Hi Everyone,
I’m a bit of a wikipedia junkie. Is there a reason that Cardano / ADA, IOHK, Emurgo etc. don’t have a presence on wikipedia? Seems like a good place for the general public to get an overview of a particular topic.
Bitcoin has masses of info.
This is my first forum post. Should I throw something together and become a wikipedia contributor too?
Best wishes from Oz - Go Cardano!
Dave
Hi mate @Elurevad and welcome to the forum!
Early 2018, several of us tried to start a wikipedia page, then we ran into some difficulties to publish content, especially by one of the Wikipedia administrator ( or validator I don’t remember the exact term) who was a bit zealous in suppressing our content to say the least -, but surprisingly the page appears to not exist anymore?
@RobJF Do you know anything about that?
Just so you know, there is also a Cardano Wiki https://cardanowiki.info/wiki/Main_Page but of course it is not as popular as a proper Wikipedia Page. You’re more than welcome to contribute anytime!
.
Not heard anything since one of the community managers, don’t remember which one, some months ago, said they were looking at getting third party WP specialists to help produce content that would be acceptable to the WP editors. The big problem has always been that anyone with any Cardano connection, including just hodling, is seen as biased. Also, they don’t like people with little/no WP history contributing.
Hi Elurevad,
It would be nice if you could get Cardano on wikipedia. There was a reddit thread with people working on it at
and other discussion on an archived thread at…
I thought that Wikipedia is not reliable anymore. I mean I never use it as a source of information
It looks like there is at least a draft for the wikipedia page but it appears that it has been rejected due to:
The rejection appears to have happened earlier this year (January 11 2019).
Another interesting thing here is that DASH has a wiki page
Monero:
Ripple:
Ethereum Classic:
Well, I have requested a review of the draft page - seems like a reasonably well written introduction to Cardano in line with the other pages you have cited. I’ll get back to you with their response.
BTWs, though wikipedia may not be an academic source, it is often a very well visited “front-page” and can be a good presence.
Cheers!
Dave
Please be very careful.
Some of us have invested quite a lot of time and efforts to write content, and argue with wikipedia admins.
As anyone can contribute, it happened multiple times that the generally crypto-skeptical wiki admins saw some new and over-motivated (hype, speculative, …) content, and then deleted the whole article.
If you are seriously interested, and have some Wiki experience I’m happy to bring you on contact with other wiki authors…
OK. If there are people already involved with getting a page established I won’t muddy the waters.
I/we are trying to get a Cardano Wikipedia page live, but haven’t succeeded so far.
Some Wikipedia admins are not so fond of the crypto scene because others have used it for promotion and did not (fully) comply to the neutral rules of Wikipedia. Now some are very strict on the (multi interpretable) Wikipedia rules like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources
If someone has suggestions on articles from ‘reliable’ sources, please post them.
How bloody ridiculous. So if there is a real thing that exists in the world, Wikipedia only want to know about it if a reliable source has written about it. So much for being an open source of knowledge.
Maybe the Cardano Foundation should donate 50,000 ADA to Wikipedia (they regularly have browser popups asking for donations) and they would soon realise that the Cardano blockchain is a real thing when they go to access the funds.
The relationship between the Wikipedia Foundation and its editors is similar to the relationship between CF and us. The editors are volunteers who believe in the principles and would in no way be influenced by donations to the WF.
Yeh, appreciate that. It wasn’t ever about the donation being used to influence.
It was more about it being able to demonstrate that their principles are flawed, as they won’t allow a real thing to be documented despite that real thing being something they themselves could touch.
It is like them visiting a town and then turning around to say that the town can’t be documented on Wikipedia.
But hey, at least we know their principles have allowed pages like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titcoin. Maybe when Cardano is as reputable as this cryptocurrency we will be considered.
I also noticed that Cardano has no coverage on -
That might be a good place to start
Yes but we’re talking about different people, I wouldn’t expect that the editors who are being difficult would ever know about any particular donations, or care much if they were told.
their principles have allowed pages like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titcoin
I think maybe a major sticking point is whether it’s fully functional. They’d say Cardano isn’t even decentralised.
There are Cardano Wikipedia pages, except in English. The German page is still one of the best with good content: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardano_(Kryptowährung)
We have a English Wikipedia page now: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardano_(cryptocurrency_platform)
Unfortunately, it’s very short and badly out of date, and you have to be well established as a WP editor to work on it (>500 edits to your credit).