have more conspiracy than anything. I think it would be neat to creat a wiki that features conpiracy theories. Then we could keep regular sites clean and still give the full flavorful rich part of our culture known as crazy conspiracy theories spread its wings. plus with peer editing alot of those long ramblings could be rendered coherent. could be fun--Olsdude 01:44, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Details
Wikiconspiracy
Proposer
--Olsdude 01:44, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
People interested joining

Geospatial

WikiEarth (Using Google Maps)

Link to request on mailing list
(none)
Naming suggestions
WikiEarth, Wikiography, Wikiplaces
Domain name
wikiearth.org
Scope
make use of google maps in a wiki, to search and hold interesting locations in the world.
Details
here you could see an example of this wiki http://www.inopia.org/wikiearth. In a short time it will be referred as http://www.wikiearth.org
Proposer
F. Terran, mail.
People interested joining
    • Scifiintel
Relevant links
WikiEarth
Comments
    • Neither of the links you give in the Details section appear to work. --Quadraxis 00:59, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry, but this proposal wouldn't work. Google Maps is copyrighted. - Kookykman|(t)(c)
    • I believe there are other map sources that are not copyrighted - "Cheesejoff"
    • Have you considered the possibility of using NASA maps instead? --Mauro 17:24, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • So, if I'm understanding this right, anyone could add their own house to this project? WOW YOU CAN NOW VANDALISE BUILDINGS WITHOUT TOUCHING THEM!! or if not, what would be the point, exactly? Most buisinesses are already listed (in the United States anyway) --Nerd42 01:29, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • This could be good for reviews of restaurants etc, places may listed but that doesn't tell you what there like it could lead to a portal for each town and subcategories for food clothing etc people could rate and then you could see what’s the best in your area, could also have menus etc included.

Wikiworld

We need a free interactive Atlas, free sources for world economy, populations / peoples, languages and other thinks arround our world! Thank you! --202.88.129.254 11:14, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; this is an excellent idea. There are 2 problems, however:
1. Speed. Wikimedia servers are admittedly slow, presumably do to the great popularity of wikipediua. It would compete with Yahoo and Google, which generally responds much faster.
2. How would you edit a map? This may require writing specialized software; possible, but would require much work.
Pcu123456789 16:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
3. Would like to see maps on Wiki. I think it would be a good idea but will take A LOT OF TIME!!!! VZDSL 03:08, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cooperation with Google?

Can you not cooperate with Google for this project? --200.237.79.194 15:24, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikicorpus

  • Link to request on mailing list:

(none)

  • Naming suggestions:

Wikicorpus

  • Domain name:

en.wikicorpus.org<---for English

zh.wikicorpus.org<---for Chinese(suggestion)

  • Scope:

An open corpus for people to write their own essay, but the essays must not use any filthy language; People can write some novel, stort composition or poem in there, and other people can discuss the essays in the discussion.

  • Details:

Wikicorpus

  • Proposer: User:Matin Luther
  • Date:20/5/2006
  • People interested joining:
  • Comments:
    • This project would do well in a private wiki; but I don't think it's appropriate for Wikimedia, as its concept does not match the notions of "factuality" and "neutrality" that is withheld in all other Wikimedia projects. Also, would you care to explain where the name Wikicorpus comes from? -- tonync (talk) (?) 13:00, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • This is inappropriate to wipe out "vulgar language" in literature, as literature pieces contain vulgar in many occasions, such as A Thousand and One Nights, Decameron or Tropic of Cancer. If vulgar language is a must to be kicked out, this place for literature and creation is not a place for literature at all.Father vice 02:29, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I see lots of vandalism problems... Speaking of that, why would this need to be a wiki? A forum-type site would fill the requirements far better. Alx xlA 20:17, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiBrain

  • Naming suggestions: WikiBrain
  • Scope: This would basically be like Wikipedia- a communal brain, a pool of knowledge and wisdom- but this Wiki would be a place for all that knowledge and wisdom that's a.) not good enough for Wikipedia ('List of Pickup Lines') and b.) not verifiable enough for Wikipedia; it would contain opinions often (not the same as Wikiopinions proposed above), and debatable material, so users of this site would have to be able to not freak out about biased knowledge/wisdom.
  • Details: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiBrain
  • Proposer: I am user:andrewdt85, email: andrewdt85@hotmail.com
  • Date: 5/26/06
  • People interested in joining:

WikiCitizens

Link to request on mailing list
(none)
Naming suggestions
WikiCitizens
Domain name
wikicitizens.org
Scope
WikiCitizens will serve as a forum for accessing information on all socio-political issues. WikiCitizens is meant to make people aware of what the important, current issues are in their communities, and how their fellow citizens are responding to them.
Details
wikicitizens
Proposer
E.J. Masicampo
Demo site
demo has been proposed at wikia.com
Date
June 5th, 2006
People interested in joining
  • E.J. Masicampo

PermaWiki

Link to request on mailing list
N/A
Naming suggestions
permaWiki, wikiranking
Domain name
N/A, may work as filter on wikipedia.org
Scope
A user maintained ranking of wiki pages for automatically condensing wiki or extracting important sub-parts.
Details

This really was a question on Meta:Babel, but got deleted there in an cleanup task without being answered. I hope that wasn't because this is uninteresting or because I'm a non-member.

I propose a tag or other means to mark wiki pages maually as more "important" than other pages.

Maybe something like this exists already, but I don't know of it.

Benefit: One could easily extract the most "important" sub-part of a wiki and thereby publish e.g. a book, CD, DVD edition without laboriously selecting the candidate pages each time a release is needed. The selection of pages would become an implicit part of the authoring of pages.
Proposed method
By using the already existing tag mechanism and an offline application reading the wiki database.

The tag could look as follows (assuming the current page is considered more important than OtherPage:

MoreImportantThan OtherPage

or simply

[[>OtherPage]]

If enough of these ranking hints are present a script could accumulate them and derive a total order from the graph implied by this relation.

But even if only a few pages are marked, these pages could be extracted and dated among themselves.

The algorithm doing the ranking has to be somewhat more robust than a simple total order extractor Of course, because users will likely provide some inconsistent marks. But these could be resolved by e.g. considering inconsistent marks as indications or more or less equal importance.

Why?/My motivation
I'd like to have a durable printed edition of wikipedia which could weather some adversities and provide valuable advice and information in an emergency (e.g. no power, no internet, disconnected from the outside world).
Proposer
C2:GunnarZarncke (I didn't register yet; hope that doesn't discredit me)
Date
12 June 2006
People interested in joining
Comments

Talk:Permawiki

Medical dictionary wiki

  • Link to request on mailing list: [5]
  • Naming suggestions: WikiMD seems to be taken, so WikiMed or WikiMedicine sound like options.
  • Domain name: en.wikimed.org, en.wikimedicine.org, etc. (neither registered)
  • Scope: A wiki dedicated to providing medical information to the public under a copyleft license.
  • Details: See Medical dictionary wiki — read the entire thing before commenting on it.
  • Proposer: Messedrocker
  • Date: June 17, 2006
  • People interested joining: List maintained at Medical dictionary wiki#Supporters


WikiTimeLine

  • Link to request on mailing list: None
  • Naming suggestions: WikiTimeLine.
  • Domain name: none.
  • Scope: A relational timeline database for history facts of any kind.
  • Details: See WikiTimeLine
  • Proposer: Julian Rodriguez Orihuela
  • Date: April 2006
  • People interested joining: myself

Aramaic/Syriac Wiktionary

I propose that the should be a new wiktionary intended for aramaic/syriac speakers. I propose that it be titled "syr.wiktionary.org". This would be a good resource for Chaldeans, Assyrians, Maronites, other Syriac speaking people. I do speak the language, know its spellings, and I wish to administate this webpage to prevent false definitions of words or mispelled words. I need to know how to establish this wiktionary and to change the fonts used within it. I am Makkow makkow and i would greatly appreciate the help. Thank you!

Good idea, but move it to Requests for new languages. Dbmag9 20:17, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wiktionary Word of The Day

Wiktionary has a fully-functional Word of the day feature, and we think it may be a nice idea to include this Word of The Day into the meta newsletter, as Wikipedia, Wikiquote and Wikicommons (AFAIK, I've not read the newsletter before) already contribute to it. Where can I go about suggesting this? Any questions, buzz me on any of my talk pages, or have a word at Wiktionary:Wiktionary talk:Word of the day or even Wiktionary:Wiktionary:Beer Parlour. All the WOTDs have an audio file on them, and are correctly formatted. --Dangherous 20:01, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimasticon

A wiki that explains the etymology and distribution of names (of all kinds) --89.56.178.134 18:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal for Malay Star Wars Wiki

Hi, I m Emrrans from Malay Wikipedia. As a fan of Star Wars, I wish to have a Malay Star Wars Wiki. Can anybody tell me where to go and what to do to have a creation of Malay Version of Star Wars Wiki??— Emrrans 16:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Get webspace, install Wikimedia, and off you go.

free public interest advertising "example:Red Cross"

It's not exactly a project,but i don't now wher to put it.My asumtion is that wikipedia's goal is to beter the world.It's alredy in the top thing sites,in the internet,look at the revenues from advertising of google.So thers great value,in that sence ,in wikipedia.No,i don't propose anoying spams of,have a peanes inlargement,pop ups,or something like that.I propose ,to give advertisment posibiliteas,to none profit,general interest entities,tsunami like releaf programes,Boinc,red cros , care ,linux and whatever you can think of.All this free of charge,so that,is actially a donation of wikipedia to thiese programmes. In a non desruptive maner to the readers,by let them deactivate them if they wich,by a simple clic(only on time),in the preferences for surfing on the wiki.We all,now how ball braking spam is.The prosses of selection,i guess whould be something similar to the prosses of editing articles,in a decentrilized way,to minimise spamers.I mean advertising of contente,that peopol chould not have problem with(save the planet thing).If you freak out,consider,that my atentions are noble,insted of regecting try to propose,something constructive.In a sence,this is alredy hapening,whith the donation,pleas of wikifondation.(and sory for the spelling)>none registered user "chiken".

I suggest moving it to the talk page (Talk:Proposals for new projects). On the idea, I think that it would become very hard to decide what is public-interest and what isn't. Also - how would it be maintained? How would we ensure that people do not vandalise things? Interesting ideas, though. Daniel (‽) Check out Wikiscope! 07:44, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
hard to decide,only what is concesual,for example the red cross ,do you now many how will doute this? maintained well i was thinking a similar mecanisme then with the articles,the comunity desides on concensus what goes in(we do decide to deleate articles),and then is implemented by admins,not open edit like articles,because yes it whould be a mess with vandals(and bots).Like i said,do you imagine the potential value in advertising of wikipedia,it whould be nice if things that whould never had that kink of finacial resources to get coca cola scale of advertising(again,the readers schould have the fredom to block them,don't do in to spam),

twexter wiki

http://twext.cc/dev/summer-of-code.html proposes open software enabling translators to easily format bilingual text to help us learn languages. Interface enables users to easily create "twext" translations and to add new languages.

System promises to build bridges between a wide variety of languages; especially useful with songs, pithy quotes, proverbs, sayings, poems, etc.. System could integrate with variety of softwares, including multilingual Wikis..

http://twext.cc/license is currently GPL/CCL, with flexibility to host variable licenses by permission.

Twext language trading system subscribes neither to theory of grammar study (boring), nor to philosophy of "immersion" (stressful), but rather to Stephen Krashen's theory of "Comprehensible Input" http://www.sk.com.br/sk-krash.html

ONE LAPTOP PER CHILD initiative expressed interest in mentoring twexter development for Google Summer of Code 2006. Jim Gettys was interested in Alexander Gelbukh as the active mentor for the project. Unfortunately, students didn't have enough time to produce qualified applications. http://wiki.laptop.org/index.php/OLPC_Google_Summer_of_Code#twexter_language_learning_interface

ALEXANDER GELBUKH http://www.gelbukh.com/ has expressed a keen interest in mentoring development of the twexter language learning interface for inclusion in Google's Summer of Code for 2007, and will ideally convince students to begin development in the academic year of 2006-2007.

http://twext.cc/lucha-libre/lucha-libre1.pdf challenges computer science students in México and around the world to deliver a lean version of twexter, potentially useful to millions of language learners around the world.

a WIKI INTERFACE for twexter will enable enable internet users to easily translate and share ideas and free language instruction services.. the lean specification at http://twext.cc/dev/index.html may be relatively easy to integrate with various versions of wiki softwares


Process Wiki

A wiki devoted to explaining processes and how to's, for example instructions for joinery or metalworking or cooking ect. could include everthing from photoshop tutorials to instructions on how to upgrade your 54 chevy's drum brakes to disk brakes.

Isn't this basically the scope of Wikibooks, but with a bit more variety? Daniel (‽) Check out Wikiscope! 19:45, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

US Cities in in French-language Wikipedia

A bot is currently needed to create articles on US Towns and counties on foreign language wikis. Much of North America is absent from these wikis. Policy has already been adopted in order to counter eurocentric and francocentric editing. ADM

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Proposals_for_new_projects&oldid=390608"