From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page is a proposal for a new Wikimedia Foundation Sister Project.
Status Under discussion
What is the proposed name for the project? Wikinexus
Proposed project tagline Where free minds connect with free knowledge; or, Where free minds and free knowledge meet
Project description
What is the project purpose? What will be its scope? How would it benefit to be part of Wikimedia?
Purpose stated below (to be further developed)
How many wikis?
Will there be many language versions or just on one multilingual wiki?
I envision many language versions
How many languages?
Is the project going to be in one language or in many?
Initially English version
Proposed project website address

Technical requirements
If the project requires any new features that the MediaWiki software currently doesn't have, please describe in detail. Are additional MediaWiki extensions needed for the project?
Development wiki
Interested participants Londonjackbooks

Proposed by[edit]


Wikimedia Foundation Values (2016) states, "We are guided by a vision of a better world.… it's about making space for new ideas and new connections, making space for creativity."

Wikimedia is primarily knowledge- and information-based. But information tends to be static. Understanding—through which one acquires wisdom—is not achieved by the mere attainment of knowledge. What is missing is a dynamic conversation about information. I submit that a new project be created that connects free minds with free knowledge. A discourse of ideas that can help develop a vision of and for a better world.

From any given article at Wikipedia, or any given work or author page at Wikisource, etc., one would link (via button or link) to a Wikinexus discussion page that corresponds to the article, work, author, etc. for general open discussion about an article topic or ideas within a work. This project would be guided by a set of guidelines/policies and require admins/moderators to keep discussions on-topic and civil.

What it is[edit]

  • A place for inquiry, dialogue and the free exchange of ideas.
  • An effort to encourage critical thinking/logic and explore ideas derived from article topics or works.
  • Some discussions may consist simply of Q&A exchanges. It depends on the topic and where people wish to take a conversation.

What it is not[edit]

  • A formal debate.
  • A place to proselytize. However, if one goal of the sister is to help develop a vision of and for a better world (both a subjective and an ethical matter), it is reasonable that opinions and beliefs will be discussed. One should not jump to conclusions of intent to proselytize at the drop of a hat with every shared opinion or belief.
  • A place to take things personally. Keep one's perspective, don't be quick to judge, and remain civil. Set the example.

This purpose section will continue to be developed as long as the proposal remains under discussion. Suggestions/criticism welcomed in the discussion section below or at the proposal's Talk page, wherever it is most appropriate. Londonjackbooks (talk) 20:50, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Alternative names[edit]

Related projects/proposals[edit]

Domain names[edit]


People interested[edit]

Gargonzula1200 (talk) 10:08, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
Fire maxetesta (talk) 10:11, 18 November 2017 (UTC) practical.
The two above users are socks. Zhangj1079 talk 20:28, 5 January 2018 (UTC)


(Just thinking aloud; not sure I've completely understood the proposal.) Could a platform like be used for this? With appropriate links from wikis, and threads perhaps automatically created when linked/used? That's sort of what PGDP does. Sam Wilson 08:27, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Nice! But the layout of Discourse (which I had never heard of before!) breaks the flow of ideas, especially in mobile. A Talk page layout reads more like a discussion, although I do realize some sort of structure may be necessary (subtopics using sections). Where Discourse is WM-centric, Nexus would be idea-centric. Yes; my proposal is more vague than I would like at this time. But I envision as you said, where threads are "automatically created when linked/used", etc., and built upon from there. Londonjackbooks (talk) 09:18, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Another benefit to using a Talk page layout is the use of wiki-markup/wikilinking as opposed to html, etc.—This would enhance wiki skills which may translate to future wiki project editors. It would require having many text formatting templates available for use from across the sister projects, esp. Wikisource. Londonjackbooks (talk) 11:04, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

This seems redundant to either Meta if we are discussing wiki stuff or Wikiversity if you are discussing ideas/knowledge/etc. —Justin (koavf)TCM 23:56, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

@Koavf: Where at Wikiversity can one have a conversation about DACA? Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:29, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
It would be so much more user friendly to have a button at the DACA WP page that, when clicked on, sends a reader directly to a corresponding talk page where thoughts can be discussed/considered on the topic. Londonjackbooks (talk) 00:40, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
@Londonjackbooks: v:en:Wikidebate. —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:08, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
@Koavf: I gave it a look. Even before a debate there is discussion. It is the discussion level I am primarily concerned with, although there will be a certain amount of informal debate within a discussion. Wikidebate is perhaps the next level (Add a "debate it" button to the discussion page which will take you to Wikidebate). Wikinexus would allow not only for views for and against a thing, but also for exploring the meaning of a poem for instance. Not all discussions will be debates. Not all conversations are arguments. What is sought are ideas... connections... inspiration. Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:12, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

see also discussion at wikimania "Covering the Wikimedia Community" - Slowking4 (talk) 01:29, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Excerpts from the Wikimania discussion potentially relating to this proposed sister:
  • "foster better communication amongst the community"
  • "it's almost strange to be asked to add additional platforms to communicate with the same community"
  • "The challenge is reaching the people who don't engage in any of these [communication platforms], but just contribute (or only read) content and occasionally complain about problems to their friends, who (might or might not) then help them find solutions. But these majority of readers and editors aren't being consulted, or taking part, in significant decisions."
  • "problems with moderators taking a while to get around to posts"
  • "The talk-xicity"
Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:56, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Comment Comment I found this proposal interesting, but there would be certain overlap with Wikiversity or Meta-Wiki if the idea is related to Wikimedia movement. I would like proposer to tell us why this proposed project could not be approached by Wikiversity (or Meta-Wiki/Outreach when is about Wikimedia movement). --Zerabat (discusión) 23:25, 25 February 2018 (UTC)