Asklemmy

43941 readers

541 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!

Open-ended question
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.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

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

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

What would be a good name for a federated Wikipedia? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by nutomic@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

91 comments fedilink hide all child comments

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] fishos@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago (3 children)

So, you STILL HAVENT ANSWERED MY QUESTION.

What part of wikipedias code or implementation is the problem? And how will the fediverse solve this?

IF dude is corrupt, what's to stop the next fediwiki from being corrupt too? After all, since it's federated, if I don't like your "facts", I can just defederate and spread my own "facts".

So maybe do some reading of your own and answer my question. What's wrong with the Wikipedia CODE that federated CODE will solve and how? Otherwise all you're really advocating for is starting your own Wikipedia, and no one is stopping you.

This is just "old thing + new buzzword".

[–] nix@merv.news 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Why are you so heated about this? Wikis are good, decentralized yet compatible services are good. This won’t destroy Wikipedia. you can just ignore it if you don’t want to use it?

[–] fishos@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago

I'm not heated. Just sick of people attaching whatever new buzzword is around to something with no thought beyond that. That's all this is. Just a rehash of blockchain and NFT woo woo.

[–] nutomic@lemmy.ml 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I bet a year ago you would have said the exact same things about Lemmy, and yet here you are.

[–] fishos@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I understand the difference between a centralized and decentralized service. I WANT Wikipedia to be centralized. I've said that since the beginning. Objective truth has no business being splintered up.

[–] nutomic@lemmy.ml 4 points 11 months ago

[–] dessalines@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

What’s wrong with the Wikipedia CODE that federated CODE will solve and how?

Wikipedia is centralized, and doesn't allow collaboration by self-hosted servers. Activitypub allows this. You seem to not understand the point of the site you're using right now.

[–] fishos@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

I understand the point. I also know that we're currently defederated from hexbear and a few others. So in effect, there is less openness currently in Lemmy than on Wikipedia. How exactly is being able to do that.going to give us objective truth and not just 500 echo chambers?