TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Rogue editors started a competing Wikipedia that's only about roads

149 点作者 cainxinth大约 1 年前

21 条评论

bloopernova大约 1 年前
Reminds me of Everything2. It started as a freeform text linking site, where nodes (pages) could be linked just like a wiki these days. It was written by some of the slashdot crew, back around 2000. The site grew and attracted a fun crowd who really liked the freeform wiki-like interface. Unfortunately some of the admins wanted to compete with Wikipedia, so the fun, frivolous stuff was discouraged over purely factual nodes. This meant that some people stopped contributing. I left around that time.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;everything2.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;everything2.com&#x2F;</a><p>Huh it&#x27;s still going! It must be 25 years old now, not a bad achievement.
评论 #39576742 未加载
评论 #39574928 未加载
评论 #39574885 未加载
yreg大约 1 年前
This is the system working as intended. It&#x27;s great that they are putting their original research on AARoads. Wikipedia can quote the noteworthy parts.
评论 #39576221 未加载
评论 #39576979 未加载
Waterluvian大约 1 年前
If anyone wants to produce digital work about anything, there should be a home for that. Perhaps it doesn’t belong in Wikipedia, but maybe there’s like a “Wikipedia Open” sibling website that clearly communicates a lower standard of quality, relevance, curation, but generally ignores those requirements. Where I can write up my grandma’s cookie recipe without having to manage my own website.<p>“I think this is relevant. Here you go, world. Do with it what you may.”
评论 #39574471 未加载
评论 #39574735 未加载
评论 #39575527 未加载
RheingoldRiver大约 1 年前
I mean...this is precisely what&#x27;s supposed to happen when you have a niche interest? And this is a better situation for them anyway because now they can use some structured data extension (SMW, Cargo,* WikiBase, DPL) specifically tailored to their needs and create a lot more advanced querying&#x2F;filtering features that are super usable by the average person rather than requiring you to know SPARQL. Wikipedia doesn&#x27;t support SMW or Cargo (for good reason) but on specific-subject wikis that aren&#x27;t literally the scale of Wikipedia one of these is pretty much a must-have if the admins are tech-savvy enough to make good use of them. (My recommendation is Cargo but either can work)<p>*no relationship to the Rust package manager, it&#x27;s a SQL wrapper for MediaWiki<p>I would say the headline here if anything is, &quot;WikiMedia doesn&#x27;t support niche-interest wikis that run alongside Wikipedia&quot; and instead make you either self-host or use a farm (Fandom, Miraheze, Wiki.gg, etc).
评论 #39577304 未加载
ginko大约 1 年前
I still think Wikipedia&#x27;s focus on significance was a historic mistake. At the very least there should have been an &quot;extended&quot; Wikipedia+ that strived to include all human knowledge no matter how trivial.<p>Not having this meant for-profit companies like Wikia (now fandom.com) could take over much of that space, pervasive tracking and ads included.
评论 #39575481 未加载
KTibow大约 1 年前
I find Wikipedia&#x27;s frontend more enjoyable than AARoads. It&#x27;s understandable as the community of editors probably wasn&#x27;t as technical as some other communities, but it feels a bit slow, there&#x27;s no search, and there are a number of broken links.
评论 #39576108 未加载
评论 #39576969 未加载
nemomarx大约 1 年前
We already see this with niche things like gaming fandom details (every pokemon used to have a wiki page for a bit, but now that&#x27;s all properly handled by Bulbapedia) so I wonder why we haven&#x27;t seen it for more serious topics before? Math, Engineering, CS could all benefit from a good wiki, I&#x27;d think.
评论 #39574520 未加载
评论 #39574807 未加载
评论 #39574750 未加载
评论 #39574839 未加载
评论 #39574647 未加载
评论 #39574789 未加载
评论 #39574696 未加载
评论 #39575129 未加载
评论 #39574723 未加载
评论 #39576040 未加载
epivosism大约 1 年前
I recently have been thinking about UGC site in general, and it seems like they generally go two ways:<p>1. Allow most legal content to be uploaded and control distribution with algos<p>YouTube, Roblox, Twitter, Tinder, Flickr, Insta, FB, TikTok.<p>This lets users practice and test things without risk to their work or account.<p>2. Sites that try to &quot;keep the db clean&quot; by nuking stuff they think is &quot;bad&quot; by some criteria.<p>Sites like this: Wikipedia, most big subreddits<p>Type 2 sites can be unsustainable because they tend to make new users feel judged, and don&#x27;t give them the chance to iterate and improve their work until it&#x27;s more ready to be shared and useful to a broader audience. You just find your content nuked, or removed from the subreddit, or downvoted a ton, often with a dismissive or aggressive comment. This is NOT the way to grow and survive as a company over a long period of time<p>Obviously, there is no necessity to keep the db full of only high quality items. As the scope and number of niches a site covers, it&#x27;s not possible to maintain that. On the other hand, using algos lets you do interactive tests with content, directly testing against various audiences to see if they like it, without having to do editorial work yourself.<p>Of course, there has to be some limit - articles for every pokemon, or every version of every pokemon, etc at some point it does get too far. The thing for me is coming in and seeing your content completely deleted.
评论 #39577172 未加载
评论 #39576573 未加载
评论 #39575361 未加载
评论 #39595629 未加载
评论 #39576092 未加载
arjie大约 1 年前
This is a great idea, I think. Mediawiki is very good about allowing multiple sites and since interwiki links are bundled in you can just link Wikipedia pages like they’re local to the wiki.<p>I actually use Mediawiki for my blog.
racked大约 1 年前
Dutch speakers have enjoyed such a wiki for a long time already: WegenWiki <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wegenwiki.nl&#x2F;Hoofdpagina" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.wegenwiki.nl&#x2F;Hoofdpagina</a><p>The UK&#x27;s got SABRE: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.sabre-roads.org.uk&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;index.php?title=Main_Page" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.sabre-roads.org.uk&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;index.php?title=Main_Pag...</a>
ghaff大约 1 年前
I mean, it makes sense. There&#x27;s an incredible rabbit&#x27;s hole of detail on certain topics that probably doesn&#x27;t belong on what purports to be a general purpose encyclopedia. Honestly a lot of mathematics etc. that is more or less worthless to people who aren&#x27;t already experts in the area could probably use their own space too.
评论 #39574519 未加载
评论 #39574451 未加载
Macha大约 1 年前
Their name might get them in trouble with the AA, a UK and Ireland insurance company who has products such as AA Roadwatch.<p>Other than that potential future problem, this is pretty much the system working as intended, and they&#x27;re following the path led by sites such as Wookiepedia.
评论 #39576230 未加载
评论 #39576942 未加载
评论 #39576599 未加载
starkparker大约 1 年前
I&#x27;ll point back to a previous comment where AARoads came up: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=37957549">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=37957549</a><p>It&#x27;s very G&#x2F;O Media-clickbaity to call this &quot;going rogue&quot;. The editors aren&#x27;t subverting anything.<p>This isn&#x27;t the first and won&#x27;t be the last fork of a Wikipedia community over the increasingly tightened, deletionism-favoring screws of notability and sourcing policies. The only people &quot;going rogue&quot; are the organized groups on Wikipedia moving across wildly different topics in order to hammer them all into one uniform shape that serves nobody as well as it had or could.<p>EDIT: The Gizmodo article doesn&#x27;t link to the US Roads group&#x27;s own rationale for leaving, which fills in some gaps from the rather low-content article. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Wikipedia:WikiProject_U.S._Roads&#x2F;Newsletter&#x2F;Issues&#x2F;Volume10&#x2F;Issue01" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Wikipedia:WikiProject_U.S._Roa...</a><p>&gt; Since August 2022, our project has faced several external challenges that made several members question the viability of editing on Wikipedia in ways that Covid-19 didn&#x27;t. The notability of highway articles in general became a focus of New Page Patrollers. Additionally, the ability to continue using maps as sources was called into question. Since then, we initiated an RfC to clarify if there was support for long-standing citation practices, namely could we continue to cite maps as sources in our articles? The results of that RfC were mixed. While chatting amongst ourselves online, it became clear that continuing to hope that another RfC or deletion discussion would go our way was an exercise in futility. In the background to all of this, other categories of articles were on the chopping block. First it was articles on Olympic athletes, and then it was cricket and area code articles.
评论 #39577191 未加载
_aleph2c_大约 1 年前
If you think this is interesting, see what happens when you try and edit the page of Susan Gerbic; the leader of the Guerilla Skeptics. She runs a gang of over 150 Wikipedia members who have taken over 1500+ articles. They are like the deletionist described in the article, but operate as an open conspiracy advancing an atheist-materialist point of view. They actively recruit new members, run them through extensive training about the Wikipedia ecosystem and how to dominate it as a team.
评论 #39576507 未加载
tomcam大约 1 年前
I’m getting on in years and am deeply disappointed I was never characterized as a rogue in public
layer8大约 1 年前
Just to be pedantic: They started a separate wiki (that isn’t really in competition with Wikipedia), not a “competing Wikipedia” (which is the name of a specific wiki).
评论 #39574909 未加载
评论 #39575087 未加载
Sharlin大约 1 年前
Isn’t &quot;a competing Wikipedia that’s only about X&quot; just called… a wiki?
评论 #39576273 未加载
thih9大约 1 年前
The title seems a stretch; an encyclopedia about roads is hardly competing with Wikipedia. In fact that was the point, Wikipedia didn’t want that content in the first place.
评论 #39576916 未加载
ern大约 1 年前
Wikipedia seems to have a growing contingent of editors from countries like India, the Phillipines and Sri Lanka who edit topics that seemingly have little to do with those countries.<p>To establish their credentials, they get involved in arcane areas like Articles for Deletion or other areas that you’d expect would be of more interest to experienced editors.<p>Now everyone has the right to edit anything on Wikipedia, but it’s starting to feel like paid editors have gained a foothold.
评论 #39576644 未加载
thih9大约 1 年前
What’s the point of not allowing that content on Wikipedia? I get that some topics are less important or have lower quality sources, but the cost of adding them seems relatively low. Personally I would enjoy seeing all kinds of fandom articles on Wikipedia, roads included.
评论 #39576956 未加载
评论 #39576915 未加载
评论 #39576909 未加载
quickthrower2大约 1 年前
Is it reasonable to expect Wikipedia to index all the things? A road that has never been written about. Openstreetmap is a seperate entity, and that makes perfect sense. So is Github. Do you need an article for every file in the Linux kernel too?
评论 #39576640 未加载