Jump to content


From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
This is a proposal for a new Wikimedia sister project.
WikiWorks or Wiki Hardware
Status of the proposal
Reasonno interest. Pecopteris (talk) 07:46, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Details of the proposal
Project descriptionA free place for makers, DIY, and Open-Source Hardware and Manufacturing enthusiasts to collaboratively design and develop open manufacturing solutions for the humanity. A place to share knowledge and instructions about Manufacturing.
Is it a multilingual wiki?will have different language versions
Potential number of languagesMany languages, opened as needed
Proposed taglineWikify the means of production!
Technical requirements
New features to requireyes, new features for hosting designs, codes, etc. may be needed.
Development wikiWikiSpore:Works Spore


Let's make a wiki for making things

WikiWorks or Wiki Hardware will be a wiki for collaborative manufacturing, designing, DIY, 3D printing, metalworking, creating physical artifacts, etc. It will be a free place for maker community, DIY, and Open-Source Hardware enthusiasts to collaboratively design and develop manufacturing solutions for the humanity. A place to share knowledge and instructions about OpenSource Hardware. The factory of the commons.

A maker wiki is essential to the world. Most existing maker websites do not offer free licensing or give power to the community despite being crowdsourced.


A wiki for:


Materialize ideas for humanity

This Wiki will be having following types of content

  • Instructions, manuals and procedure. (main)
  • DIY or How-to guides
  • Lab/Research: to do collaborative open research to solve a task
  • Files: of codes and design
  • Data: for data, factsheets
  • (Optional) Shop: to purchase or facilitate fabrication through fablabs

Proposed by[edit]

Alternative names[edit]

  • Wiki hardware

Related projects/proposals[edit]


WikiSpore:Works Spore

Similar communities[edit]

Main article: WikiSpore:Works Spore/Similar sites


Chukudu - a two-wheeled handmade vehicle, the main transportation system in many places. About half a billion still live in extreme poverty with little infrastructure or established factories. This project will help them the most.
  • Wikis are the best suitable for collaborative open projects like this, and many of the existing crowdsourcing sites do not respect the community's opinions. Only WMF wikis can guarantee the infrastructure, openness, free-license, respect and freedom.
  • Wikibooks can neither provide a hub for the manufacturing community nor can it host files and codes needed for open hardware. It is better to start a new project site for open manufacturing.
  • No prominent place is currently available to collaboratively tackle human issues and needs.
  • Presently the maker, DIY and OSHW communities are scattered around small communities. Let's unify all and put under one hub for manufacturing. Let's accelerate human development.
  • A manufacturing wiki is essential and inevitable... one day it has to be made. Let's make it now!!!

People interested[edit]

Sign your name (~~~~) below


What makes this different from Wikibooks? Books on manufacturing have never been banned as far as I remember. Leaderboard (talk) 09:01, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Leaderboard, that would face multiple limitations. The OpenHardware, makers & DIY communities are big enough to have a separate project. Also, it has to host files and codes needed for open hardware, 3D printing, CNC, CAD etc. This project is to facilitate making things, than just sharing knowledge in instruction guidebook format. Vis M (talk) 15:39, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Don't think so @Vis M:, have you checked at Wikibooks' reading room? We do have books of a DIY nature here. Also, as for the 3D printing, you should be able to host them at Commons, and if that's somehow not allowed, we do have a provision for local upload that can be considered. Leaderboard (talk) 19:31, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Leaderboard: In the short term perhaps Wikibooks may suffice, but you can see that #Similar communities sites cannot be fit in to Wikibooks. The plan is to have a practical/application part of wikiverse, which should happen one day. Thanks. -Vis M (talk) 19:50, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Vis M: I don't see why not. Leaderboard (talk) 05:49, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Mainly because Wikibooks do not allow original research and experimentation. It also tried to abort Wikiversity Vis M (talk) 08:41, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Vis M: For Wikiversity, I cannot comment since I was not in the project then. The definition of "original research" is very broad, and we normally give considerable leeway in practice, especially with the strategy guides that was unbanned in February 2021. As an admin, I do not see why making a book on manufacturing would contravene Wikibooks' OR policy. And even if there is something you want changed, you can make a proposal - just see the game strategy proposal for an example of a major proposal that succeeded. Leaderboard (talk) 16:15, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The idea is fantastic, however, does it need its own project? I think this needs to detail a bit more about why a new project would be either necessary, or just significantly beneficial to the idea. A few thoughts:

  1. An idea or community being "big" enough isn't really a factor in considering a new project. Portals exist to help people access certain types of content and communities within wikis. I could imagine a Portal on wikibooks for anyone wanting to access this kind of thing.
  2. How-to's, instructables, and the sort are well placed at Wikibooks and Wikisource. "Project pages" are available to people which could be linked to from a Portal page for collaboration and open research.
  3. Files should be hosted on Commons, even if you have a new project, Commons should still be the main source of files. I'm not sure what you mean by codes, so some clarification on that would be helpful. What stops wikibooks presenting the files stored on Commons? Wikisource does the same.
  4. I would think any kind of store would be inappropriate. I'm not aware of anything of this nature on wikimedia.

So what is the benefit of a new project, that existing wiki infrastructure could not provide? Supertrinko (talk) 22:39, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Actually Wikisource is not for original content, it is for already published works that are free. Wikibooks is for original content, but it do not allow original research and experimentation. "Wikibooks discourages original research.".
Wikiversity meets many requirements that this proposals have but Wikiversity has so far just a "learning" community with courses and all, rather than a "doing" community. I couldn't find any Lab or experiment related content there, perhaps because it is very less active so far. I have started a discussion there v:Wikiversity:Colloquium#Does_Wikiversity_support_labs_and_practical_activities? regarding this proposal.
I think the main issue is the lack of active editors. b:, v:, s:, voy: & n: all have less than 500 active editors. So, yes, perhaps it is better to start as a sub-project inside Wikiversity. Vis M (talk) 08:41, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Oppose - I think creating something on Wikiversity, including exploring "lab" ideas and creative commons house building designs, etc stored on wikicommons linked to it. Similar to WikiFactory Jamzze (talk) 14:47, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Comment This project should organize itself on the base of the concept of w:Open design, renaming itself as something like Wikidesign, which is suficiently broad to include all the proposals made, but also entails a coherent idea with a community of practice. We should contact such already existing communities to evaluate their needs and perspectives, so as to base the project on concrete grounds, building, at the same time, the nucleus of any future development. I think this has a huge potential, but we should take more preparatory steps to realize it. JoaquimCebuano (talk)

Wäre genial! Es gibt so viel Handwerkswissen! Altes und neues und hochspezialisiertes. Es lohnt sich, dieses zusammenzutragen und weltweit allen zur Verfügung zu stellen. Die Herausforderung wird sein, dieses nachvollziehbar zu beschreiben und strukturiert auffindbar zu machen... Gibt es dazu schon Ideen? Gruss, --Markus Bärlocher (talk) 17:21, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vielen Dank! (Thank you!) Vis M (talk) 01:33, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]