Abstract Wikipedia/Abstract Wikipedia naming contest/Names

The second round of voting ran from on 19 November to 1 December 2025.

Please read the overview of this project to learn about Abstract Wikipedia, and to see details about voting eligibility. The Wikimedia Foundation's Legal and Communications departments have provided some notes, which is shown in the table next to each option.

#	Name	Round 1 votes and discussions	Notes from community	Notes from Wikimedia Foundation
1	Abstract Wikipedia	link	abstracting from concrete languages established name for the project contains "Wikipedia", but it is not only for Wikipedia contains "Wikipedia" people know, but is not like the Wikipedia people know "abstract" is ambiguous, and can refer to research paper summaries, art, mathematical abstraction, etc. See full discussion	Legal: Using an established trademark such as Wikipedia as part of the name gives us a lot of legal certainty. Branding: OK branding — Existing name. It implies modification of the existing Wikipedia platform but deviates from the movement naming practice of using a Wiki prefix which creates a disconnect.
2	Multilingual Wikipedia	link	intended to be multilingual, ie. usable by people with different mother tongues straightforward, simple, clear, and plain contains "Wikipedia", but it is not only for Wikipedia contains "Wikipedia" people know, but is not like the Wikipedia people know Wikipedia is already multlingual See full discussion	Legal: Using an established trademark such as Wikipedia as part of the name gives us a lot of legal certainty. Branding: Difficult branding — Deviates from movement naming practices and could be misread as a description of Wikipedia instead of a project itself. It is also confusing and misleading as Wikipedia is already multilingual.
3	Wikiabstracts	link	generating data-based short texts similar to academic abstracts conveys what it is about seems confusing, and plays with a "misconception" about the project aim "abstract" is ambiguous, and can refer to research paper summaries, art, mathematical abstraction, etc. See full discussion	Legal: More in-depth legal review would be needed if this option wins, to determine if we could adequately protect it as a trademark. Branding: Good branding — Makes clear use of movement naming practices (Wiki prefix) but uses a common word (abstracts) usually used to describe summaries which could be misleading.
4	Wikigenerator	link	a project that generates text for Wikipedia clear, immediately understandable, creative will be confused with generative AI sounds like a project to generate wikis (like Incubator), not just text for some wikis See full discussion	Legal: More in-depth legal review would be needed if this option wins, to determine if we could adequately protect it as a trademark. Branding: Great branding — Makes clear use of movement naming practices (Wiki prefix) and uses a common term (generator) to clearly communicate the project’s functionality.
5	Proto-Wiki	link	"proto" meaning "before" or "original", as in "proto language" following the pattern of Meta-Wiki; rolls off the tongue unusual pattern with the hyphen and capitalization this project is not a predecessor to a "real" wiki, which the name suggests See full discussion	Legal: More in-depth legal review would be needed if this option wins, to determine if we could adequately protect it as a trademark. Branding: Difficult branding — Somewhat follows movement naming practices by using Wiki as a suffix but uses an uncommon word (Proto) that could lead to misinterpretation and lack of clarity on what the project is about.