Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2011-09-19/Sister projects

Discuss this story

I have had nothing but unpleasant expediences with TechEssentials, and find several members of their staff, including their leadership, both unethical and untrustworthy. I have witnessed firsthand several members of TE interfering in an ArbCom investigation, and been threatened by one of them over the IRC. While I wish OpenGlobe itself success, I find their choice of hosts to be distressing, and I personally will not create an OpenGlobe account because the thought of TE staff having access to my personal information would keep me up at night. Sven Manguard Wha? 09:09, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like OpenGlobe has followed Jimmy Wales advice in part. See: Wikipedia:Advertisements#Wikiversity, Wikinews, etc. as semi-for-profit Benefit Corporations using ads. I see that OpenGlobe has ads. I don't see a problem with that if OpenGlobe is either non-profit or a Benefit Corporation in structure. They now have the independence, and maybe the funds, to do some more things. --Timeshifter (talk) 09:51, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the record: TechEssentials is currently an unregistered nonprofit organization. — Kudu ^~I/O~ 21:57, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is some discussion here:

http://theopenglobe.org/wiki/Talk:Main_Page#OpenGlobe_organizational_structure --Timeshifter (talk) 06:41, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to do an article on Wikinews once. It was there, and then it was gone. Not sure what happened, but I think they have rules kinda like DYK mixed with FA, which isn't easy for newbies. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) 04:23, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps this needed to be done to draw attention to the sister projects. But Wikipedia has demonstrated that "only one will remain"; and a small project splitting just changes "tiny" to "invisible". I wish those project the best, but I will be surprised if they gain any significant amount of visibility on the web. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 16:38, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are some popular sites using MediaWiki software (the wiki software used by Wikipedia). Wikia is very popular. Wikitravel is doing alright. Also, WikiLeaks and WikiHow. See Category:MediaWiki websites. Few sites though, whether Mediawiki-based or not, will ever be as popular as Wikipedia. Wikipedia is one of the top ten sites on the web as far as page views are concerned. --Timeshifter (talk) 10:04, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]