Hello, and welcome! Wiktionary is a multiple-language (multilingual) free dictionary and thesaurus, being written collaboratively on this website. Entries are edited by anyone—records of changes are kept. We have created 330,641 articles since starting in December, 2002, and we're growing rapidly.
Ordinary people like you are very active in building this project. While you are reading this, it is likely someone is editing some entry. Already at work have been many knowledgeable people, but everybody is welcome! Contributing does not require logging in, but we'd like you to, as it facilitates the administration of this site. You can dive right in and add to, fix or create any page you like. If it pleases you, we invite you to drop in as often as you can! You can be bold, and even should be, in updating pages. You might like the "Recent Changes" page. Above all, play nice.
One of the most important things you should know is that we have borrowed from our sister project Wikipedia some cultural norms you should respect: We try not to argue pointlessly. This isn't a debate forum. After civilized and reasonable discussion, we try to reach broad consensus about what an entry should be in order to present an accurate, neutral summary of all relevant facts for future readers. We try to make the entries as unbiased as we can, meaning that definitions or descriptions, even of controversial topics, are not meant to be platforms for preaching of any kind. Bear in mind this is a dictionary, which means there are many things it is not. At any point, if you are uncomfortable changing someone else's work, and you want to add a thought (or question or comment) about an entry or other page, the place is its talk page (click on the "discussion" tab at the top or the "Discuss this page" link in the sidebar or elsewhere, depending on your preference skin). Though again, generally, we try to avoid discussion for its own sake. You can find out more about our community norms in the links listed below.
You might expect Wiktionary to be a low-quality product because it is open for everybody to edit. But, perhaps the fact it is open to everyone creates the potential for making a lot of these definitions pretty good, and ever-improving. To use a now-famous catchphrase in essence: “Given enough eyeballs, all errors are shallow. ” We tend to cater to the highest. "Lower common denominators" tend politely not to touch articles they know nothing about! We hope you have fun.
More, introductory information is on the following pages:
Monday, February 12, 2007
Technical
Wikipedia uses the MediaWiki software. It's an open-source program that is used on all Wikimedia projects, and is also widely used on other third party websites on the internet. The hardware supporting the various projects is based on almost 100 servers hosted in various hosting centers around the world. Full descriptions of the various servers are available on this meta page. For technical information about Wikipedia, you can check Technical FAQs.
Editorial quality review
As well as systems to catch and control substandard and vandalistic edits, Wikipedia also has a full style and content manual, and a variety of positive systems for continual article review and improvement. Examples of the processes involved include peer review, good article assessment, and featured articles, a rigorous review of articles which are desired to meet the highest standards and showcase Wikipedia's capability to produce high quality work.
In addition, specific types of article or fields often have their own specialized and comprehensive projects, assessment processes (such as biographical article assessment), and expert reviewers within specific subjects. Nominated articles are also frequently the subject of specific focus under projects such as the Neutrality Project or covered under editorial drives by groups such as the Cleanup Taskforce.
In addition, specific types of article or fields often have their own specialized and comprehensive projects, assessment processes (such as biographical article assessment), and expert reviewers within specific subjects. Nominated articles are also frequently the subject of specific focus under projects such as the Neutrality Project or covered under editorial drives by groups such as the Cleanup Taskforce.
Handling disputes and abuse
Main articles: Wikipedia:Vandalism, Wikipedia:Dispute resolution, Wikipedia:Consensus, Wikipedia:Sock puppet, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest
Wikipedia has a rich span of methods to handle most abuses which commonly arise, which are well tested and should be relied upon.
Intentional vandalism can be reported and corrected by anyone.
Unresolved disputes between editors, whether based upon behavior, editorial approach or validity of content, can be addressed through the talk page of an article, through requesting comments from other editors or through Wikipedia's comprehensive dispute resolution process.
Abuse of user accounts, such as the creation of Internet sock puppets or solicitation of friends and other parties to enforce a non-neutral viewpoint or inappropriate consensus within a discussion, or to disrupt other Wikipedia processes in an annoying manner, are addressed through the sock puppet policy.
In addition, brand new users (until they have established themselves a bit) may at the start find that their votes are given less weight by editors in some informal polls, in order to prevent abuse of single purpose accounts.
Wikipedia has a rich span of methods to handle most abuses which commonly arise, which are well tested and should be relied upon.
Intentional vandalism can be reported and corrected by anyone.
Unresolved disputes between editors, whether based upon behavior, editorial approach or validity of content, can be addressed through the talk page of an article, through requesting comments from other editors or through Wikipedia's comprehensive dispute resolution process.
Abuse of user accounts, such as the creation of Internet sock puppets or solicitation of friends and other parties to enforce a non-neutral viewpoint or inappropriate consensus within a discussion, or to disrupt other Wikipedia processes in an annoying manner, are addressed through the sock puppet policy.
In addition, brand new users (until they have established themselves a bit) may at the start find that their votes are given less weight by editors in some informal polls, in order to prevent abuse of single purpose accounts.
Editorial administration, oversight and management
Main article: Wikipedia:Editorial oversight and control
The Wikipedia community is largely self-organising, so that anyone may build a reputation as a competent editor and become involved in any role they may choose, subject to peer approval. Individuals often will choose to become involved in specialised tasks, such as reviewing articles at others request, watching current edits for vandalism, or watching newly created articles for quality control purposes, or similar roles. Editors who find that editorial administrator responsibility would benefit their ability to help the community may ask their peers in the community for agreement to undertake such roles; a structure which enforces meritocracy and communal standards of editorship and conduct. At present around a 75-80% approval rating after enquiry, is considered the requirement for such a role, a standard which tends to ensure a high level of experience, trust and familiarity across a broad front of projects within Wikipedia.
A variety of software assisted systems and automated programs help several hundred editors to watch for problematic edits and editors. An arbitration committee sits at the top of all editorial and editor conduct disputes,[4] and its members are elected in three regularly rotated tranches by an established enquiry and decision making process in which all regular editors can equally participate.
The Wikipedia community is largely self-organising, so that anyone may build a reputation as a competent editor and become involved in any role they may choose, subject to peer approval. Individuals often will choose to become involved in specialised tasks, such as reviewing articles at others request, watching current edits for vandalism, or watching newly created articles for quality control purposes, or similar roles. Editors who find that editorial administrator responsibility would benefit their ability to help the community may ask their peers in the community for agreement to undertake such roles; a structure which enforces meritocracy and communal standards of editorship and conduct. At present around a 75-80% approval rating after enquiry, is considered the requirement for such a role, a standard which tends to ensure a high level of experience, trust and familiarity across a broad front of projects within Wikipedia.
A variety of software assisted systems and automated programs help several hundred editors to watch for problematic edits and editors. An arbitration committee sits at the top of all editorial and editor conduct disputes,[4] and its members are elected in three regularly rotated tranches by an established enquiry and decision making process in which all regular editors can equally participate.
Wikipedia content criteria
Main article: Wikipedia:Wikipedia in nine words
Wikipedia content is intended to be factual, notable, verifiable with external sources, and neutrally presented, with external sources cited.
The appropriate policies and guidelines for these are found at:
Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not summarizes what Wikipedia is, and what it is not.
Wikipedia:Neutral point of view Wikipedia's core approach, neutral unbiased article writing.
Wikipedia:No original research what is, and is not, valid information
Wikipedia:Verifiability what counts as a verifiable source and how a source can be verified
Wikipedia:Citing sources sources should be cited, and the manner of doing so.
These can be abbreviated to WP:NOT, WP:NPOV, WP:NOR, WP:V, and WP:CITE respectively.
Wikipedia content is intended to be factual, notable, verifiable with external sources, and neutrally presented, with external sources cited.
The appropriate policies and guidelines for these are found at:
Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not summarizes what Wikipedia is, and what it is not.
Wikipedia:Neutral point of view Wikipedia's core approach, neutral unbiased article writing.
Wikipedia:No original research what is, and is not, valid information
Wikipedia:Verifiability what counts as a verifiable source and how a source can be verified
Wikipedia:Citing sources sources should be cited, and the manner of doing so.
These can be abbreviated to WP:NOT, WP:NPOV, WP:NOR, WP:V, and WP:CITE respectively.
Editing Wikipedia pages
Main article, including list of common mark-up shortcuts: Wikipedia:How to edit a page
Wikipedia uses a simple yet powerful page layout to allow editors to concentrate on adding material rather than page design. These include automatic sections and subsections, automatic references and cross-references, image and table inclusion, indented and listed text, links ISBNs and math, as well as usual formatting elements and most world alphabets and common symbols. Most of these have simple formats that are deliberately very easy and intuitive.
Wikipedia has robust version and reversion controls. This means that poor quality edits or vandalism can quickly and easily be reversed or brought up to an appropriate standard by any other editors, so inexperienced editors cannot accidentally do permanent harm if they make a mistake in their editing. As there are many more editors intent upon good quality articles than any other kind, articles that are poorly edited are usually corrected rapidly.
Wikipedia uses a simple yet powerful page layout to allow editors to concentrate on adding material rather than page design. These include automatic sections and subsections, automatic references and cross-references, image and table inclusion, indented and listed text, links ISBNs and math, as well as usual formatting elements and most world alphabets and common symbols. Most of these have simple formats that are deliberately very easy and intuitive.
Wikipedia has robust version and reversion controls. This means that poor quality edits or vandalism can quickly and easily be reversed or brought up to an appropriate standard by any other editors, so inexperienced editors cannot accidentally do permanent harm if they make a mistake in their editing. As there are many more editors intent upon good quality articles than any other kind, articles that are poorly edited are usually corrected rapidly.
Contributing to Wikipedia
Main articles: Contributing to Wikipedia, First steps in editing articles, Bootcamp
Guide to fixing vandalism: Help:Reverting
Anyone can contribute to Wikipedia by clicking on the Edit this page tab in an article. Before beginning to contribute however, you should check out some handy helping tools such as the tutorial and the policies and guidelines, as well as our welcome page. It is important to realize that in contributing to Wikipedia, users are expected to be civil and neutral, respecting all points of view, and only add verifiable and factual information rather than personal views and opinions. "The five pillars of Wikipedia" cover this approach and are recommended reading before editing.
Most articles start as stubs, but after many contributions, they can become featured articles. Once you have determined that there is no article on Wikipedia on a topic you are interested in, you may want to request that the article be written (or you could even research the issue and write it yourself). Wikipedia has many on-going projects, focused on specific topic areas or tasks, which help coordinate editing. The hope of any contributor is to provide useful and accurate information to others, and the projects help coordinate efforts.
Guide to fixing vandalism: Help:Reverting
Anyone can contribute to Wikipedia by clicking on the Edit this page tab in an article. Before beginning to contribute however, you should check out some handy helping tools such as the tutorial and the policies and guidelines, as well as our welcome page. It is important to realize that in contributing to Wikipedia, users are expected to be civil and neutral, respecting all points of view, and only add verifiable and factual information rather than personal views and opinions. "The five pillars of Wikipedia" cover this approach and are recommended reading before editing.
Most articles start as stubs, but after many contributions, they can become featured articles. Once you have determined that there is no article on Wikipedia on a topic you are interested in, you may want to request that the article be written (or you could even research the issue and write it yourself). Wikipedia has many on-going projects, focused on specific topic areas or tasks, which help coordinate editing. The hope of any contributor is to provide useful and accurate information to others, and the projects help coordinate efforts.
Disclaimers
Disclaimers
General
Legal
Medical
Content
Risk
Main article and text of disclaimers: Wikipedia:Disclaimers.
Wikipedia disclaimers apply to all pages on Wikipedia.
Wikipedia, in common with many websites, makes its disclaimers highly visible, a practice which at times has led to commentators citing these in order to support a view that Wikipedia is unreliable. A selection of similar disclaimers from places which are often regarded as reliable (including sources such as Encyclopædia Britannica, Associated Press, and the Oxford English Dictionary) can be read and compared at Non-Wikipedia disclaimers. Wikipedia content advisories can also be found here.
General
Legal
Medical
Content
Risk
Main article and text of disclaimers: Wikipedia:Disclaimers.
Wikipedia disclaimers apply to all pages on Wikipedia.
Wikipedia, in common with many websites, makes its disclaimers highly visible, a practice which at times has led to commentators citing these in order to support a view that Wikipedia is unreliable. A selection of similar disclaimers from places which are often regarded as reliable (including sources such as Encyclopædia Britannica, Associated Press, and the Oxford English Dictionary) can be read and compared at Non-Wikipedia disclaimers. Wikipedia content advisories can also be found here.
Strengths, weaknesses and article quality in Wikipedia
Main articles: Wikipedia:Why Wikipedia is so great and Wikipedia:Why Wikipedia is not so great
Wikipedia's greatest strengths, weaknesses and differences arise because it is open to anyone, has a large contributor base, and articles are written by consensus according to editorial guidelines and policies. The MediaWiki software which runs Wikipedia retains a history of all edits and changes, thus information added to Wikipedia never "vanishes", and is never "lost" or deleted.
Wikipedia is open to a large contributor base, drawing a large number of editors from diverse backgrounds. This allows Wikipedia to significantly reduce regional and cultural bias found in many other publications, and makes it very difficult for any group to censor and impose bias. A large, diverse editor base also provides access and breadth on subject matter that is otherwise inaccessible or little documented. A large number of editors contributing at any moment also means that Wikipedia can produce excellent encyclopedic articles and resources covering newsworthy events within hours or days of their occurrence.
Wikipedia articles and coverage of topics may have a tendency to reflect the cultural, age, and socio-economic demographics of its contributors. There is no systematic process to make sure that "obviously important" topics are written about, so Wikipedia may contain unexpected oversights and omissions. While most articles may be altered by anyone, in practice editing will be performed by a certain demographic (younger rather than older, male rather than female, rich enough to afford a computer rather than poor, Christian or Jewish rather than Muslim or Bantu etc.) and will thus necessarily reflect a certain degree of implicit bias. Some more academic topics may not be covered as well on Wikipedia, while pop culture topics are covered in great depth.
Allowing anyone to edit Wikipedia means that it is more easily vandalized or susceptible to unchecked information later needing removal. While blatant vandalism is usually easily spotted and rapidly corrected, Wikipedia is more subject to subtle vandalism and viewpoint promotion than a typical reference work. While Wikipedia articles generally attain a good standard after editing, it is important to note that fledgling, or less well monitored, articles may be susceptible to vandalism and insertion of false information. Wikipedia's radical openness also means that any given article may be, at any given moment, in a bad state, such as in the middle of a large edit, or a controversial rewrite. Many contributors do not yet comply fully with key policies, or may add information without citable sources. Wikipedia's open approach tremendously increases the chances that any particular factual error or misleading statement will be relatively promptly corrected. Numerous editors at any given time are monitoring recent changes and edits to articles on their watchlist.
Wikipedia is written by consensus -- an approach that has its pros and cons. Censorship or imposing "official" points of view is difficult to achieve and almost always fails after a time. Eventually for most articles, all notable views become fairly described and a neutral point of view reached. In reality, the process of reaching consensus may be a long and drawn-out, with articles more fluid or changeable for a long time compared while they find their "neutral approach" that all sides can agree on. Reaching neutrality is occasionally made harder by extreme-viewpoint contributors. Wikipedia operates a full editorial dispute resolution process, that allows time for discussion and resolution in depth, but also permits months-long disagreements before poor quality or biased edits will be removed forcibly.
Studies suggest that Wikipedia is broadly as reliable as Encyclopedia Brittanica, with similar error rates on established articles for both major and minor omissions and errors.[1] There is a tentative consensus, backed by a gradual increase in academic citation as a source, that it provides a good starting point for research, and that articles in general have proven to be reasonably sound. That said, articles and subject areas sometimes suffer from significant omissions, and whilst misinformation and vandalism are usually corrected quickly, this does not always happen. (See for example this incident in which a person inserted a fake biography linking a prominent journalist to the Kennedy assassinations and Soviet Russia as a joke on a co-worker which went undetected for 4 months, saying afterwards he "didn’t know [Wikipedia] was used as a serious reference tool.") Therefore, a common conclusion is that it is a valuable resource and provides a good reference point on its subjects, but like any online source, unfamiliar information should be checked before relying upon it.
A 2005 editorial by a BBC technology writer comments that these debates are probably symptomatic of new cultural learnings which are happening across all sources of information (including search engines and the media), namely "a better sense of how to evaluate information sources."[3]
See also: Reliability of Wikipedia and Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia
Wikipedia's greatest strengths, weaknesses and differences arise because it is open to anyone, has a large contributor base, and articles are written by consensus according to editorial guidelines and policies. The MediaWiki software which runs Wikipedia retains a history of all edits and changes, thus information added to Wikipedia never "vanishes", and is never "lost" or deleted.
Wikipedia is open to a large contributor base, drawing a large number of editors from diverse backgrounds. This allows Wikipedia to significantly reduce regional and cultural bias found in many other publications, and makes it very difficult for any group to censor and impose bias. A large, diverse editor base also provides access and breadth on subject matter that is otherwise inaccessible or little documented. A large number of editors contributing at any moment also means that Wikipedia can produce excellent encyclopedic articles and resources covering newsworthy events within hours or days of their occurrence.
Wikipedia articles and coverage of topics may have a tendency to reflect the cultural, age, and socio-economic demographics of its contributors. There is no systematic process to make sure that "obviously important" topics are written about, so Wikipedia may contain unexpected oversights and omissions. While most articles may be altered by anyone, in practice editing will be performed by a certain demographic (younger rather than older, male rather than female, rich enough to afford a computer rather than poor, Christian or Jewish rather than Muslim or Bantu etc.) and will thus necessarily reflect a certain degree of implicit bias. Some more academic topics may not be covered as well on Wikipedia, while pop culture topics are covered in great depth.
Allowing anyone to edit Wikipedia means that it is more easily vandalized or susceptible to unchecked information later needing removal. While blatant vandalism is usually easily spotted and rapidly corrected, Wikipedia is more subject to subtle vandalism and viewpoint promotion than a typical reference work. While Wikipedia articles generally attain a good standard after editing, it is important to note that fledgling, or less well monitored, articles may be susceptible to vandalism and insertion of false information. Wikipedia's radical openness also means that any given article may be, at any given moment, in a bad state, such as in the middle of a large edit, or a controversial rewrite. Many contributors do not yet comply fully with key policies, or may add information without citable sources. Wikipedia's open approach tremendously increases the chances that any particular factual error or misleading statement will be relatively promptly corrected. Numerous editors at any given time are monitoring recent changes and edits to articles on their watchlist.
Wikipedia is written by consensus -- an approach that has its pros and cons. Censorship or imposing "official" points of view is difficult to achieve and almost always fails after a time. Eventually for most articles, all notable views become fairly described and a neutral point of view reached. In reality, the process of reaching consensus may be a long and drawn-out, with articles more fluid or changeable for a long time compared while they find their "neutral approach" that all sides can agree on. Reaching neutrality is occasionally made harder by extreme-viewpoint contributors. Wikipedia operates a full editorial dispute resolution process, that allows time for discussion and resolution in depth, but also permits months-long disagreements before poor quality or biased edits will be removed forcibly.
Studies suggest that Wikipedia is broadly as reliable as Encyclopedia Brittanica, with similar error rates on established articles for both major and minor omissions and errors.[1] There is a tentative consensus, backed by a gradual increase in academic citation as a source, that it provides a good starting point for research, and that articles in general have proven to be reasonably sound. That said, articles and subject areas sometimes suffer from significant omissions, and whilst misinformation and vandalism are usually corrected quickly, this does not always happen. (See for example this incident in which a person inserted a fake biography linking a prominent journalist to the Kennedy assassinations and Soviet Russia as a joke on a co-worker which went undetected for 4 months, saying afterwards he "didn’t know [Wikipedia] was used as a serious reference tool.") Therefore, a common conclusion is that it is a valuable resource and provides a good reference point on its subjects, but like any online source, unfamiliar information should be checked before relying upon it.
A 2005 editorial by a BBC technology writer comments that these debates are probably symptomatic of new cultural learnings which are happening across all sources of information (including search engines and the media), namely "a better sense of how to evaluate information sources."[3]
See also: Reliability of Wikipedia and Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia
How Wikipedia differs from a paper encyclopedia
Main article: Wiki is not paper (on Wikimedia Meta-Wiki)
Major areas of difference between Wikipedia and a traditional paper encyclopedia include the very low "cost" of adding additional articles or information, or expanding existing material; the ability to provide both overview summaries and extensive detail without becoming hard to read; ease of reading due to wikilinks replacing in line explanations; timeliness accessibility and ease of editing in the editorial cycle; and low environmental cost (no paper or distribution impact on the environment).
Major areas of difference between Wikipedia and a traditional paper encyclopedia include the very low "cost" of adding additional articles or information, or expanding existing material; the ability to provide both overview summaries and extensive detail without becoming hard to read; ease of reading due to wikilinks replacing in line explanations; timeliness accessibility and ease of editing in the editorial cycle; and low environmental cost (no paper or distribution impact on the environment).
Using Wikipedia as a research tool
Main articles: Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia and Citing Wikipedia
As a wiki, articles are never complete. They are continually edited and improved over time, and in general this results in an upward trend of quality, and a growing consensus over a fair and balanced representation of information.
Users should be aware that not all articles are of encyclopedic quality from the start. Indeed, many articles start their lives as partisan, and it is after a long process of discussion, debate and argument, that they gradually take on a neutral point of view reached through consensus. Others may for a while become caught up in a heavily unbalanced viewpoint which can take some time - months perhaps - to extricate themselves and regain a better balanced consensus. In part, this is because Wikipedia operates an internal resolution process when editors cannot agree on content and approach, and such issues take time to come to the attention of more experienced editors.
The ideal Wikipedia article is balanced, neutral and encyclopedic, containing notable verifiable knowledge. An increasing number of articles reach this standard over time, and many already have. However this is a process and can take months or years to be achieved, as each user adds their contribution in turn. Some articles contain statements and claims which have not yet been fully cited. Others will later have entire new sections added. Some information will be considered by later contributors to be insufficiently founded, and may be removed or expounded.
While the overall trend is generally upward, it is important to use Wikipedia carefully if it is intended to be used as a research source, since individual articles will, by their nature, vary in standard and maturity. There are guidelines and information pages designed to help users and researchers do this effectively, and an article that summarizes third party studies and assessments of the reliability of Wikipedia.
As a wiki, articles are never complete. They are continually edited and improved over time, and in general this results in an upward trend of quality, and a growing consensus over a fair and balanced representation of information.
Users should be aware that not all articles are of encyclopedic quality from the start. Indeed, many articles start their lives as partisan, and it is after a long process of discussion, debate and argument, that they gradually take on a neutral point of view reached through consensus. Others may for a while become caught up in a heavily unbalanced viewpoint which can take some time - months perhaps - to extricate themselves and regain a better balanced consensus. In part, this is because Wikipedia operates an internal resolution process when editors cannot agree on content and approach, and such issues take time to come to the attention of more experienced editors.
The ideal Wikipedia article is balanced, neutral and encyclopedic, containing notable verifiable knowledge. An increasing number of articles reach this standard over time, and many already have. However this is a process and can take months or years to be achieved, as each user adds their contribution in turn. Some articles contain statements and claims which have not yet been fully cited. Others will later have entire new sections added. Some information will be considered by later contributors to be insufficiently founded, and may be removed or expounded.
While the overall trend is generally upward, it is important to use Wikipedia carefully if it is intended to be used as a research source, since individual articles will, by their nature, vary in standard and maturity. There are guidelines and information pages designed to help users and researchers do this effectively, and an article that summarizes third party studies and assessments of the reliability of Wikipedia.
Basic navigation in Wikipedia
Main article: Wikipedia:Basic navigation
Wikipedia articles are all linked, or cross-referenced. Wherever you see highlighted text like this, it means there is a link to some relevant article or Wikipedia page with further in-depth information elsewhere if you need it. Holding your mouse over the link will often show you where a link will take you. You are always one click away from more information on any point that has a link attached. There are other links towards the ends of most articles, for other articles of interest, relevant external web sites and pages, reference material, and organized categories of knowledge which you can search and traverse in a loose hierarchy for more information. Some articles may also have links to dictionary definitions, audio-book readings, quotations, the same article in other languages, and further information available on our sister projects. You can add further links if a relevant link is missing, and this is one way to contribute.
Wikipedia articles are all linked, or cross-referenced. Wherever you see highlighted text like this, it means there is a link to some relevant article or Wikipedia page with further in-depth information elsewhere if you need it. Holding your mouse over the link will often show you where a link will take you. You are always one click away from more information on any point that has a link attached. There are other links towards the ends of most articles, for other articles of interest, relevant external web sites and pages, reference material, and organized categories of knowledge which you can search and traverse in a loose hierarchy for more information. Some articles may also have links to dictionary definitions, audio-book readings, quotations, the same article in other languages, and further information available on our sister projects. You can add further links if a relevant link is missing, and this is one way to contribute.
Exploring Wikipedia
Main article: Wikipedia:Explore
Many visitors come to this site to acquire knowledge, others to share knowledge. In fact, at this very instant, dozens of articles are being improved, and new articles are also being created. You can view the changes at the Recent changes page. You also can view random articles. Over 1,200 articles have been designated by the Wikipedia community as featured articles, exemplifying the best articles in Wikipedia. Another 1,800 articles are designated as good articles. Wikipedia also has portals, which organize content around topic areas. You may also search for articles, using the search box on the left side of the screen.
You also might enjoy reading Wikipedia in other languages. Wikipedia has more than two hundred different languages (see other language versions), including a Simple English version, and related projects include a dictionary, quotations, books, manuals, and scientific reference sources, and a news service (see sister projects). All of these are maintained, updated, and managed by separate communities, and often include thought-provoking information and articles which can be hard to find through other common sources.
Many visitors come to this site to acquire knowledge, others to share knowledge. In fact, at this very instant, dozens of articles are being improved, and new articles are also being created. You can view the changes at the Recent changes page. You also can view random articles. Over 1,200 articles have been designated by the Wikipedia community as featured articles, exemplifying the best articles in Wikipedia. Another 1,800 articles are designated as good articles. Wikipedia also has portals, which organize content around topic areas. You may also search for articles, using the search box on the left side of the screen.
You also might enjoy reading Wikipedia in other languages. Wikipedia has more than two hundred different languages (see other language versions), including a Simple English version, and related projects include a dictionary, quotations, books, manuals, and scientific reference sources, and a news service (see sister projects). All of these are maintained, updated, and managed by separate communities, and often include thought-provoking information and articles which can be hard to find through other common sources.
Who writes Wikipedia?
Main articles: Wikipedia:Who writes Wikipedia and Wikipedia:Wikipedians
There are tens of thousands of regular editors - everyone from expert scholars to casual readers. Anyone who visits the site can edit it, and this fact has encouraged contribution of a tremendous amount of content. There are mechanisms that help community members watch for bad edits, about one thousand administrators with special powers to enforce good behavior, and a judicial committee which considers the few situations remaining unresolved, and decides on withdrawal or restriction of editing privileges or other punishments when needed, after all other consensus remedies have been tried. The site is owned by the Wikimedia Foundation, which is largely uninvolved in daily operation and writing.
There are tens of thousands of regular editors - everyone from expert scholars to casual readers. Anyone who visits the site can edit it, and this fact has encouraged contribution of a tremendous amount of content. There are mechanisms that help community members watch for bad edits, about one thousand administrators with special powers to enforce good behavior, and a judicial committee which considers the few situations remaining unresolved, and decides on withdrawal or restriction of editing privileges or other punishments when needed, after all other consensus remedies have been tried. The site is owned by the Wikimedia Foundation, which is largely uninvolved in daily operation and writing.
Wikipedia statistics
Main articles: Wikipedia:Statistics, Wikipedia:Size of Wikipedia
There are over 75,000 active contributors working on more than 5,300,000 articles in more than 100 languages. As of today, there are 1,633,971 articles in English; every day hundreds of thousands of visitors from around the world make tens of thousands of edits and create thousands of new articles to enhance the amount of knowledge held by the Wikipedia encyclopedia. Visitors do not need any specialised qualifications to contribute, since their primary role is to write articles that cover already-existing knowledge, and people of all ages can therefore write Wikipedia articles.
All the text in Wikipedia, and most of the images and other content, is covered by the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). Contributions remain the property of their creators, while the GFDL license ensures the content will remain freely distributable and reproducible (see the copyright notice and the content disclaimer for more information).
There are over 75,000 active contributors working on more than 5,300,000 articles in more than 100 languages. As of today, there are 1,633,971 articles in English; every day hundreds of thousands of visitors from around the world make tens of thousands of edits and create thousands of new articles to enhance the amount of knowledge held by the Wikipedia encyclopedia. Visitors do not need any specialised qualifications to contribute, since their primary role is to write articles that cover already-existing knowledge, and people of all ages can therefore write Wikipedia articles.
All the text in Wikipedia, and most of the images and other content, is covered by the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). Contributions remain the property of their creators, while the GFDL license ensures the content will remain freely distributable and reproducible (see the copyright notice and the content disclaimer for more information).
Wikipedia history
For more details on this topic, see History of Wikipedia.
Wikipedia was founded as an offshoot of Nupedia, a now-abandoned project to produce a free encyclopedia. Nupedia had an elaborate system of peer review and required highly qualified contributors, but the writing of articles was seen as very slow. During 2000, Jimmy Wales, founder of Nupedia, and Larry Sanger, whom Wales had employed to work on the project, discussed various ways to supplement Nupedia with a more open, complementary project.
On the evening of January 2, 2001, Sanger had a conversation over dinner with Ben Kovitz, a computer programmer, in San Diego, California. Kovitz, who was a regular on "Ward's Wiki" (the WikiWikiWeb), explained the wiki concept to Sanger. Sanger saw that a wiki would be an excellent format whereby a more open, less formal encyclopedia project could be pursued. Sanger easily persuaded Wales, who had been introduced to the wiki concept previously, to set up a wiki for Nupedia, and Nupedia's first wiki went online on January 10.
There was considerable resistance on the part of Nupedia's editors and reviewers to the idea of associating Nupedia with a website in the wiki format, however, so the new project was given the name "Wikipedia" and launched on its own domain, wikipedia.com, on January 15 (now humorously called "Wikipedia Day" by some users). The bandwidth and server (located in San Diego) were donated by Wales. Other current and past Bomis employees who have done some work on the encyclopedia include Tim Shell, one of the co-founders of Bomis and its current CEO, and programmer Jason Richey.
In May 2001, the first wave of non-English Wikipedias were launched (in Catalan, Chinese, Dutch, German, Esperanto, French, Hebrew, Italian, Japanese, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish, and Swedish, soon joined by Arabic and Hungarian.[1] In September,[2] a further commitment to the multilingual provision of Wikipedia was made. At the end of the year, Afrikaans, Norwegian, and Serbocroatian versions were announced.
Wikipedia was founded as an offshoot of Nupedia, a now-abandoned project to produce a free encyclopedia. Nupedia had an elaborate system of peer review and required highly qualified contributors, but the writing of articles was seen as very slow. During 2000, Jimmy Wales, founder of Nupedia, and Larry Sanger, whom Wales had employed to work on the project, discussed various ways to supplement Nupedia with a more open, complementary project.
On the evening of January 2, 2001, Sanger had a conversation over dinner with Ben Kovitz, a computer programmer, in San Diego, California. Kovitz, who was a regular on "Ward's Wiki" (the WikiWikiWeb), explained the wiki concept to Sanger. Sanger saw that a wiki would be an excellent format whereby a more open, less formal encyclopedia project could be pursued. Sanger easily persuaded Wales, who had been introduced to the wiki concept previously, to set up a wiki for Nupedia, and Nupedia's first wiki went online on January 10.
There was considerable resistance on the part of Nupedia's editors and reviewers to the idea of associating Nupedia with a website in the wiki format, however, so the new project was given the name "Wikipedia" and launched on its own domain, wikipedia.com, on January 15 (now humorously called "Wikipedia Day" by some users). The bandwidth and server (located in San Diego) were donated by Wales. Other current and past Bomis employees who have done some work on the encyclopedia include Tim Shell, one of the co-founders of Bomis and its current CEO, and programmer Jason Richey.
In May 2001, the first wave of non-English Wikipedias were launched (in Catalan, Chinese, Dutch, German, Esperanto, French, Hebrew, Italian, Japanese, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish, and Swedish, soon joined by Arabic and Hungarian.[1] In September,[2] a further commitment to the multilingual provision of Wikipedia was made. At the end of the year, Afrikaans, Norwegian, and Serbocroatian versions were announced.
Wikipedia:About
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an introduction to the Wikipedia project for visitors. We also have an encyclopedia article about us, at Wikipedia.
wikipedia.orgWikipedia (IPA: /ˌwiːkiːˈpiːdi.ə/) is a multilingual, Web-based, free content encyclopedia project. Wikipedia is written collaboratively by volunteers from all around the world. With rare exceptions, its articles can be edited by anyone with access to the Internet, simply by clicking the edit this page link. The name Wikipedia is a portmanteau of the words wiki (a type of collaborative website) and encyclopedia. Since its creation in 2001, Wikipedia has rapidly grown into the largest reference Web site on the Internet.
In every article, links will guide you to associated articles, often with additional information. You are welcome to add further information, cross-references, or citations, so long as you do so within Wikipedia's editing policies and to an appropriate standard. You do not need to fear accidentally damaging Wikipedia when you add or improve information, as other editors are always around to advise or correct obvious errors, if needed, and the Wikipedia encyclopedia software, known as MediaWiki, is carefully designed to allow easy reversal of editorial mistakes.
Because Wikipedia is an on-going work to which in principle anybody can contribute, it differs from a paper-based reference source in some very important ways. In particular, older articles tend to be more comprehensive and balanced, while newer articles may still contain significant misinformation, unencyclopedic content, or vandalism. Users need to be aware of this in order to obtain valid information and avoid misinformation which has been recently added and not yet removed. (See Researching with Wikipedia for more details.) However, unlike a paper reference source, Wikipedia can be constantly updated, with articles on topical events being created or updated within minutes or hours, rather than months or years for printed encyclopedias.
Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, which has created an entire family of free content projects. On all these projects, you are welcome to be bold and edit articles yourself, contributing knowledge as you see fit in a collaborative way.
If you have not done so, we invite you to take a few moments to read What Wikipedia is (and is not), so that you have an understanding of how to use, rely upon, or contribute to Wikipedia as you continue. Further information on key topics can be found below. If you can't find what you are looking for, try the Frequently Asked Questions or see Where to ask questions.
This is an introduction to the Wikipedia project for visitors. We also have an encyclopedia article about us, at Wikipedia.
wikipedia.orgWikipedia (IPA: /ˌwiːkiːˈpiːdi.ə/) is a multilingual, Web-based, free content encyclopedia project. Wikipedia is written collaboratively by volunteers from all around the world. With rare exceptions, its articles can be edited by anyone with access to the Internet, simply by clicking the edit this page link. The name Wikipedia is a portmanteau of the words wiki (a type of collaborative website) and encyclopedia. Since its creation in 2001, Wikipedia has rapidly grown into the largest reference Web site on the Internet.
In every article, links will guide you to associated articles, often with additional information. You are welcome to add further information, cross-references, or citations, so long as you do so within Wikipedia's editing policies and to an appropriate standard. You do not need to fear accidentally damaging Wikipedia when you add or improve information, as other editors are always around to advise or correct obvious errors, if needed, and the Wikipedia encyclopedia software, known as MediaWiki, is carefully designed to allow easy reversal of editorial mistakes.
Because Wikipedia is an on-going work to which in principle anybody can contribute, it differs from a paper-based reference source in some very important ways. In particular, older articles tend to be more comprehensive and balanced, while newer articles may still contain significant misinformation, unencyclopedic content, or vandalism. Users need to be aware of this in order to obtain valid information and avoid misinformation which has been recently added and not yet removed. (See Researching with Wikipedia for more details.) However, unlike a paper reference source, Wikipedia can be constantly updated, with articles on topical events being created or updated within minutes or hours, rather than months or years for printed encyclopedias.
Wikipedia is a registered trademark of the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, which has created an entire family of free content projects. On all these projects, you are welcome to be bold and edit articles yourself, contributing knowledge as you see fit in a collaborative way.
If you have not done so, we invite you to take a few moments to read What Wikipedia is (and is not), so that you have an understanding of how to use, rely upon, or contribute to Wikipedia as you continue. Further information on key topics can be found below. If you can't find what you are looking for, try the Frequently Asked Questions or see Where to ask questions.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)