From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This is a proposal for a new Wikimedia sister project.
Status of the proposal
Details of the proposal
Project descriptionAn open web directory that anyone can edit.
Is it a multilingual wiki?Many
Potential number of languagesMany
Proposed URL
Technical requirements
New features to requireNothing we don't already have
Interested participants
Bastenbas Archi38 Sophivorus Evachan39


Wikidirectory is a directory of links organized by category. There is already a project on this subject outside Wikimedia, DMOZ, but it isn't an open wiki, links must be submitted and approved by a category curator. Furthermore, this project is easy to set up with current software.

Update: DMOZ is now closed since 17 March 2017. The former DMOZ crew has been developing another web directory --George Ho (talk) 21:19, 24 June 2017 (UTC); edited, 21:54, 24 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alternate proposal[edit]

This is mostly me thinking out loud but could this info essentially just be a smaller WikiProject at Wikidata rather than a full-fledged sister project? Ultimately, all we would be doing is storing a handful of links per topic and have an ontology for said links--it's not like a page on a wiki that will have a lot of content. Thoughts? —Justin (koavf)TCM 17:08, 21 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  1. Support support I support this idea. —Justin (koavf)TCM 03:50, 25 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. I will support if Koavf is cool with it. Varlaam (talk) 05:17, 27 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I support Varlaam's support. —Justin (koavf)TCM 05:21, 27 January 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Great idea. --Stranger195 (talkcontribs) 02:56, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. Nice concept Archi38 (talk) 16:33, 13 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5. Support With caveats, listed sites should ideally be drawn from those already cited in other projects. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:08, 6 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6. Support support Very good idea. -- issimo 15 !? 20:09, 19 June 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7. Support Support This wiki would be the natural extension of the "External links" section of Wikipedia, and many Wikipedia articles could contain, at the bottom of the "External links" section, a link to this wiki. --Sophivorus (talk) 13:05, 1 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  8. I'm in, I think it's wonderful, so I support. --Evachan39 (talk) 15:34, 5 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  9. Nice concept GrandCelinien (talk) 21:01, 29 January 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  10. Wonderful. I'll anticipate its opening if it happens. --George Ho (talk) 05:44, 20 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  11. -- Sloyment (talk) 03:48, 3 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  12. Support due to DMOZ closing and the fact that the Wikimedia community has had bad experiences with AOL before (remember the dynamic proxies?) KATMAKROFAN (talk) 22:44, 8 March 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  13. Support However we should really look at adopting DMOZ. They are looking for a new home. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:05, 12 April 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  14. Support adopting DMOZ, not particularly fussy about the name, but could use both for transition. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 08:01, 9 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  15. Support Support I support this idea. --Samuele2002 (Talk!) 21:09, 9 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  16. Support Support Absolutely necessary --Neurorebel (talk) 03:30, 2 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  17. Support Support With the recent demise of the DMOZ/the Open Directory Project, this seems to be necessary. Sophivorus's reason also makes sense to me, though I additionally support Doc James' proposal to welcome the DMOZ community, should they want to move here. —DocWatson42 (talk) 09:55, 21 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  18. Support Support -Jayprakash12345 (talk) 20:06, 24 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  19. Support Support -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 11:24, 26 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  20. Strong support Strong support --Assoc (talk) 02:49, 3 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  21. Support Support can't wait -- Tris T7 TT me —Preceding undated comment added 16:44, 9 January 2019 (UTC).Reply[reply]
  22. Support Support Dont mind if i do... Arep Ticous 18:33, 10 September 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  23. Support Support Absolutely, great idea with potential. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 13:38, 21 October 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  24. Support Support . --Kitabc12345 (talk) 05:02, 2 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  25. Support Support I don't want this to become stale, and it's definitely something that seems to be needed post-downfall of DMOZ. --Sailor Ceres (talk) 19:31, 12 July 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  26. Weak support I’m always highly skeptical of new projects but this actually sounds quite reasonable. Dronebogus (talk) 18:45, 17 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  27. Support Support I was thinking of one of these the other day, and then I found this. Zippybonzo (talk) 11:48, 17 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  28. Support Support --V0lkanic (talk) 22:56, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Oppose Oppose-Jayprakash12345 (talk) 08:19, 24 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Jayprakash12345. May you please explain why you oppose? Thanks. --George Ho (talk) 08:53, 24 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear George Ho Sir, Todays Most of the link provides by Search Engine. So Wikidirectory have not a bright future.-Jayprakash12345 (talk) 17:52, 24 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't know, Jay. If you believe in the future of search engines, have you read w:Web search engine, w:Google Search and w:Bing (search engine)? What about w:Web directory? Those articles can help you reconsider your argument. Also, to which search engine were you referring? Google or Bing or... which else? Wikimedia Foundation is a non-profit organization that provides free content in its all projects. The Foundation is neither Google nor Microsoft, both of which are for-profit companies. Nevertheless, it has its own search engine, which is, unfortunately, somewhat a mess, even with a dropdown-list system. Recently, cross-wiki results are added in Wikipedia languages sites, but some communities have unhappy editors who want the results disabled. As said before, the Foundation's search systems are messy and somewhat flawed. To help you further, you might want to read the Wikipedia articles w:en:Knowledge Engine (Wikimedia Foundation) and w:Arnnon Geshuri. Also, you may want to read Requests for comment/Vote of no confidence on Arnnon Geshuri. --George Ho (talk) 20:01, 24 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I take my oppose back-Jayprakash12345 (talk) 20:12, 24 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Minor Oppose for now, someone should point out that how contributions about pornographic stuffs are allowed or not, since the unprivileged insert of such contents really, really and really make a black hole to e.g. Stuxnet. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:03, 19 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I wonder whether you read the following essays about censorship, especially on Wikimedia projects. --George Ho (talk) 12:19, 20 November 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Comments and notes[edit]

  • Comment: is currently hosting an "under construction" page for something called "WikiAllergies". According to the WHOIS data, the domain is registered by "Doahn Nguyen" and won't expire until 2026. So if we want this launched within the next year, the WMF legal team will probably have to send a nasty letter to Mr. or Mrs. Nguyen. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 23:29, 20 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • About the main page: the fancy Wikimedia default main page with "do not start editing yet" is not needed, and neither is the software default "MediaWiki has been installed" main page. The first version of the en.wiktionary main page was "insert Wiktionary here"; the first version of the fr.wiktionary main page translates to "this is a dictionary"; the first version of the en.wikiquote main page was just a link to the proposal on Meta; the first version of the en.wikibooks main page was just a link to a mailing list for discussing the then-embryonic project which would eventually become Wikibooks; and the first version of the Meta main page was "this wiki thing seems really cool". KATMAKROFAN (talk) 01:35, 20 October 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Similar proposals[edit]