Wikimedia

86 readers
1 users here now

Wiki-pedia, -tionary, -source, -books, -quote, commons, -versity, -voyage, -news, -data, -species.

Civility is aggressively enforced: do not be rude, troll-y, flame-bait-y, etc. If someone else is, please report, block as necessary, and move on.

Comments that cannot reasonably lead to discussion or which have no analysis ("first!", "lol", [string of emojis]) will be deleted. Please do not post them.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
koavf@lemmy.ml
listing: all - local
1
2
Fine-tuned LLMs Know More, Hallucinate Less with Few-Shot Sequence-to-Sequence Semantic Parsing over Wikidata (arxiv.org)
submitted 1 year ago by ray@lemmy.ml to c/wikimedia@lemmy.ml
0 comments fedilink
2
1
Russia has launched its own version of Wikipedia, called Ruwiki, which is notably more sympathetic to Putin (www.msn.com)
submitted 1 year ago by koavf@lemmy.ml to c/wikimedia@lemmy.ml
0 comments fedilink
 
 

A Kremlin-compliant version of Wikipedia, Ruwiki, has launched in Russia. Its founder, a former longtime editor at Russian Wikipedia, says it will follow strict Russian media laws. It's currently remarkably quiet on the Ukraine war, Prigozhin's mutiny, and criticism of Putin.

3
4
awesome-wikipedia (github.com)
submitted 3 years ago by leanleft@lemmy.ml to c/wikimedia@lemmy.ml
0 comments fedilink
 
 

awesome list

4
1
How can we fix Wikipedia? (lemmy.ml)
submitted 3 years ago by SnowC0de@lemmy.ml to c/wikimedia@lemmy.ml
0 comments fedilink
 
 

I LOVE Wikipedia, I think it's one of the best websites of the internet.

But the fact is that Wikipedia has many flaws:

  • Editing became very hard on Wikipedia based on the amount of rules to respect
  • Wikipedia is biased, many cultures and minorities are not well represented among editors and pages.
  • Wikipedia is a dependence, I can't imagine Wikipedia disappear, I think it already changed the way people see knowledge, not as something fixed anymore, but as something dynamic that changes and evolve.
  • Wikipedia 'sources admission' are also very... Weird. Because you can be a professional in a special field, it doesn't mean your contribution will be accepted, just because your source is not coming from a 'reliable source', even if YOU are this reliable source.

There are other problems as well, but I think those are the most important ones.

What do you think about it? If you could change anything or everything to Wikipedia, what would you do?