Wikimuseum

This is a **proposal for a new** Wikimedia sister project.
Wikimuseum
Status of the proposal
Status	under discussion
Details of the proposal
Project description	It aims to dispose all content that can be arranged in a museum and that has enough notability for such, separated in small projects, like Museum of Art, Museum of Fossils etc. It is different from Wikipedia, because the criteria of notability are different, it is not necessary that each object be covered by sources, for example, it is enough that it has “museum interest” (to be better defined the criteria). It is also different from Wikipedia by the provision of information (the image becomes the center), by the multilingual style, as in Wikidata, among others. It differs from Commons because it not only stores images and catalogs them, but explains them, relates them, and does so in all possible languages, for public, like ina Museum. Will use Commons as archive. It differs from the Wikidata because its information is not only objects but also contains a text. I suggest that each page has a museum object, with a main photo and other photos (other angles, etc.) a larger text, and links as in wikidata for artist, place where it is found etc.
Is it a multilingual wiki?	It would be a multilingual project, where the user decides which language to access. Kind of like it's done today at the Wikidata
Potential number of languages	It would be a multilingual project, where the user decides which language to access. Kind of like it's done today at the Wikidata
Proposed tagline	Does your project have a tagline? (optional)
Proposed URL	museum.wikimedia.org
Technical requirements
New features to require	Same extension of commons.
Development wiki	no
Interested participants
	Felipe da Fonseca, --Los Vegas (talk) 14:32, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]; 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 01:46, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
	v; t; e;

It aims to dispose all content that can be arranged in a museum and that has enough notability for such, separated in small projects, like Museum of Art, Museum of Fossils etc. It is different from Wikipedia, because the criteria of notability are different, it is not necessary that each object be covered by sources, for example, it is enough that it has “museum interest” (to be better defined the criteria). It is also different from Wikipedia by the provision of information (the image becomes the center), by the multilingual style, as in Wikidata, among others.

It differs from Commons because it not only stores images and catalogs them, but explains them, relates them, and does so in all possible languages, for public, like ina Museum. Will use Commons as archive.

It differs from the Wikidata because its information is not only objects but also contains a text.

I suggest that each page has a museum object, with a main photo and other photos (other angles, etc.) a larger text, and links as in wikidata for artist, place where it is found etc.

Proposed by

Felipe da Fonseca

Alternative names

WikiSciences

Related projects/proposals

Mineralwiki, Wikispecies

Domain names

museum.wikimedia.org

Mailing list links

Demos

People interested

--Los Vegas (talk) 14:32, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

— Dino Bronto Rex (talk) 18:28, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

i like your great achieve project. i would love to contribute SamadheeDsilva (talk) 05:50, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I would be interested in this project, keep me posted. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 15:36, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If carried out, this project would interest me. Miguu (talk) 19:17, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I would love to participate if this project goes well! -- Jay Jay Marcus Keize13 (talk)
Pretty interesting. I was thinking of something like this too. We have tons of old machins from the industrial age in Thiers, some still in use. It could even be filmed with people using it. -- Thibdx (talk) 18:24, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support ArepTicous ^talk _contribs 14:56, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm interested. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 13:07, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support. It sounds as culture. And can include all the items in a Museum / Archaeological Site. 23:41, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
Support. --NGC 54 (talk | contribs</span》) 10:15, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

But why multilingual? --NGC 54 (talk | contribs) 09:08, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support JackFromReedsburg (talk) 03:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support MONUMENTA (talk) 13:57, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Inphonekrie (talk) 14:14, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Netgo123 (talk) 05:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Commons is badly designed for showcasing. Structured data and the such hasn't been widely used. Curation is important --Ignacio Rodríguez (talk) 20:19, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Very strong support If Wikispecies and Mineralwiki and a bunch of other stuff from Commons was combined, it would probably (eventually) become one of the most visited Wikimedia projects, only below Wikipedia. Eshaan011 (talk) 00:25, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I came here to pitch a Wiki for folk songs, folklores, inscriptions, manuscripts etc. But I think that can be a part of WikiMuseum now that I have read about this proposal. IKHazarika (talk) 11:10, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Need a wiki virtual museum Vis M (talk) 06:36, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support To do--doramiso-meta (talk) 11:10, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support seems like a nice way to centralize and arrange historical topics from all the wikis at a museum Crainsaw (talk) 22:12, 18th June 2023 (UTC)
Support --V0lkanic (talk) 23:03, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support good plan. Is it... going ahead at all, or has this died out a bit? 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 15:41, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've sketched out this:

as a possible, vague idea for a project logo. There's also an alternate version at File:Museum2.png. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 15:41, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried drafting a sample page and run into problems. Commons has lots of high-quality pictures, but for many archaeological objects, not much is known besides what's on the museum's own web page about the object. Instead of creating pages about individual objects, in which case we're mostly copying from museum websites, I suggest we have curated many exhibits with short blurbs about each object. Object pages can be transcluded from a different namespace onto the exihibit pages, and can then be easily cycled. We'll need policies about the scope of exhibit pages, what can be included on one, and how often they should be cycled.

I'll try to make some mockups of this at Wikispore; I'm keen to actually get this project off the ground.

The museum won't of course be restricted to archaeology, and having biology or geology exhibitions is a bit easier. I suggest we stay away from modern art, as that would make things more complicated than they have to be. Cremastra (talk) 21:09, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

At Wikispore I've thrown together a partial main page draft (which imho looks really good) and an example of an object page to be transcluded onto an exhibit/gallery page. That does not have structured data in it, because I'm not very techy, but should give an idea of the general look of the thing.

Pinging editors who have previously expressed interest, as I'd like to see this get off the ground: @V0lkanic, Crainsaw, Vis M, Brunnaiz, 沈澄心, Faendalimas, Los Vegas, Dino Bronto Rex, Rubbish computer, Paloi Sciurala, JackFromReedsburg, MONUMENTA, IKHazarika, Eshaan011, Ignacio Rodríguez, Arepticous, Netgo123, PastelKos, Miguu, Thibdx, SamadheeDsilva, Jay Jay Marcus Keize13, and ドラみそ: what do you think? Cremastra (talk) 01:21, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How could we help to carry along this project. It have been proposed for a long time now and the support seems to be strong. @Cremastra is there particular tasks to advance in the project? Miguu (talk) 21:10, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support --dring sim 12:52, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seems like a plausible project which would spark interest from many editors and readers. I do wonder, though, how the multilingual aspect would be enhanced, because as a speaker of a minoritized language this is an important factor for me. Nonetheless, I wish we could start it off soon. --Brunnaiz (talk) 23:41, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support It seems like a plausible project. I think it will be a strong way of popularizing cultural pieces currently only known at a local level. Miguu (talk) 21:08, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Excellent. If it works well, it will help protect a lot of meaningful things. Even just images and text are very meaningful, since everyone will eventually pass away, and what remains are descriptions and photos. ~ Sheminghui.WU (talk) 04:14, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

People opposed

Oppose. Not dissociated enough from Wikispecies and Wikidata. --Hérisson grognon (talk) 13:08, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wikispecies? JrawX (talk) 07:25, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We could simply merge WikiSpecies into Wikimuseum. And Wikidata is wildly different. Even Mineralwiki can be merged into this. Eshaan011 (talk) 17:26, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the idea behind Mineralwiki. It might actually be a good idea to merge this into the Wikimuseum. If these wikis were merged into one, there would be more editors and more visitors. There are over 5,000 minerals and rocks, and new ones are being discovered all the time. And I would really like to have the wiki as soon as possible, because I would really like to edit it. Thanks. Lois131 (talk) 06:51, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Um I second the ??? on Wikispecies. At Wikispecies we are an informative and curated list of names of biological organisms. Including all the metadata associated with that. We are not a list of museums or the registered objects they contain, not all types are even in museums. I am happy to support a project development around museums per se, but what you seem to be doing is a list of registered museum objects. In any species page on Wikispecies only one datapoint, the type specimen, can (and is not always) a museum object. As currently being defined here though I am leaning to agree with oppose. Cheers Scott Thomson (Faendalimas) ^talk 04:41, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I tend to oppose because this can already be implemented via Wikimedia Commons and Wikidata as is. It differs from Commons because it not only stores images and catalogs them, but explains them, relates them, and does so in all possible languages, for public, like ina Museum. Will use Commons as archive. This can also be done on Wikidata and Commons: via galleries and Wikidata lists. See for example, c:Music genres and c:Cats and d:Wikidata:List of science fiction genres. Most Commons galleries are very low-quality, outdated, rarely viewed, and built by just few users – so rather than having a new separate superniche unknown project you could just use what is there already. A metapage like "c:Wikimuseums" could be created on Commons that e.g. indexes all of these (maybe using the categories). --Prototyperspective (talk) 13:47, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unnecessary project that will eventually fall into disuse. Improve the Wikidata entries, perhaps create a Project to improve the information available there. --PastelKos (talk) 12:21, 07 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]