Abstract Wikipedia/Abstract Wikipedia naming contest/Factpedia
Factpedia
[edit]Abstract Wikipedia will represent facts independently of language. This prevents the added information to be biased towards a given opinion.
Votes
[edit]- Proposed by User:Csisc
Support far less misleading than other proposed names and quite clear. It conveys what the project is about or can do, turning wikidata facts into natural language. Prototyperspective (talk) 14:04, 21 October 2025 (UTC)
Weak oppose --Waldyrious (talk) 22:12, 21 October 2025 (UTC) (see discussion)
Discussion
[edit]- Facts? It's just some variation of the usual hallucinogenic artificial dumbness, that's en vogue today, to make real wikimedians redundant. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 12:10, 20 October 2025 (UTC)
Comment In order to avoid confusion, I think it is imperative to clarify that Abstract Wikipedia's approach is quite different from that of generative AI or large language models alluded to in this comment. Wikifunctions, as a mechanism for producing text, operates in a fundamentally different way. The only real similarity is that they both ultimately produce text, though through very different processes. --CristianCantoro (talk) 14:30, 20 October 2025 (UTC)
- WikiFunktions is another misleading name, like WikiAbstract, as there is no connection to functions. But it fits in the realm of Structured Discussions, the misleading renaming of FLOW, that took away structure from discussions.
- Euphemistic false-naming of unwanted nothings ist the new hype in the ivory tower of the WMF. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 14:40, 20 October 2025 (UTC)
- Ok, you clearly don't like the project, but quoting from the Wikifunctions website: "Wikifunctions is a Wikimedia project for everyone to collaboratively create and maintain a library of code functions [...] in the world's natural and programming languages.", it is quite obviously referring to functions in computer programming. Have a nice day. --CristianCantoro (talk) 15:03, 20 October 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, but now it's for prose, for article generation, not just templates or graphs. That's a complete different ballpark. Grüße vom Sänger ♫(Reden) 17:07, 20 October 2025 (UTC)
- Ok, you clearly don't like the project, but quoting from the Wikifunctions website: "Wikifunctions is a Wikimedia project for everyone to collaboratively create and maintain a library of code functions [...] in the world's natural and programming languages.", it is quite obviously referring to functions in computer programming. Have a nice day. --CristianCantoro (talk) 15:03, 20 October 2025 (UTC)
- Weak oppose due to the "pedia" suffix. This project should not be limited to encyclopedic articles; instead, it should enable (and encourage) the community to produce multilingual content of many kinds (for Wikivoyage, Wikiversity, Wikinews, Wikidata item descriptions, Meta page contents, Commons category descriptions, etc.). --Waldyrious (talk) 22:12, 21 October 2025 (UTC)
