Понастояшем все още има някои дигитални произведения, които не могат да бъдат публикувани в проекти на Уикимедия, тъй като нито един от тях няма правилните редакционни указания да ги съдържа. Неща като оригинална поезия, песни, есета, дисертации, романи и т.н., без значение дали вече са били публикувани по-рано или не.
Би било страхотно Уикимедия да стартира проект, който да съдържа този вид творби.
Без оригинални изследвания е разбираем и много важен принцип за Уикимедия. Понастоящем, както е упоменато в предната свързана страница, това, което е от значение за една енциклопедия, може да не съответства на други проекти, които се нуждаят от различни редакторски указания. От съществуващите проекти, Уикикниги е твърде ориентиран към педагогически произведения, а Уикиизточник няма да приема творби, които не са били публикувани преди това на хартиен носител.
Освен това, може да се твърди, че това е добър начин на внимателно отстраняване на оригинални творби от Уикипедия - с послание като „Вашата редакция съдържа оригинални твърдения, а Уикипедия не е мястото, където този вид съдържание може да се публикува, но можете да споделите Вашето оригинално произведение в Уикикултура“. След това евентуално, статията в Уикипедия може да използвате статиите в „Уикикултура“ като препратки. Това ще даде достъп до авторска информация (евентуално анонимни/ IP произведения), и всички предимства на свободна/ безплатна творба в уики. Например, може да се води статистика за статиите, така че да може да се провери дали дадена статия не е използвана като референтна към прекомерно застъпена гледна точка в статия в Уикипедия.
В художествените теми, това наистина ще спомогне свободното и безплатно културно движение да заеме място, на което всеки творец може пряко да експериментира какво означава съвместното споделяне и създаване, с аудитория, която участва и в други МедияУики проекти.
Общ преглед - матрица
|Все още няма предложения. Приноси са добре дошли.|
|Status of the proposal|
|Details of the proposal|
|Project description||Създаване и публикуване на оригинални творби като поезия, песни, есета, дисертации, романи и т.н., независимо дали те вече са били публикувани по-рано или не.<! - За предпочитане, напишете резюме тук и отговорете по-подробно на въпросите в раздел "Предложения" ->|
|Is it a multilingual wiki?||Ще има много езикови версии.|
|Potential number of languages||Проектът ще бъде на много езици.|
|Proposed tagline||Свободната културна сцена или Безплатната културна сцена|
|Proposed URL||За определяне|
|New features to require||Проектът не изисква задължително нови функции, с които софтуера на МедияУики в момента не разполага. Добре дошли са някои разширения като Duplicator за лесно създаване на разклонения (например, ако искате да напишете алтернативен край на роман). LilyPond може да се използва за осигуряване на начин за споделяне на музикални партитури. Възможно е да се създадат (или интегрират) новаторски интерфейси, които да облекчат музикалните и графичните приноси и сътрудничества.|
|Development wiki||Все още не е в инкубационен период.|
wikiculture wikicultur wikikulturo wikikultura wikicultura wikikult wikisevenadur wikimentan wikicultural…
Свързани проекти/ предложения
- wikisource if you drop the "no first publication" requirement
- wikibooks if you drop the pedagogic focus
- Wikiessay have a smaller focus, which would be included in a project like wikikultur, a category essay and a portal could be created for this particular subject, and others
- WikiScores, Wikimusic II, and so on, could also be covered in a wikikultur, once again with categories and portal to guide people
- Sexta poética a brazilian wiki publishing poems affiliated to the Wikimedia Brazil
- WikiCulture - the same unofficial proposal (written unaware of this). May have good points.
Имена на домейни
всяко .org на предишните имена
Препратки към пощенски списъци
Add your name to the end of the list with #~~~~ if you are interested in this project.
- Psychoslave (talk)
- Nevinho (talk)
- Raylton P. Sousa (talk) 09:26, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
- H2NCH2COOH (talk)
- Ordre Nativel (talk) 07:02, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
- David1010 (talk) 13:14, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
- Varnent (talk) 18:13, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
- Leucosticte (talk) 21:16, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
- Theopolisme talk! 23:16, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
- Lo Ximiendo (talk) 01:09, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- VIGNERON * discut. 19:29, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
- --Claritas (talk) 23:35, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
- Spring Roll Conan ( Teahouse | Contributions )18:56, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
- Halley Pacheco de Oliveira (talk) 18:30, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- 220.127.116.11 19:23, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
- ABC 15:22, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
- ClementD (talk) 14:54, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
- ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 19:42, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
- Startracker 23:13, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
- --Iste (D) 17:24, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
- Solstag (talk) 20:53, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
- Eduardofeld (talk) 00:21, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
- Ricordisamoa 07:25, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- Lionel Allorge (talk) 19:30, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
- Mirrorhai (talk) 10:57, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- Micru (talk) 20:44, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
- --TheChampionMan1234talken-wiki 02:58, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
- Jmfayard (talk) 16:13, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
- --Blizinsk (talk) 08:33, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
- --Dixtosa (talk) 22:42, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
- --Satdeep Gill (talk) 16:25, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
- --Wikipiki 00:06, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
- --Donald Trung (Talk 🤳🏻) (My global lock 😒🌏🔒) (My global unlock 😄🌏🔓) 11:13, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
- Does the proposal fit into one of the existing projects?
- Not with current guidelines. Wikibook could be used if the guideline would be redefined without pedagogical requirements. Wikisource could be used if the guideline would be redefined without previous paper publication.
- Would there be side-effects on existing projects?
- It would be possible to redirect, from Wikipedia, people interested to write free (eventually collaborative) essays, or other works exposing a point of view or originals theses. Thus, the free/libre culture would not miss possible contributions, and it may reduce the amount of POV tainted articles. Moreover, Wikipedia may use some Wikikultur articles as references, giving people a primary source with many wiki-format advantages : history , statistics, etc. This may help establishing the topic's notability.
- Doesn't Wikipedia, and others Wikimedia projects, have a no novel works guideline ? Isn't an encyclopedia a project which sum up existing knowledge, rather an original works collection ?
- It's important and right that Wikipedia continues to keep a guideline which exclude novels works, it's an important principle which tend to make it an improving encyclopedia. However, all projects of the foundation does not exclude novels works, or at least are committed to the necessary acceptance of original works pertinent for their general guidelines. Thus, Wikiversity established a guideline for original researches and Wikinews explains the steps one may follow to contribute on first hand journalism actions. A project like wikikultur have its place among other Wikimedia projects because it would well interconnect with them. A Wikiversity course exposing structuring narratives (or musical if you prefer) woks may end with an invitation to share works wrote after studying the course on Wikikultur, and to add interlinks at the end of the course. And retroactively, the study of produced works could be as used as material for Wiktionary research studies on the impact and effectiveness of the course. The possibilities of publishing essays which can serve as primary source for Wikipedia, and benefits that could be bring, have already been mentioned several times on this page. A page as The no original research policy have would completely fit the guideline of a project like Wikikultur, while its publication on Meta-Wiki is more questionable.
- Isn't other collaborative media available which would me more suited for this kind of project, like launching a dedicated wiki, on Wikia for example? Isn't this project out scope of the Wikimedia goals ?
- As explained in the previous point, Wikikultur has an ambition of symbiosis with the other Wikimedia projects, an objective which can only be achieved by becoming itself a Wikimedia project. Wikikultur will not only intend to encourage interconnections with other Wikimedia projects, it will participate in strengthening links between other projects. For covering a guideline that is out of scope of other projects, it will fill a gap of potential inter-relationships.
- Who are the volunteers who will judge the artistic quality of what is provided? Isn't art the most subjective of all human activities that can not be judged objectively.
- First, one could argue first that all judgment is necessarily subjective, but this is a topic that deserves a highly developed essay alone, and that would of course have its place on Wikikultur. More simply, concerns on art works qualities or philosophical works virtues, are decisions that should be left to the discretion of each person who will consult those works. Obviously, anyone can inquire about other contributors opinions through discussion pages. Possibly, if the community perceive the interest, it would be possible to implement systems to allow rapid feedback like it's done on Wikipedia, obviously with questions adapted the original works.
- Doesn't this project require too much resources for Wikimedia which has limited space and time and extremely limited financial and volunteers resources, with only small potential benefits?
- This project have probably not a disproportionate size relative to other goals set by the Wikimedia Foundation. Wikimedia does not hide and is sparing no efforts to attract new contributors and retain those already involved. Certainly a project like Wikikultur will bring many new contributors, some of which would also extend community of other Wikimedia projects. It would also provide means of expression to all Wikimedians who would like to broaden the scope of their contributions to areas covered by Wikikultur without having to look elsewhere for their happiness, with the risk that they would completely stop to contribute to Wikimedia projects. Such a contributors inheritance dynamic would probably become anecdotic for a project with similar objectives to those of Wikikultur but not affiliated with Wikimedia.
- Would Wikikultur articles really be appropriate as references in Wikipedia articles ? Shouldn't references results from sources already checked by professional-level fact checkers?
- What's reliable is mainly a matter of who do you trust. What's a "professional-level fact checkers" ? Just because people are labeled "professional", that doesn't make their opinions some absolute true you can blindly trust. Professionals may have economic interest in lie, or bullshit for example. What's important for an encyclopaedia is to inform readers who claims what, and when possible giving references to check further that one person or an other really claimed that. With wikikultur, people will just have easy access to free/libre sources, and with the article history, will be able to see who published it on the wiki, possibly which contributors wrote what exactly, and even easily find other contributions from this users what could give a better background on their thought system. So it would just bring more transparent sources. Wikipedia is already full of web pages references that doesn't offer as much transparency. Anyway, whether this would be a good idea or not to use Wikikultur as Wikipedia references source could be debated along the way, independently from the project launching.