Talk:Differences between Wikipedia, Wikimedia, MediaWiki, and wiki/Archive

All of these concepts put together are sometimes described by the portmanteau "WikipmediaWiki." Leucosticte (talk) 13:44, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

What is the main meaning of "Wikimedia"?
Doesn't the term "Wikimedia", when used by itself, usually refer to the Wikimedia Foundation? Everything else seems to require a qualifier - sites are Wikimedia projects, servers are Wikimedia servers (I don't know if this page really needs an entry about "Wikimedia servers", by the way), and so on, but when people say "Wikimedia" by itself, I think they're usually referring to the nonprofit organization - like "How many people work for Wikimedia?". On the English-language Wikipedia, "Wikimedia" redirects to "Wikimedia Foundation", for what it's worth. Yaron Koren (talk) 14:14, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * @Yaron Koren: No. Wikimedia Foundation is only one of the organizations existing inside the Wikimedia movement. It might be the biggest and the richest one, but there are many different Wikimedia organizations all around the world. Wikimedia refers to the movement as a whole; the English Wikipedia just got that wrong. odder (talk) 12:51, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the insights! --  Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 20:12, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Video
Nothing against The State of Wikipedia video on YouTube, but as long as it doesn't come with a license for an upload to commons it has no business here. –Be..anyone (talk) 00:50, 3 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Why is that? Yaron Koren (talk) 01:52, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * It does not have a free license&mdash;i.e., I haven't found one&mdash;and its purpose appears to be promotional (for the company of the creators, apart from Wikipedia.) –Be..anyone (talk) 03:06, 3 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Does this wiki have a policy of not linking to content that doesn't have a free license? And the video seems to me to be educational as well as promotional. Yaron Koren (talk) 05:41, 3 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I'd go with CC-BY-NC (not allowed on commons), but consider a "standard youtube license" as not good enough. The nearest thing to a policy here might be Project:About, and developers with admin rights decide what's okay as they see fit. –Be..anyone (talk) 10:11, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Readded the video section. The link was added by a highly trusted community member. The video itself gives a good (short) overview of Wikipedia's history and principle. MediaWiki.org itself is able to link to other contents in the internet, that doesn't need to be licensed under a free license, as long as we don't copy the the content. So, a link to YouTube (as a reference) is ok in my opinion. --Florianschmidtwelzow (talk) 10:45, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

MediaWikiWiki
Various things are special about this wiki, e.g., its name mediawiki.org could not be used as name for its project namespace, and it doesn't belong to the wikimedia projects with their global policies on Meta. There is a correct line explaining Meta with a wikilink to m:Meta:About. Therefore I added this and after it was reverted that. Folks reading this wiki should at least know where they are and how to wikilink to it (needs mediawikiwiki:Project:About.)

The page addresses the confusion about these terms, and explaining MediaWikiWiki while at it is an obvious idea. Actually the MediaWiki name space for system messages should also be noted, it's a part of the confusion. –Be..anyone (talk) 03:55, 20 January 2015 (UTC)


 * This page is about MediaWiki (among other topics); it's not about mediawiki.org, except in passing. Explaining how to link to mediawiki.org from other wikis seems to be both overly-specific and beside the point. Surely someone who is confused about the differences between, say, Wikipedia and MediaWiki is not going to be linking to mediawiki.org from a Wikimedia wiki any time soon? Yaron Koren (talk) 14:03, 20 January 2015 (UTC)