Talk:Wiki

This is not the page to post new encyclopedia content to or to ask general questions!
	This page is only for discussion of the article "Wiki" itself. You are probably looking for one of the following pages: How to create a page - How to create a new Wikipedia article page Help desk - For questions about Wikipedia and editing. Reference desk - For questions on factual topics (for example: Who is the pope?) Please reread Wikipedia:Questions for more details.

the comparison picture

i believe we should not use a screenshot of wikipedia as a citation but as a noncitation. that would be okay on a wiki, but not on an encyclopedia or in mexico.

currently the picture is of wikipedia's "vitamin c" article. unless there are any valid philosophical disagreements, i will take the inwanted inferior liberty of changing it to something from another wiki on tuesday.

--Harlequence 14:19, 7 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Harlequence (talk • contribs)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Wiki/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Just a few things that need to be fixed before this is a GA:

• Fewer lists
  • Could you specify which lists strike you as problematic? Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} 20:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
    • Looks OK to me now. -- Beland (talk) 17:10, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
• Fewer one-sentence paragraphs
  • Again, which in particular strike you as problematic? Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} 20:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
• History doesn't mention Wikipedia. Maybe I am vain but I think this is important?
  • History of wikis is the main article and includes detail about the history of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is also mentioned (and wikilinked) in the lead and "Communities" section of this article. Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} 20:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
    • I agree; Wikipedia is probably the most important thing that has ever happened to wikis, other than their invention. I added a quick mention to that paragraph. -- Beland (talk) 15:50, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Shii (tock) 16:38, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Please see my responses above. Thank you for your time! Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} 20:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

The "Characteristics" list could be written in non-list form. Ditto with "research communities". All one-sentence paragraphs are frowned upon unless necessary. Shii (tock) 03:46, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to close this since there have been no further responses. Shii (tock) 23:28, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

• Alignment of the rows within the table, giving examples of MediaWiki syntax vs Equivalent HTML and it's Rendered output would give greater clarity — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.106.149.130 (talk) 07:31, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

HEEHOI CHIBADOA! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.215.206.155 (talk) 01:13, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Semi-protection?

Rohit Kumar wants the Jewish community to provide protection for him. He wants to join the Reform and Conservative Synagogues in Atlanta, GA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.122.99.157 (talk) 14:33, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Why is this article semi-protected? Whatever the reason, surly this insanely ironic fact is worthy of mention in the 'Trust and security' section as a prime example of the problems with wiki's (talk) 20:48, 21 July 2009 (UTC)neil

In Reference [4] of the entry for "Wiki," it is noted that "wiki" is Hawaiian for "fast." More to the point, "wiki" is Hawaiian for "quick." Actually, "wiki" is a borrowed word in Hawaiian. It is a Hawaiianized pronunciation of the English work "quick." Doubling a word in Hawaiian intensifies it; therefore, "nui" is "big," and "nuinui" is "huge," and "wiki" is "quick," and "wikiwiki" is "Quick! Quick!" or "very quickly!" Hleatherse (talk) 15:53, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Move

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Result was not moved. I don't think it's a stretch to say this hasn't a SNOWBALL's chance. --Cybercobra (talk) 22:55, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

---

Wiki → Wiki website — Wiki only means fast in the hawaiian language, "wiki" is not mentioned in the dictionary. The word is thus unreferenced and website should be added to give it some meaning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.182.165.108 (talk) 14:29, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Wiki has entered the English language by now.—greenrd (talk) 14:35, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Oppose. This is the common name for the topic. And, I hasten to point out, it is mentioned in the dictionary: [1]. Powers ^T 17:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Oppose. The word is not unreferenced – see the references section. What the word means in Hawaiian is irrelevant, since we're only interested in what it means in English. Also, as pointed out above, "wiki" is mentioned in the dictionary. Jafeluv (talk) 18:43, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Oppose Wiki in English refers exclusively to the website, and we already mention the Hawaiian word it's based on. --Cybercobra (talk) 20:07, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Oppose — WP:COMMONNAME
— V = I * R (talk) 22:10, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Definition is recursive

The sentence that defines this term ("Wiki") defines it using by using itself. I'm not convinced this makes the article useful. Using a term to define itself has been identified as a "no-no" in each language and class where I've been a student, for -- a long time.

I intend to change it as soon as I find a defnition that is useful. The list of examples for describing "useful" 1) won't have "useful" in it, and 2) will allow it to be compared with, for example, "Content Management System". Kernel.package (talk) 17:26, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't see how it's recursive. It uses the term "wiki software", but then immediately goes on to say what that software allows people to do. --Cybercobra (talk) 18:07, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I can see how it could be read as ambiguous; it's not 100% clear whether a wiki is a subset of all sites running wiki software (namely, that subset that "allows the easy creation and editing of any number of interlinked Web pages..."), or if that clause refers to all web sites running wiki software. It may be better to reverse the order of the clauses: "A wiki is a website that allows the easy creation and editing of any number of interlinked web pages, powered by wiki software." Powers ^T 13:36, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Wiki

Some people call this wiki because it is quite to say wikipedia. Wikipedia is a website where you can find a lot of information and things from the past. To every person that goes to www.wikipedia.com, please do so every day of the week —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.250.155.203 (talk) 09:32, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Trustworthiness

I think the section on trustworthiness misses the point. The point it seems to make is "this should not work at all, but it kinda looks like it seems like it might, at least so far, so meh." Not exactly a ringing endorsement.

I would argue it will work, and it will be trustworthy, and that this type of system has been under test for about 4 billion years. Life evolved to the working examples that it is through random mutation and natural selection. Wikis evolve through (usually) non-random and intelligent mutation and (usually) intelligent selection based on facts. So it should not only work as well as evolution, it should work far better and far faster. Just like there are people who assume evolution will not work, there are people who will assume a Wiki will not work, and probably for the same reasons (well, other than religion) -- because it seems complicated an esoteric with so much seemingly left to freedom and chance, when in fact the wikis are constantly selected back to the facts. There may be some messiness and missteps along the way, but both systems will eventually arrive at working solutions.

I suppose, however, that at any given instant a wiki could have been vandalized and not fixed yet, so thus untrustworthy. Unlikely, but quite possible. So, perhaps the original section would be accurate, barring some technological solution. Like coloring any change that is less than 24 hours old, or not reviewed or something. Meh. Skintigh (talk) 15:12, 6 November 2009 (UTC) Baseically Wikipedia is really good for finding infomation BUT .... It can be bias to a few things because people are putting in their opinions!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.47.110.117 (talk) 16:11, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

remove Lars Aronsson quote

I suggest you remove the paragraph quote from Lars Aronsson. It is pointless, adds nothing new that hasn't just been said the line before, and is not ecyclopedia style.

Lars Aronsson, a data systems specialist, summarizes the controversy as follows: “ Most people, when they first learn about the wiki concept, assume that a Web site that can be edited by anybody would soon be rendered useless by destructive input. It sounds like offering free spray cans next to a grey concrete wall. The only likely outcome would be ugly graffiti and simple tagging, and many artistic efforts would not be long lived. Still, it seems to work very well.[7] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.244.34.116 (talk) 10:33, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

In what way is it not "e[n]cyclopedia style"? Powers ^T 15:24, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Contradictory Pronunciation Guide

The information in the first paragraph contradicts that in the third one. Unless there's objection, I'll remove the information in the third paragraph. --TippTopp (talk) 14:09, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

It would seem that.. the original Hawaiian is 'wiki'.. then a wiki is a 'wicky'.. and then wikipedia is 'wicca-pedia' for some reason. That's lazy American pronunciation for you. Giving the schwa more business... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.70.113 (talk) 03:16, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I just go by Weird Al's pronunciation from White and Nerdy. Tisane (talk) 00:12, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

MURR Everyone is cool!! Spread the love !!!! OH YH :):):):):):):):):D —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.47.110.117 (talk) 16:15, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Meanings

Wiki can also mean Wikipedia. For ex: If i type banana wiki, then i will be taken to the banana article on Wikipedia. -- User:Fdasfdsa12342 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fdsafdsa12342 (talk • contribs) 21:06, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

That's just because Wikipedia is by a far shot the most popular wiki out there. Sorafune +1 04:51, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

See WP:NOTWIKI. I would imagine a large fraction of visitors to the Wiki article arrive by mistake, since to many if not most people "Wiki" (incorrectly) means "Wikipedia" now. Even though the Wiki article has a hatnote that links to Wiki (disambiguation), which mentions the incorrect usage, it might be worth having an additional hatnote to explicitly dispel what is becoming one of the most common misuses of the term "Wiki". --Teratornis (talk) 18:31, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Most viewed

We must improve this article which is also not a good article and is the most viewed on Wikipedia with 131,383 hits per day. Please help improve this improve this article to at least good article status. --Extra999 (talk) 16:34, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

I have also posted a note the Help Desk. See here. --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 16:19, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Interesting-looking essays

• http://www.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/doi/10.1109/ICIW.2008.76
• http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1254960.1255003
• Neumann, D. L., & Hood, M. (2009) The effects of using a wiki on student engagement and learning of report writing skills in a university statistics course. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(3), 382-398. info:/
• Trentin, G. (2009) Using a wiki to evaluate individual contribution to a collaborative learning project. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(1), 43-55. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2008.00276.x [Get full-text PDF from Pubget]
• COLE, M. (2009) Using Wiki technology to support student engagement: Lessons from the trenches. Computers , 52(1), 141-146. DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.07.003 [Get full-text PDF from Pubget]
• Cronin, J. (2008) Upgrading to Web 2.0: An Experiential Project to Build a Marketing Wiki. Journal of Marketing Education, 31(1), 66-75. DOI: 10.1177/0273475308329250 [Get full-text PDF from Pubget]
• Wheeler, S., Yeomans, P., & Wheeler, D. (2008) The good, the bad and the wiki: Evaluating student-generated content for collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(6), 987-995. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00799.x [Get full-text PDF from Pubget]
• http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1497399
• http://www.editlib.org/d/28725/proceeding_28725.pdf

Tisane (talk) 18:48, 23 April 2010 (UTC) jefrey liu is gay and has a big head!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.202.51.253 (talk) 17:02, 5 May 2010 (UTC) Heyy Peoples :):):):):) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.47.110.117 (talk) 16:13, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes

This article is one of a number selected for the early stage of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.

The following request appears on that page:

Comments on the suitability of theis page for "Pending changes" would be appreciated.

Please update the Queue page as appropriate.

Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially

Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 00:38, 17 June 2010 (UTC).

Well, that seems to have made things worse with lots of annoying edits from unregistered users. Shritwod (talk) 14:23, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Martin medical Uniforme

Martin medical je specijalizovana proizvodnja koja se bavi proizvodnjom uniformi po vasim merama i zeljama. U proizvodni program spadaju medicinske uniforme,uniforme za ugostiteljstvo, za zdravstvo, za kuvare,i za sve koji nose uniforme. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.216.182.114 (talk) 15:35, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

PureTravel Writing Competition

Travel writing competition for travelers to submit their travel moment which includes activity and adventure holidays, history and culture vacations, walking, climbing and trekking trips and sports, water activities and wildlife tours. More Information: http://www.puretravel.com/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.248.51.237 (talk) 08:23, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

"what I know is"

The backronym that is allegedly described in the inaccessible Economist reference, "what I know is", at the very least should be buried somewhere else later in the article rather than being paraded in the lede as though it is -- laughably -- of paramount relevance to a discussion of the word.

The etymology of "wiki" is not exactly disputed or lost to the mists of history. We know where this word came from. It came from the Hawaiian language. A single reference wherein someone with only peripheral connections to the subject matter does not justify the inclusion of this backronym with the same prominence as the known etymology of the word.

Frankly I believe my constructive edit is being reverted merely because I have chosen to make it from an IP address rather than logging in. This "pending edits" system is quite clearly an attempt to divide anonymous users into a disregarded underclass on Wikipedia.

Will no one discuss my edit? Will I merely be reverted by a cabal of semi-automated tools with no willingness to pursue the goals of this project? Has Wikipedia really fallen this far? 72.152.0.189 (talk) 08:10, 11 July 2010 (UTC)