Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Aussie Tech-Focused Wiki Launched

Posted by timothy on from the history-is-written-by-the-koala dept.

daria42 writes "Wikipedia's great for some things — like looking up the in-depth history of 4chan, for example — but not great for others, such as finding out the micro-history of the technology sector in certain countries. That's why Australian technology publication Delimiter has launched a public wiki site purely focused on the Australian technology sector — its personalities, issues, companies, and events. Already the site has better coverage of some areas than Wikipedia, leading to the question of whether more such small wikis should be created for certain verticals."

8 of 155 comments (clear)

  1. Abstract says it all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wikipedia's great for some things — like looking up the in-depth history of 4chan

    That is what is wrong with Wikipedia.

    1. Re:Abstract says it all by eclectro · · Score: 5, Funny

      That is what is wron^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H

      There, I deleted it for ya.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  2. Put the word "Wikipedia" in quotes like me... by Qubit · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Aussie Tech-Focused Wikipedia Launched

    No, it wasn't. Some business in Australia unconnected with the Wikimedia crowd decided to put up their own wiki (running MediaWiki, like half of the other wikis out there). Good for them.

    Why didn't Slashdot cover it when Penny Arcade got their own Wikipedia ? Oh wait, it was because that didn't happen, the same way Australia didn't get their own Wikipedia for technology.

    Anyhow, if someone's going to give the Land Down Under their own honest-to-goodness Wikipedia wiki, I think it should be about ways to get rid of invasive species. Any Aussies here? You've got what: rabbits, poisonous toads, some kind of insect, and.... what else?

    --

    coding is life /* the rest is */
    1. Re:Put the word "Wikipedia" in quotes like me... by FiloEleven · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think it should be about ways to get rid of invasive species. Any Aussies here? You've got what: rabbits, poisonous toads, some kind of insect, and.... what else?

      New Zealanders. ;)

      --
      Your brain is not a computer.
  3. Re:Advantage? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It does seem curious. In wonder if they ran up against some faction of US-centric "notability nazis" on wikipedia(in which case starting their own wiki is probably the most logical response) or whether they made the(arguably stupid) move of looking at wikipedia, noting that it didn't have what they wanted, and then making their own.

    Distinct wikis are quite sensible when dealing with matters that aren't within Wikipedia's area of interest(the dedicated Star Wars and Star Trek wikis, among others, would be a bit much shoehorned in to wikipedia proper, for instance). In this case, though, the Australian tech industry would seem to be as logical a candidate for entry into standard Wikipedia as any other country's, if perhaps understandably less heavily contributed.

    Assuming that the license isn't something totally off the wall, somebody could probably do a more or less automatic mass import; but it still seems sort of pointless.

  4. WTF are you on about? by the_raptor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wikipedia doesn't want full depth coverage of specific areas. Once they wanted to contain the "sum of human knowledge" (including catch rates for pokemon) but these days they want to be an online encyclopaedia based on reputable sources. They encourage you to go off and make your own wiki if you want to have deep coverage of a particular area.

    For example the article on 4chan contains superficial background information. There is another entire wiki dedicated to the full history of 4chan and the memes it generates. The wikipedia article focuses on Project Chanology and /b/ because that is probably what got 4chan the most press coverage (which is what wikipedia admins like to base articles on, but hardly covers all knowledge of a subject).

    Wikipedia wants you to write encyclopedia articles. They don't just want an infodump of "non-encyclopaedic" information. If you do the latter they will tell you to take you "non-notable fancruft" to another wiki.

    --

    ========
    CINC, 4th Penguin Legion
  5. I want a sum-of-all-knowledge-opedia. by mirix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I want a wiki that contains a coredump of all human knowledge, notable or not. I'd get stuck in even worse wikiloops.

    You know about some obscure film that was a knockoff of batman produced by 2 Chileans and a Russian in Azerbaijan in 1974?
    BRING IT ON. I want to know the life story of the three producer/director/actors as well. What the name of their third cat was. What brand of cigarettes they smoked. Everything is notable.

    --
    Sent from my PDP-11
  6. Already done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Surely Whirlpool's wiki is an 'Aussie tech-focused wikipedia', and it's already got thousands of mature articles, e.g.

    A series of articles on working in IT industry in Australia:
    http://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/?tag=it_telco

    A comprehensive guide to PC parts, prices and specs:
    http://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/?tag=rmp_sg_whirlpoolpcs