??????????
(
or
WIK
-i-
PEE
-dee-?
) ??
????
,
????? ??? ?????
,
?????
,
???????
????????
???? ?? ????????? ????
?????????? ?????????
??? ????????? ? ????? ?? ?????? ???? (???????? ???? ?.? ??????
?????? ??????????
???) ????? ????? ??????
???????????
??? ????????? ? ????? ?????? ???? ?????? ??? ??????? ????? ?
[?]
??????????
?????? ??
?????
????
???? (wiki)
(????? ???? ??????) ?
??????????????
(Encyclopedia) ?? ?????? ???????????? ??????? ????????????? ???? ?????? ???? ????? ???????? ??? ??????? ????????? ?
Wikipedia is
written collaboratively
by largely anonymous Internet
volunteers
who write without pay. Anyone with Internet access can write and make changes to Wikipedia articles (except in
certain cases
where editing is restricted to prevent disruption or vandalism). Users can
contribute anonymously
, under a pseudonym, or with their real identity, if they choose.
The fundamental principles by which Wikipedia operates are the
Five pillars
. The Wikipedia community has developed many
policies and guidelines
to improve the encyclopedia; however, it is not a formal requirement to be familiar with them before contributing.
Since its creation in 2001,
Wikipedia
has grown rapidly into one of the
largest
reference
websites
, attracting 400 million unique visitors monthly as of March 2011 according to
ComScore
.
[?]
There are more than
82,000 active contributors
working on more than
19,000,000 articles
in more than
270 languages
. As of today, there are ??,??? articles in
English
. Every day, hundreds of thousands of visitors from around the world collectively make tens of thousands of edits and create thousands of new articles to augment the knowledge held by the
Wikipedia
encyclopedia
(see also
Wikipedia:Statistics
.)
People
of all ages, cultures and backgrounds can add or
edit
article prose, references, images and other media here. What is contributed is more important than the expertise or qualifications of the contributor. What will remain depends upon whether it fits within Wikipedia's
policies
, including being
verifiable
against a published
reliable source
, so excluding editors'
opinions
and beliefs and
unreviewed research
, and is free of
copyright restrictions
and contentious material about
living people
. Contributions cannot damage Wikipedia because the software allows easy reversal of mistakes and many experienced editors are watching to help and ensure that edits are cumulative improvements. Begin by simply clicking the
edit
link
at the top of any editable page!
Wikipedia is a live collaboration differing from paper-based reference sources in important ways. Unlike printed encyclopedias, Wikipedia is continually created and updated, with articles on historic events appearing within minutes, rather than months or years. Older articles tend to grow more comprehensive and balanced; newer articles may contain misinformation, unencyclopedic content, or
vandalism
. Awareness of this aids obtaining valid information and avoiding recently added misinformation (see
Researching with Wikipedia
).
What Wikipedia is not
circumscribes Wikipedia's scope. Further information on key topics appears below. Further advice is at
Frequently asked questions
,
advice for parents
, or see
Where to ask questions
. For help getting started with editing or other issues, see
Help:Contents
.
About Wikipedia
Wikipedia history
Wikipedia
was founded as an offshoot of
Nupedia
, a now-abandoned project to produce a free encyclopedia. Nupedia had an elaborate system of
peer review
and required highly qualified contributors, but the writing of articles was slow. During 2000,
Jimmy Wales
, founder of Nupedia, and
Larry Sanger
, whom Wales had employed to work on the project, discussed ways of supplementing Nupedia with a more open, complementary project. Multiple sources suggested the idea that a
wiki
might allow members of the public to contribute material, and Nupedia's first wiki went online on January 10, 2001.
There was considerable resistance on the part of Nupedia's editors and reviewers to the idea of associating Nupedia with a website in the wiki format, so the new project was given the name "Wikipedia" and launched on its own domain, wikipedia.com, on January 15 (now called "
Wikipedia Day
" by some users). The
bandwidth
and
server
(in San Diego) were donated by Wales. Other current and past
Bomis
employees who have worked on the project include
Tim Shell
, one of the cofounders of Bomis and its current CEO, and programmer Jason Richey. The domain was eventually changed to the present wikipedia.org when the not-for-profit
Wikimedia Foundation
was launched as its new parent organization, prompting the use of a ".org" domain to denote its non-commercial nature.
In May 2001, a wave of non-English Wikipedias was launched?in
Catalan
,
Chinese
,
Dutch
,
Esperanto
,
French
,
German
,
Hebrew
,
Italian
,
Japanese
,
Portuguese
,
Russian
,
Spanish
, and
Swedish
. These were soon joined by
Arabic
and
Hungarian
.
[?]
In September,
[?]
Polish
was added, and further commitment to the multilingual provision of Wikipedia was made. At the end of the year,
Afrikaans
,
Norwegian
, and
Serbo-Croatian
versions were announced.
Trademarks and copyrights
Wikipedia
is a registered
trademark
of the
not-for-profit
Wikimedia Foundation
, which has created a family of free-content
projects
that are built by user contributions.
Most of Wikipedia's text and many of its images are dual-licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License
(CC-BY-SA) and the
GNU Free Documentation License
(GFDL) (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts). Some text has been imported only under CC-BY-SA and CC-BY-SA-compatible license and cannot be reused under GFDL; such text will be identified either on the page footer, in the page history or on the discussion page of the article that utilizes the text. Every image has a description page which indicates the license under which it is released or, if it is non-free, the rationale under which it is used.
Contributions remain the property of their creators, while the CC-BY-SA and GFDL licenses ensure the content is freely distributable and reproducible. (See the
copyright notice
and the
content disclaimer
for more information.)
Wikipedia contributors
Anyone with Web access can edit Wikipedia, and this openness encourages inclusion of a tremendous amount of content. About 91,000 editors?from expert scholars to casual readers?regularly edit Wikipedia, and these experienced editors often help to create a consistent style throughout the encyclopedia, following our
Manual of Style
.
Several mechanisms are in place to help Wikipedia members carry out the important work of crafting a high-quality resource while maintaining
civility
. Editors are able to watch pages and techies can write editing programs to keep track of or rectify bad edits. Where there are disagreements on how to present facts, editors work together to arrive at an article that fairly represents current expert opinion on the subject.
Although the Wikimedia Foundation owns the site, it is largely uninvolved in writing and daily operations.
Credits
Text on Wikipedia is a collaborative work, and the efforts of individual contributors to a page are recorded in that page's history, which is publicly viewable.
See
Help:Page history
.
Information on the authorship of images and other media, such as sound files, can be found by clicking on the image itself or the nearby information icon. The file page for the image or media will be displayed and it includes the author and source, where appropriate, along with other information.
See
Help:File page
.
Making the best use of Wikipedia
Exploring Wikipedia
Many visitors come to Wikipedia to acquire knowledge, others to share knowledge. At this very instant, dozens of articles are being improved, and
new articles
are also being created. Changes can be viewed at the
Recent changes
page and a random page at
random articles
. Over 2,000 articles have been designated by the Wikipedia community as
featured articles
, exemplifying the best articles in the encyclopedia. Another 7,000 articles are designated as
good articles
. Some information on Wikipedia is organized into
lists
; the best of these are designated as
featured lists
. Wikipedia also has
portals
, which organize content around topic areas; our best portals are selected as
featured portals
. Articles can be found using the
search
box on the top-right side of the screen.
Wikipedia is available in languages other than English. Wikipedia has more than two hundred languages (see
other language versions
), including a
Simple English
version, and related projects include a dictionary, quotations, books, manuals, and scientific reference sources, and a news service (see
sister projects
). All of these are maintained, updated, and managed by separate communities, and often include information and articles that can be hard to find through other common sources.
Basic navigation in Wikipedia
Wikipedia articles are all
linked
, or cross-referenced. When highlighted text like
this
is seen, it means there is a link to some relevant article or Wikipedia page with further in-depth information elsewhere. Holding the mouse over the link will often show to where the link will lead. The reader is always one click away from more information on any point that has a link attached. There are other links towards the ends of most articles, for other articles of interest, relevant external websites and pages, reference material, and
organized categories of knowledge
which can be searched and traversed in a loose
hierarchy
for more information. Some articles may also have links to dictionary definitions, audio-book readings, quotations, the same article in other languages, and further information available on our
sister projects
. Further links can be added if a relevant link is missing, and this is one way to contribute.
Using Wikipedia as a research tool
As
wiki
documents, articles are never considered complete and may be continually edited and improved. Over time, this generally results in an upward trend of quality and a growing consensus over a neutral representation of information.
Users should be aware that not all articles are of encyclopedic quality from the start: they may contain false or debatable information. Indeed, many articles start their lives as displaying a single viewpoint; and, after a long process of discussion, debate, and argument, they gradually take on a
neutral point of view
reached through
consensus
. Others may, for a while, become caught up in a heavily unbalanced viewpoint which can take some time?months perhaps?to achieve better balanced coverage of their subject. In part, this is because editors often contribute content in which they have a particular interest and do not attempt to make each article that they edit comprehensive. However, eventually, additional editors expand and contribute to articles and strive to achieve balance and comprehensive coverage. In addition, Wikipedia operates a number of internal resolution processes that can assist when editors disagree on content and approach. Usually, editors eventually reach a consensus on ways to improve the article.
The
ideal
Wikipedia article is well-written, balanced,
neutral
, and encyclopedic, containing comprehensive, notable,
verifiable
knowledge. An increasing number of articles reach this standard over time, and many already have. Our best articles are called
Featured Articles
(and display a small star in the upper right corner of the article), and our second best tier of articles are designated
Good Articles
. However, this is a process and can take months or years to be achieved, as each user adds their contribution in turn. Some articles contain statements which have not yet been fully
cited
. Others will later be augmented with new sections. Some information will be considered by later contributors to be insufficiently founded and, therefore, may be removed or expunged.
While the overall trend is toward improvement, it is important to use Wikipedia carefully if it is intended to be used as a research source, since individual articles will, by their nature, vary in quality and maturity.
Guidelines and information pages
are available to help users and researchers do this effectively, as is an article that summarizes third-party studies and assessments of the
reliability of Wikipedia
.
Wikipedia vs. paper encyclopedias
- Main article:
Wiki is not paper
(on
Wikimedia Meta-Wiki
)
Wikipedia has advantages over traditional paper encyclopedias. Wikipedia has a very low "publishing" cost for adding or expanding entries and a low environmental impact
in some respects
, since it never needs to be printed, although computers have their own
environmental cost
. In addition, Wikipedia has
wikilinks
instead of in-line explanations and it incorporates overview summaries (article introductions) with the extensive detail of full articles. Additionally, the editorial cycle is short. A paper encyclopedia stays the same until the next edition, whereas editors can update Wikipedia at any instant, around the clock, to help ensure that articles stay abreast of the most recent events and scholarship.
Strengths, weaknesses, and article quality in Wikipedia
Wikipedia's greatest strengths, weaknesses, and differences all arise because it is open to anyone, it has a large contributor base, and its articles are written by consensus, according to editorial guidelines and policies.
- Wikipedia is
open to a large contributor base
, drawing a large number of editors from diverse backgrounds. This allows Wikipedia to significantly reduce regional and cultural bias found in many other publications, and makes it very difficult for any group to censor and impose bias. A large, diverse editor base also provides access and breadth on subject matter that is otherwise inaccessible or little documented. A large number of editors contributing at any moment also means that Wikipedia can produce encyclopedic articles and resources covering newsworthy events within hours or days of their occurrence. It also means that like any publication, Wikipedia may reflect the cultural, age, socio-economic, and other biases of its contributors. There is no systematic process to make sure that
"obviously important" topics
are written about, so Wikipedia may contain unexpected oversights and omissions. While
most
articles may be altered by anyone, in practice editing will be performed by a certain demographic (younger rather than older, male rather than female, rich enough to afford a computer rather than poor, et cetera) and may, therefore, show some bias. Some topics may not be covered well, while others may be covered in great depth.
- Allowing
anyone to edit
Wikipedia means that it is more easily vandalized or susceptible to unchecked information, which requires removal. See
Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism
. While blatant vandalism is usually easily spotted and rapidly corrected, Wikipedia is more subject to subtle viewpoint promotion than a typical reference work. However, bias that would be unchallenged in a traditional reference work is likely to be ultimately challenged or considered on Wikipedia. While Wikipedia articles generally attain a good standard after editing, it is important to note that fledgling articles and those monitored less well may be susceptible to vandalism and insertion of false information. Wikipedia's radical openness also means that any given article may be, at any given moment, in a bad state, such as in the middle of a large edit, or a controversial rewrite. Many contributors do not yet comply fully with key
policies
, or may add information without
citable
sources. Wikipedia's open approach tremendously increases the chances that any particular factual error or misleading statement will be relatively promptly corrected. Numerous editors at any given time are monitoring
recent changes
and edits to articles on their
watchlist
.
- Wikipedia is
written by open and transparent consensus
?an approach that has its pros and cons. Censorship or imposing "official" points of view is extremely difficult to achieve and usually fails after a time. Eventually for most articles, all notable views become fairly described and a
neutral point of view
reached. In reality, the process of reaching consensus may be long and drawn-out, with articles fluid or changeable for a long time while they find their "neutral approach" that all sides can agree on. Reaching neutrality is occasionally made harder by
extreme-viewpoint contributors
. Wikipedia operates a full editorial dispute resolution process, one that allows time for discussion and resolution in depth, but one that also permits disagreements to last for months before poor-quality or biased edits are removed. A common conclusion is that Wikipedia is a valuable resource and provides a good reference point on its subjects.
- That said, articles and subject areas sometimes suffer from significant omissions, and while misinformation and vandalism are usually corrected quickly, this does not always happen. (See for example
this incident
in which a person inserted a fake biography linking a prominent journalist to the Kennedy assassinations and Soviet Russia as a joke on a co-worker which went undetected for four months, saying afterwards he "didn’t know
Wikipedia
was used as a serious reference tool.")
- Wikipedia is
written largely by amateurs
. Those with expert credentials are given no additional weight. Some experts contend that expert credentials are given less weight than contributions by amateurs. Wikipedia is also not subject to any peer review for scientific or medical or engineering articles. One advantage to having amateurs write in Wikipedia is that they have more free time on their hands so that they can make rapid changes in response to current events. The wider the general public interest in a topic, the more likely it is to attract contributions from non-specialists.
The
MediaWiki
software that runs Wikipedia retains a history of all edits and changes, thus information added to Wikipedia never "vanishes". Discussion pages are an important resource on contentious topics. Therefore, serious researchers can often find a wide range of vigorously or thoughtfully advocated viewpoints not present in the consensus article. As with any source, information should be checked. A 2005 editorial by a
BBC
technology
writer comments that these debates are probably symptomatic of cultural changes that are happening across all sources of information (including search engines and the media), and may lead to "a better sense of how to evaluate information sources."
[?]
Disclaimers
Wikipedia disclaimers apply to all pages on Wikipedia. However, the consensus in Wikipedia is to put all disclaimers only as links and at the bottom of each article. Proposals to have a warning box at the top have been rejected. Some do not like the way it looks or that it calls attention to possible errors in Wikipedia.
Wikipedia, in common with many websites, has a disclaimer that, at times, has led to commentators citing these in order to support a view that Wikipedia is unreliable. A selection of similar disclaimers from places which are often regarded as reliable (including sources such as
Encyclopædia Britannica
,
Associated Press
, and the
Oxford English Dictionary
) can be read and compared at
Non-Wikipedia disclaimers
. Wikipedia content advisories can also be found
here
.
Contributing to Wikipedia
- Main pages:
Contributing to Wikipedia
,
Starting an article
,
New contributors' help page
- Guide to fixing vandalism:
Help:Reverting
Anyone can contribute to Wikipedia by clicking on the
Edit this page
tab in an article. Before beginning to contribute, however, read some handy helping tools such as the
tutorial
and the
policies and guidelines
, as well as
our welcome page
. It is important to realize that in contributing to Wikipedia, users are expected to be
civil
and
neutral
, respecting all points of view, and only add
verifiable
and factual information rather than
personal views and opinions
. "
The five pillars of Wikipedia
" cover this approach and are recommended reading before editing. (Vandals are reported via the
Administrator Notice Board
and may be temporarily
blocked
from editing Wikipedia.)
Most articles start as
stubs
, but after many contributions, they can become
featured articles
. Once the contributor has decided a topic of interest, they may want to
request that the article
be written (or they could research the issue and write it themselves). Wikipedia has on-going
projects
, focused on specific topic areas or tasks, which help coordinate editing.
The ease of editing Wikipedia results in many people editing. That makes the updating of the encyclopedia very quick, almost as fast as news websites.
Editing Wikipedia pages
Wikipedia uses a simple yet powerful page
layout
to allow editors to concentrate on adding material rather than page design. These include automatic sections and subsections, automatic references and cross-references, image and table inclusion, indented and listed text, links, ISBNs, and math, as well as usual formatting elements and most world alphabets and common symbols. Most of these have simple formats that are deliberately very easy and intuitive.
The page layout consists of tabs along the top of the window. These are:
- Article.
Shows the main Wikipedia article.
- Discussion.
Shows a user discussion about the article's topic and possible revisions, controversies, etc.
- Edit.
This tab allows users to edit the article. Depending on the page’s susceptibility to vandalism, according to its visibility or the degree of controversy surrounding the topic, this tab may not be shown for all users. (For example, any user who is not an
administrator
will not be able to edit the
Main Page
).
- View history.
This tab allows readers to view the editors of the article and the changes that have been made.
- Star.
("Watch") If you are logged in to your account, clicking on the star icon will cause any changes made to the article to be displayed on the watchlist. (Note: when this icon is clicked, it changes to a filled-in star.)
Wikipedia has robust
version and reversion controls
. This means that poor-quality edits or vandalism can quickly and easily be reversed or brought up to an appropriate standard by any other editor, so inexperienced editors cannot accidentally do permanent harm if they make a mistake in their editing. As there are many more editors intent on improving articles than not, error-ridden articles are usually corrected promptly.
Wikipedia content criteria
Wikipedia content is intended to be factual, notable, verifiable with cited external sources, and neutrally presented.
The appropriate policies and guidelines for these are found at:
- Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
, which summarizes what belongs in Wikipedia and what does not;
- Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
, which describes Wikipedia's mandatory core approach to neutral, unbiased article-writing;
- Wikipedia:No original research
, which prohibits the use of Wikipedia to publish personal views and original research of editors and defines Wikipedia's role as an encyclopedia of existing
recognized
knowledge;
- Wikipedia:Verifiability
, which explains that it must be possible for readers to verify all content against credible external sources (following the guidance in the
Wikipedia:Risk disclaimer
that is linked-to at the bottom of every article);
- Wikipedia:Reliable sources
, which explains what factors determine whether a source is acceptable;
- Wikipedia:Citing sources
, which describes the manner of citing sources so that readers can verify content for themselves; and
- Wikipedia:Manual of Style
, which offers a style guide?in general editors tend to acquire knowledge of appropriate writing styles and detailed formatting over time.
These are often abbreviated to
WP:NOT
,
WP:NPOV
,
WP:NOR
,
WP:V
,
WP:RS
,
WP:CITE
, and
WP:MOS
respectively.
Editorial administration, oversight, and management
The Wikipedia community is largely self-organising, so that anyone may build a reputation as a competent editor and become involved in any role he/she may choose, subject to peer approval. Individuals often will choose to become involved in specialised tasks, such as reviewing articles at others' request, watching current edits for vandalism, watching newly created articles for quality control purposes, or similar roles. Editors who believe they can serve the community better by taking on additional administrative responsibility may ask their peers for agreement to undertake such responsibilities. This structure enforces meritocracy and communal standards of editorship and conduct. At present a minimum approval of 75?80% from the community is required to take on these additional tools and responsibilities. This standard tends to ensure a high level of experience, trust, and familiarity across a broad front of aspects within Wikipedia.
A variety of
software-assisted systems
and
automated programs
help editors and administrators to watch for problematic edits and editors. Theoretically all editors and users are treated equally with no "power structure". There is, however a hierarchy of permissions and positions, some of which are listed below:
- Anyone
can edit most of the articles here. Some articles are protected due to vandalism or edit-warring, and can only be edited by certain editors.
- Anyone with an account that has been registered for four days or longer and made ten edits becomes
Autoconfirmed
, and gains the technical ability to do three things that non-autoconfirmed editors cannot:
- Move articles.
- Edit semi-protected articles.
- Vote in certain elections (minimum edit count to receive suffrage varies depending on the election).
- Many editors with accounts obtain access to certain tools that make editing easier and faster. Few editors learn about most of those tools, but one common privilege granted to editors in good standing is "
rollback
", which is the ability to undo edits more easily.
- Administrators
("admins" or "sysops") have been approved by the community, and have access to some significant administrative tools. They can delete articles, block accounts or IP addresses, and edit fully protected articles.
- Bureaucrats
are chosen in a process similar to that for selecting administrators. There are not very many bureaucrats. They have the technical ability to add or remove admin rights, approve or revoke "
bot
" privileges, and rename user accounts.
- The
Arbitration Committee
is kind of like Wikipedia's
supreme court
. They deal with disputes that remain unresolved after other attempts at dispute resolution have failed. Members of this Committee are elected by the community and tend to be selected from among the pool of experienced admins.
- Stewards
are the top echelon of technical permissions, other than the Wikimedia Board of Directors. Stewards can do a few technical things, and one almost never hears much about them since they normally only act when a local admin or bureaucrat is not available, and hence almost never on the English Wikipedia. There are very few stewards.
- Jimmy Wales
, the founder of Wikipedia, has several special roles and privileges. In most instances however, he does not expect to be treated differently than any other editor or administrator.
Handling disputes and abuse
- Main articles:
Wikipedia:Vandalism
,
Wikipedia:Dispute resolution
,
Wikipedia:Consensus
,
Wikipedia:Sock puppetry
,
Wikipedia:Conflict of interest
Wikipedia has a rich set of methods to handle most abuses that commonly arise. These methods are well-tested and should be relied upon.
In addition,
brand new users
(until they have established themselves a bit) may at the start find that their votes are given less weight by editors in some informal
polls
, in order to prevent abuse of
single-purpose accounts
.
Editorial quality review
As well as systems to catch and control substandard and vandalistic edits, Wikipedia also has a full
style and content manual
and a variety of positive systems for continual article review and improvement. Examples of the processes include
peer review
,
good article assessment
, and
the featured article process
, a rigorous review of articles that are intended to meet the highest standards and showcase Wikipedia's capability to produce high-quality work.
In addition, specific types of article or fields often have their own specialized and comprehensive
projects
, assessment processes (such as
biographical article assessment
), and expert reviewers within specific subjects. Nominated articles are also frequently the subject of specific focus under projects such as the
Neutrality Project
or are covered under editorial drives by groups such as the
Cleanup Taskforce
.
Technical attributes
Wikipedia uses
MediaWiki
software, the
open-source
program used not only on
Wikimedia
projects but also on many other third-party websites. The hardware supporting the
Wikimedia
projects is based on several hundred servers in various hosting centers around the world. Full descriptions of these servers and their roles are available on
this meta page
. For technical information about Wikipedia, check
Technical FAQs
. Wikipedia publishes various types of
metadata
; and, across its pages, are many thousands of
microformats
.
Wikipedia does not place
cookies
or other tracking software on users' computers
[?]
except for cookies associated with logging into a Wikimedia account, including for the English Wikipedia.
[?]
Feedback and questions
Wikipedia is run as a communal effort. It is a community project whose result is an encyclopedia. Feedback about content should, in the first instance, be raised on the discussion pages of those articles.
Be bold
and edit the pages to add information or correct mistakes.
Frequently asked questions (FAQ)
Giving feedback
There is an established escalation-and-dispute process within Wikipedia, as well as pages designed for questions, feedback, suggestions, and comments:
- Talk pages
?the associated discussion page for discussion of an article or policy's contents (usually the first place to go);
- Wikipedia:Vandalism
?a facility for reporting vandalism (but fix vandalism as well as report it);
- Dispute resolution
?the procedure for handling disputes that remain unresolved within an article's talk space; and
- Village pump
?the Wikipedia discussion area, part of the
community portal
.
See also:
Research help and similar questions
Facilities for help for users researching specific topics can be found at:
Because of the nature of Wikipedia, it is encouraged that people looking for information should try to find it themselves in the first instance. If, however, information is found to be missing from Wikipedia,
be bold
and
add it
so others can gain.
For specific discussion not related to article content or editor conduct, see the
Village pump
, which covers such subjects as
announcements
,
policy
and
technical
discussion, and information on other specialized portals such as the
help
,
reference
and
peer review
desks. The
Community Portal
is a centralized place to find things to do, collaborations, and general editing help information, and find out what is happening.
Contacting individual Wikipedia editors
For more information, the first place to go is the
Help:Contents
. To contact individual contributors, leave a message on their
talk page
. Standard places to ask policy and project-related questions are the
Village Pump
, online, and the
Wikipedia mailing lists
, over e-mail. Reach other
Wikipedians
via
IRC
and
e-mail
.
In addition, the Wikimedia Foundation
meta-wiki
, a site for coordinating the various Wikipedia projects and sister projects (and abstract discussions of policy and direction). Also available are places for submitting
bug reports and feature requests
.
For a full list of contact options, see
Wikipedia:Contact us
.
Related versions and projects
????
?(
????
)
??
?????
??????? ??? ????????????
???????
???? ?????? ? ????? ???
??,???
???? ???? ??? ?
???? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ?????? ?????????? ???; ?????? ??? ??? ?????????? ????:
- ?????? ??????:
- ??,??,????? ???? ?????? ???:
- ?,??,????? ???? ?????? ???:
Sister projects
- Please note that while other sites may also use
MediaWiki
software and therefore look similar to Wikipedia, or may have a name that includes 'Wiki-' or '-pedia', or a similar
domain name
, the only projects which are part of the Wikimedia Foundation are those listed above and Wikipedia, even if other projects claim to be part of it.
See also
References
- ↑
In some parts of the world, the access to Wikipedia had been blocked.
- ↑
"Report card"
. Wikimedia
. Retrieved
May 18,
2011
CS1 maint: postscript (
link
)
.
- ↑
"Wikipedia announcements?? May 2001"
.
, wikipedia.org
- ↑
"Wikipedia announcements?? September 2001"
.
, wikipedia.org
- ↑
Bill Thompson,
"What is it with Wikipedia?"
,
BBC
, December 16, 2005.
- ↑
Angwin, Julia,
The Web's New Gold Mine: Your Secrets: What They Know
(a Wall St. J. Investigation) (1st in ser.), in
The Wall Street Journal
.
, §
Weekend Journal
, Jul. 31?Aug. 1, 2010 (4-star ed.), p. W1, col. 2 (test of popular websites including Wikipedia found no tracking software was installed by Wikipedia).
- ↑
E.g.
, the
en-WP user login page
, as accessed Jan. 22, 2011.
Further reading