Wikipedia and Archive.org are two of the most fantastic projects in existence. Their contributions to humanity rival NASA imho.
this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023
274 points (99.3% liked)
[Outdated, please look at pinned post] Casual Conversation
6603 readers
1 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling
- Encourage conversation in your post
- Avoid controversial topics such as politics or societal debates
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc.
- Respect privacy: Don’t ask for or share any personal information
Related discussion-focused communities
- !actual_discussion@lemmy.ca
- !askmenover30@lemm.ee
- !dads@feddit.uk
- !letstalkaboutgames@feddit.uk
- !movies@lemm.ee
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Oh man, how could I have forgotten to mention archive.org??
My favorite thing on there is the Old Time Radio Researcher's Group who maintain a huge archive of radio shows produced between 1920 and the 1960s (and some from later years as well such as CBS Radio Mystery Theater).
I've been listening through the most well-known shows for about the last 10 years and I still haven't even listened to them all and there are dozens of other more obscure shows!
I agree. And this makes me wonder: of they both disappeared due to some catastrophic event, would it be remembered through the ages in a similar way to the destruction of the Library of Alexandria?
Wikipedia isn’t going anywhere unless most of humanity and our tech is gone. Tons of people take “backups” of it all the time. (Shout out to my fellow datahoarders). If you only get the text, it’s not very large at all.
It’ll easily fit on phones these days.
https://www.howtogeek.com/260023/how-to-download-wikipedia-for-offline-at-your-fingertips-reading/
Internet archive? Likely. It has an archive of a large portion of the beginnings of the internet, which will likely be a major historical source in the future.
Wikipedia? I’m unsure. It’s a collection of information obtained via various sources, most of which would still be extant. Not to put down the work of their project, it is very important. But it’s not impossible to replace like the way back machine.
Archive is already used as a historical source in some cases, including as the source of many citations on Wikipedia.
Are the sites with other top level domains like archive.is the same company? I've seen requests to donate to various Archive sites but I can tell if they are all the same company.
As an ex-contributor, what goes on behind the scenes is absolutely wild. If you're ever board and want something to take over your life... Start editing Wikipedia.
Also an ex-contributor; if you want to keep your respect for Wikipedia as a great source of well cited facts then do not look into the qualifications for being a cited source, once you dive into the citations of an article and see important facts having their citation be a random blog post on blogspot from 2003 it starts to feel a little like the Great and Powerful Oz.
You should be doing that anyway, always look at the sources if you care about the info.
As I generally read the science related pages, I have yet to find a bad citation, they are almost always from an accredited journal or other verified source. The Wikipedia chemistry section has saved me so much time and given me so much helpful info. The pages on genes and proteins are also usually amazing!
It depends, the reliable sources guidelines do get followed to a tee for controversial/edit warred articles
Me when I check some minor article and I notice some questionable things, go into the talk page, and observe the fireworks behind the scenes
Thank you for your service
If i found a genie, one of my 3 wishes would be that reddit was viewed like Wikipedia. It should be a non-profit. I'd gladly donate to keep the servers up. I do that for Lemmy now.
If I want to know something, I'm either looking at Wikipedia for general information, or reddit for specific. The odds that someone else has asked the same question on reddit it weirdly high. Even Google acknowledged that there search results went to shit because of the blackouts. How did we let such a wealth of knowledge get caught up in profits.
I love Wikipedia. Even if it has flaws, it's by far one of the best things we've created a humanity.
I would like to see Jimmy Wales run Twitter and Reddit clones. If there is anyone that you can trust to not turn a website into a commercial entity, it's the guy running one of the world's most visited site with no advertising.
Maybe Wikimedia can host Mastodon and Lemmy server.
Either him or the guy who runs Craigslist, with no obvious intentions of trying to wring money out his site
Isn't the wiki media foundation planning a reddit like site?
Wikipedia is one of the few online orgs that I donate to every year. Even if I can only throw a couple of bucks their way, I usually try to gift at least $20 or something.
Same here! I have a monthly donation going, and the $2 is well worth the hundreds of hours I've spent on it.
Don’t. I used to, until i found out that they have a ton of money and their begging and their pleading is a disingenuous emotional appeal to make people like me donate
This is a bad take to me. Them having a surplus of money is good. We want them to be operating as strongly as possible. Is it shitty to use an appeal to emotion like that? Absolutely. However, that shouldn't mean we all stop donating to them. For some people, the shitty appeal to emotion doesn't outweigh the importance of what wikipedia provides. Don't donate if you don't have it, but if someone still sees the value in what they do and it is easy for them to donate then they should do so. Personally, I put my money elsewhere, but discouraging people from donating at all is a weird stance to take.
The alternative is telling people that they shouldn't donate until Wikipedia is bankrupt. If you want Wikipedia to exist, that doesn't sound like a wise plan.
That site has some huge yikes material on it. They basically pride themselves on being contrarian, as well.
I'd never heard that about Wikipedia before. What sorts of things are they contrarian about?
Not Wikipedia, the unherd site they linked lol
Ahh makes much more sense! Thanks!
I don't mind contributing to a service I use pretty much daily. That seems a fair thing to do regardless of their financial state.
I've never donated, but I don't mind seeing them ask. It really is all the information in history in your pocket. That's a great thing in my book, and has never been done before ever at the scale they make possible. I see zero problems with them having money in the bank.
Can we all just take a moment to stop and appreciate just how much content Wikipedia delivers to us completely ad-fucking-free???
Oftentimes, I find myself just skipping a search engine entirely and going straight to Wikipedia first.
The power of community driven projects! Tis' a beautiful thing.
When it first came out people ridiculed it and thought it would fail and never reach the quality of encyclopedias.
Have you heard of Obsidian? It's basically a note-taking/journaling app that allows you to link entries to other entries similar to Wikipedia. Overtime you create a wiki of your mind and experiences. It's also free and saves your files in markdown.
view more: next ›