Abstract Wikipedia/Wiki of functions naming contest/More proposals

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Round 1 complete. Round 2 will start 27 October.

---

• Please vote for any of these.
• Add any new proposals to this page.
• See the naming process details for more information.

---

WiKi-K'e

Voting

• Proposed by Koridas

Discussion

• Navajo for friendship
• Unclear how friendship relates to the idea of functions, templates, or translation. Unclear pronunciation. Also, "wikike.org" is a no-go because it contains an ethnic slur in English (but maybe "wiki-ke.org" could avoid that). PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:17, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • I my opinion the name does not necessarily have to be related to the technical aspect of the system. As for the pronounciation it could be why-Kee-keh. As a non-native English speaker it is difficult to associate wikike with any form of slurs, even after searching the Internet. This much be a marginal or subcultural slur or spelt in a different way (Waikiki, a Honolulu neighborhood, is the closest match I could find). I would say the apostrophe should not be there as it does not work in a URL. The dash could also be removed. — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 07:09, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
    • @Fnielsen: The last four letters taken together are a derogatory word for Jewish people. PiRSquared17 (talk) 07:19, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
    • That would probably be new for Wikimedia projects (beside Wikimania, probably). Why should it be exactly "friendship"? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:13, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• No - it is not easy to translate (not transliterate) to Chinese if the translated name needs to be informative. In Chinese, names of Wikimedia project are never transliterated..--GZWDer (talk) 13:35, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Difficult to say and pronounce. This is just my opinion, but, there are too many K consonants. harej (talk) 22:25, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikisetta or Wikirosetta

Voting

• Proposed by BugWarp
•  Support BugWarp (talk) 02:19, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• I kinda like the name (maybe "RosettaWiki" would be even better). It probably doesn't meet the desideratum of The name should not restrict the wiki only towards the goal of the Abstract Wikipedia or be only about natural language and content abstraction, but should reflect the potential that the functions may be used in a large diversity of ways and places., but I don't know how important that is. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Not a fan, sorry. "Rosetta" and "Babel" are already overused for naming a lot of products related to languages, language learning, machine translation, etc. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:03, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• As this will be a Wiki of functions and not a Wiki of translations, this is not a name explaining what it is. Though Abstract Wikipedia is at least one of the main goals, afaIk it is not the only application of the functions. --CamelCaseNick (talk) 18:05, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Changing proposal to use non-CamelCase, per talkpage. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 20:32, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
• S-U-P-P-O-R-T as Wikisetta, the Wiki for coding and translating beyond functions and abstractions. It's simple and recognizable almost instantly and without any confusion. --2603:9000:A511:9E76:C4A9:4067:3725:A098 15:23, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your comment. Unfortunately votes are limited to this criteria. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:06, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
• This is a good name. Enjoyer of World (talk) 03:55, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Project Eco

Voting

• Proposed by Denny

Discussion

• to honor Umberto Eco’s work, in particular the book “The search for a perfect language”, which details the history of projects which have failed at the goals of this project
• This name does not indicate it is a wiki.--GZWDer (talk) 04:07, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• I like the idea, but it could also be confused with "Eco" as in ecology, and it might lean too heavily on Abstract Wikipedia/natural language instead of functions in general. PiRSquared17 (talk) 04:16, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• So-so. Doesn't make the functionality obvious, and can be confused for ecology. But the tribute is cute≤ and it's easily translatable. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:05, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• No - it is not easy to translate (not transliterate) to Chinese if the translated name needs to be informative. In Chinese, names of Wikimedia project are never transliterated..--GZWDer (talk) 13:35, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki". For this one, "Wiki" is not in the name at all.--GZWDer (talk) 13:40, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• It is probably a good idea for the second phase, not for the Lambda phase. --Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 13:38, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Project Aquinas

Voting

• Proposed by Denny

Discussion

• more a play on words on the term "knowledge acquisition" than the philosopher Thomas of Aquinas
• I don't know much about Catholic theology, but is there any connection between Aquinas and "knowledge acquisition" other than his surname kinda looking like the word "acquisition" if you squint? I guess his Five Ways are about acquiring knowledge of God, or something, but that seems like a stretch. Regardless, using a specific religious figure is probably a no-go for something intended to be cross-cultural. (Would Muslims and Hindus be okay with the name?) PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:36, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• This name does not indicate it is a wiki.--GZWDer (talk) 04:08, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Not bad, although somewhat Western-centric and doesn't make the functionality obvious. The problem with the lack of "wiki" can be addressed by calling it WikiAquinas. It can be easily translated to Russian and Hebrew, although there will be a lot of K and W sounds in "Wikiaquinas": "qui" is actually pronounced as "kwi", which is very close to "wiki", so it can be a bit of a drag to write and say aloud in some languages. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:14, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• No - it is not easy to translate (not transliterate) to Chinese if the translated name needs to be informative. In Chinese, names of Wikimedia project are never transliterated.--GZWDer (talk) 13:35, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki". For this one, "Wiki" is not in the name at all.--GZWDer (talk) 13:41, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikifunction

Voting

Discussion

• Direct and to the point. "Function" is a technical word that not everyone will understand, but the project itself is not intended for direct layperson consumption anyway, so not a big deal. Maybe "FunctionWiki" would sound better. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:45, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

  I do have a slight preference for "Wikifunctions", see that proposal below. PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:04, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

• Not easily translatable into German as Wikifunktionen would mean functions of/for the wiki and not a wiki of functions and Funktionenwiki — German for Wiki of functions — diviates from the common Wiki- prefix. --CamelCaseNick (talk) 15:59, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
• I think "function" should be plural. The wiki of functions will contain plural functions similarly Wikibooks contains plural books. --Atmark-chan <^T/_C> 15:40, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

---

Universalpedia

Voting

• Proposed by ChristianKl

Discussion

• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:41, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• "Pedia" does not make sense as the project is not supposed to be an encyclopedia. Also, the name seems too general to me, as it does not indicate what the project is about. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:18, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Changed from UniversalPedia to Universalpedia given the suggestion to avoid Camelcase on the talkpage. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 14:34, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
• Wikiversal would sound better. Enjoyer of World (talk) 03:41, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiWords

Voting

• Proposed by Zblace

Discussion

• Conveys the sense of translation well, but maybe it doesn't meet the desideratum of The name should not restrict the wiki only towards the goal of the Abstract Wikipedia or be only about natural language and content abstraction, but should reflect the potential that the functions may be used in a large diversity of ways and places. Also, it sounds like the name for a wiki dictionary (e.g., Wiktionary, OmegaWiki, or Wikidata Lexemes). PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:58, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per PiRSquared17. This might fit the Abstract Wikipedia rather than the wiki of functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:21, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikigram

Voting

• Proposed by Denny

Discussion

• The word "program" directly relates to the purpose of the project, which will mainly host program code for functions. It's also worth considering the inverted form ProgramWiki and the plural form Wikiprograms. (The latter might make more sense, for the same reason that Wikibooks was chosen over Wikibook.) PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:26, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • I'd oppose "ProgramWiki" for consistency with other WMF wikis. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:22, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• "Wikigram" has some merit, having connotations of both programming and language.--Pharos (talk) 01:32, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikiprogram

Voting

• Proposed by Deryck Chan

Discussion

• Not bad for the idea of this project, but the problem is that it can easily be confused for Programs that are managed by the Foundation and Affiliates, which are a completely different things. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:16, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Agree that there is an association with various Wikimedia community programs. --Papuass (talk) 14:33, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Hohonupedia

Voting

• Proposed by 135.180.44.152

Discussion

• hohonu being the Hawaiian word for 'deep' as opposed to wiki (quick)). Or simply Deep Wikipedia
• Very cute! No one will understand it, but then no one knew what "wiki" is thirty years ago either. The sense is find, and easy to translate to the languages I now. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:17, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• No - it is not easy to translate (not transliterate) to Chinese if the translated name needs to be informative. In Chinese, names of Wikimedia project are never transliterated.--GZWDer (talk) 13:36, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:41, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• As the project is not supposed to be an (encyclo)pedia, I oppose this. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:23, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

MultiWiki

Voting

• Proposed by Gkellogg

Discussion

• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:42, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose: Quite general, does not sufficiently indicate the topic of the project. Also per GZWDer above. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:26, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

AIMO or Aimopedia

Voting

• Proposed by Ainali

Discussion

• Abstract Input, Multilingual Output
• The acronym is in English, so how would it be translated into other languages? Would they keep "AIMO" or translate it word by word and then turn it into an acronym? Also, probably doesn't meet the desideratum of The name should not restrict the wiki only towards the goal of the Abstract Wikipedia or be only about natural language and content abstraction, but should reflect the potential that the functions may be used in a large diversity of ways and places. But I do think it sounds okay, it's not bad by any means. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:22, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• No - it is not easy to translate (not transliterate) to Chinese if the translated name needs to be informative. In Chinese, names of Wikimedia project are never transliterated.--GZWDer (talk) 13:36, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:42, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose "Aimopedia"; the project is not supposed to be an (encyclo)pedia. Just "AIMO" does not indicate this is a wiki, and any other variant with "aimo" will not tell an external visitor sufficiently what the project is about either imho. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:32, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikiglobal

Voting

• Proposed by Amire80

Discussion

• Does not address the topic of the project well enough. I don't quite see the connection between functions and globes. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:36, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikiglobe

Voting

• Proposed by Amire80

Discussion

• Does not address the topic of the project well enough. I don't quite see the connection between functions and globes. "Wikiglobe" reminds me of the logo of Meta. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:36, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikitemplates

Voting

• Proposed by Amire80

Discussion

• Direct and to the point, relates to the project's goals. Template is a MediaWiki jargon term, but that's probably fine since this isn't end-user-facing anyway. Also worth considering TemplateWiki/TemplatesWiki. PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:37, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• This wiki won't be about templates, but about functions. On top of it the same issue with translation into German occurs, that does with Wikifunctions. (see above) --CamelCaseNick (talk) 16:03, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  • @CamelCaseNick: Where is the ambiguity in "Wikivorlagen"/"Wikischablonen"? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:58, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
    • @1234qwer1234qwer4: Schablone? stencil? Definitely not the correct German word here. Wikivorlagen would be. It could be confused with the namespace Vorlagen: (Template:) in German projects using MediaWiki (which most German Wikimedia projects happen to be). The reason for ambiguity comes from the how German compound words work and Wikivorlagen is a perfectly normal German word meaning the template for or of a Wiki and cannot as a German word (unless used as a name) mean Wiki of Templates. This is absolutly confusing. --CamelCaseNick (talk) 18:14, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
      • @CamelCaseNick: I am basically a native German speaker, and while I see "Wikivorlagen" could mean "Vorlagen des Wikis", I don't think this is any different from how "Wikiwörterbuch" can be interpreted. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 22:39, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikiuniverse

Voting

• Proposed by Amire80

Discussion

• This would rather fit Meta in my opinion. It does not address the purpose of the project well enough. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:40, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

  I also agree that this is too broad in scope (according to the description above that would encompass also the long-term goal and all existing wikis, or that it could bring a confusion: "Wikimedia" is already the dedicated name for this "universe".

  The concept is not to generate everything, but just being allowed to generate some contents that could be brought to existing wikis, at least to create much better articles than very poor "stubs" (also frequently partly translated or with frequent problems of presentation, navigatibility, usability, accessibility: the need is evident from small and medium wikis that have a very slow and complex startup, even after the initial test in Incubator

  We've all seen problems caused by the fact that these small wikis could not easily be sourced reliably while being able to source at least interesting features, which would be immediately usable by natives

  This would greatly help their understanding and then improve that content and adapt it to their culture and current local communities of interest and even help develop their interest in many topics for which they have no clue or that find them to difficult to start with, while also benefiting of the experience gained in other languages, and even allowing mutual cooperation for administering these wikis, possibly even in talk pages to create more buinds between communities that have difficulties to talk each other and understand a sufficient common language). It would also allow easier cooperation across wikis to find more experienced admins to solve complex issues (notably those related to NPOV, and respect of peoples, while also setting a better limit to avoid conflicts of interests by the few experienced users that can decide against more the legitimate needs of modest contributors so that everyone can find a suitable space of work and cooperation also with their own sets of cultural interests). but even this larger goal can describe what could be Wikipedia abstract later, which will still be a part of our existing "Wikimedia" universe. clearly the goal for now is jsut being allwoed to compose several sources to generate modest contents (probably not more than a simple sentence or just a single phrase, such as to help build a navigatable structure, or sets of nav templates, or an index of topics, a reliable set of categories and all the necessary and suitable interwiki links, or a set of disambiguation pages appropriate for each language but still pointing to relevant stubs pages to be later completed; for this reason the initial pags would be bot-generated but still editable: we've seen that method used effectively in a rare language, notably Waray-Waray, except that this is made by a bot controlled by just a single user and it is not so open; instead of posting "stubs pages" the stubs could use templates with their content fed and basic presentation from functions but still in a form correct for the target language; but the Waray-Wray wiki is now usable by its community which now update it with less efforts but still with all the set of links to other more populated wikis and more possible sources in various languages). This could also be used to greatly accelerate the development of Wiktionnary (with basic definitions for some meanings/lemmas, while the local community would add their own language-specific expressions, or could find examples of use and citations in their culture to support each lemma; as well they could benefit from data-driven generated contents such as conjugations, declensions, transliterations, usable input methods; in Wikipedia thee data in Wikitionanry could have a Wikitionnary-based spellchecker, and we could create out own automatic translartos with smarter intelligence to help others understanding what is happening in the small wiki where problems are reported by very few users but difficult to assert). verdy_p (talk) 23:11, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikishare

Voting

• Proposed by Amire80

Discussion

• Every wiki is about "sharing" knowledge, so I find this to vague and failing to address the purpose of this specific project. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:42, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikisum

Voting

• Proposed by Husky

Discussion

• Hmm, "sum" meaning total or summarize? Functions can be more than this. Although "sum" as in "dim sum" in Chinese means "heart" ♥ --Thadguidry (talk) 02:17, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Possible conflict with Wikipedia's goal being the "sum of human knowledge"? I agree with Thadguidry above that it does not quite address the purpose of the project, and the connection between "sum" and "functions" is not strong enough. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:45, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Talk:Abstract Wikipedia/Name#Some other names suggests "sum of human knowledge" was actually the background. @Husky: Is that a name proposal for the wiki of functions or for Abstract Wikipedia? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:06, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
    • This was definitely more with Abstract Wikipedia in mind, but the combination of being it a reference to both 'Sum of all Knowledge' and the mathematical concept of a sum might still make it a valid suggestion. Husky (talk) 09:22, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
• I kind of like the multiple relevant meanings of "sum" implied here.--Pharos (talk) 18:21, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
  • @Pharos: I kind of don't like this, as this might (read: will) be lost in translation. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:06, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikibabel

Voting

• Proposed by Husky

Discussion

• I kinda like it, but (1) "babel" might be too Judeo-Christian-specific, e.g. would it work as well in a Chinese cultural context? (2) it might not meet the desideratum of The name should not restrict the wiki only towards the goal of the Abstract Wikipedia or be only about natural language and content abstraction, but should reflect the potential that the functions may be used in a large diversity of ways and places. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:48, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

I had immediately thought of this name also, but dismissed it for the same concerns you are raising here. --Thadguidry (talk) 02:14, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

• Same problem as with "WikiSetta" above: "Rosetta" and "Babel" are already overused for naming a lot of products related to languages, language learning, machine translation, etc. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:21, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• I proposed the same idea earlier, and I still sort of like it. I doubt it could be considered evangelistic, as this was considered rather an evil city in the scriptures, and it's a well-known metaphor in modern humanistic culture.--Pharos (talk) 17:36, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  • I think it is leant too much toward the Abstract Wikipedia aspect of Wikilambda. The name should not restrict the wiki only towards the goal of the Abstract Wikipedia or be only about natural language and content abstraction, but should reflect the potential that the functions may be used in a large diversity of ways and places. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:18, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
•  Support, maybe best purpose, I think that name associated with {{#babel}}. 217.117.125.72 18:39, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikiversal

Voting

• Proposed by Husky

Discussion

• Functions are kind of universal (they can be applied to all the values in their domain), not everything universal is a function, so I wouldn't associate this name with them directly. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:13, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikitolk

Voting

• Proposed by Husky

Discussion

• Is this supposed to be an eye dialect spelling of "talk"? I can imagine that would be a nightmare to translate, and it has only minimal relevance to the goals of the project anyway. PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:06, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• No - it is not easy to translate (not transliterate) to Chinese if the translated name needs to be informative. In Chinese, names of Wikimedia project are never transliterated.--GZWDer (talk) 13:36, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Who or what is "tolk" and how is s?he|it related to functions? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:47, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Aha, this is explained at Talk:Abstract Wikipedia/Name#Some other names. @Husky: Please keep in mind suggested names should be translatable and therefore must not centrally rely on wordplay. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:01, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
    • I think you're right, i wouldn't shed a tear if nobody votes for this proposal ;) Husky (talk) 09:25, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikiglot

Voting

• Proposed by Husky

Discussion

• a "Wiki of functions" is not by itself related to languages.--GZWDer (talk) 04:14, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per above: This does not fulfill The name should not restrict the wiki only towards the goal of the Abstract Wikipedia or be only about natural language and content abstraction, but should reflect the potential that the functions may be used in a large diversity of ways and places. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:51, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiPreTranslate

Voting

• Proposed by Victorgrigas

Discussion

• Too leaned on Abstract content.--GZWDer (talk) 04:08, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per above: This name is too specific and does not fulfill The name should not restrict the wiki only towards the goal of the Abstract Wikipedia or be only about natural language and content abstraction, but should reflect the potential that the functions may be used in a large diversity of ways and places. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:51, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikifacts

Voting

• Proposed by Moedn

Discussion

• This would be a better name for Abstract Wikipedia than for Wikilambda, which is not intended to host factual content about the world but rather function code. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:59, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
•  Support, underlines that the Wiki will contain directly facts. 217.117.125.72 18:40, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiCortex

Voting

• Proposed by PaulAsimov

Discussion

• I only associate this with anatomical terms. Wikipedia only tells me this is also used in botany and archaeology, and that "Cortex" is the name of a processor architecture. Is there a connection to functions that I'm missing? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 08:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiChunks

Voting

• Proposed by PaulAsimov

Discussion

• I like it because it's catchy and fun, but i think it might not translate very well into other languages. Husky (talk) 09:26, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikigeneral

Voting

• Proposed by Niklitov

Discussion

• generic sounding? Also slight military tones from my cursory translations with semantics of "Wiki General" or "Wiki Commander". --Thadguidry (talk) 02:25, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• General what? This name does not indicate any connection with functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:57, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Hyperpedia

Voting

• Proposed by Niklitov

Discussion

• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:42, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• The project is not supposed to be an (encyclo)pedia. Also, not sure why "hyper". The name is not addressing the purpose of the project, functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:59, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Hyperwiki

Voting

• Proposed by Niklitov

Discussion

• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:42, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• As with "Hyperpedia" above, I find the name is not addressing the purpose of the project, functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:00, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Datapedia

Voting

• Proposed by Niklitov

Discussion

• If I understand correctly, the content of the wiki will not be data, but rather functions that transform data. This seems like a better name for Abstract Wikipedia than for Wikilambda. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:32, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Can be too easily confused with Wikidata. We already have this huge problem with MediaWiki and Wikimedia, let's not repeat it :) --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:22, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 11:49, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Also, the project is not supposed to be an (encyclo)pedia. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:00, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:42, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Per other people above, this will cause lots of confusion with both Wikidata and DBPedia. Husky (talk) 09:27, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

---

BigDaPedia

Voting

• Proposed byNiklitov

Discussion

• Big Da? Big Data, I assume. I don't think the proposed wiki is really about big data though, unless I'm missing something. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:41, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

You are not missing it. ;-) Agree, not the right context. --Thadguidry (talk) 02:27, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:42, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• The project is not supposed to be an (encyclo)pedia, and functions do not fit "big data" (at least this seems to be what the name is referencing) either. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:02, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

NewWiki

Voting

• Proposed by Niklitov

Discussion

• Seems too vague; not really related to the ideas of translation, functions, templates, etc. Possibly better suited for Abstract Wikipedia than for Wikilambda. Also the name is too temporary, e.g. in 5+ years do we still want it to be called "NewWiki"? Finally, "newwiki" is the internal database name for https://new.wikipedia.org. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:12, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

agree, really vague --Thadguidry (talk) 01:31, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:42, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• I don't see the connections between "new" and functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:03, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Newpedia

Voting

• Proposed by Niklitov

Discussion

• Same comments as for "NewWiki" proposal. Additionally, it sounds the same as Nupedia. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:14, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:42, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• See NewWiki above (does not relate the project to functions), and *Wikilambda is not supposed to be an (encyclo)pedia either. Also agreeing with PiRSquared17 on the homophony/homoeophony (depending on dialect) with a different project. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:07, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Alphapedia

Voting

• Proposed by Niklitov

Discussion

• This name does not indicate what it is about, especially for users who do not know Wolfram Alpha.--GZWDer (talk) 04:10, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:43, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• The connection between "alpha" and functions, even after the mention of Wolfram Alpha here, is unclear to me, and the project is not supposed to be an (encyclo)pedia. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:09, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
•  Oppose, may be confused with alpha‐version. 217.117.125.72 18:31, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Х-pedia

Voting

• Proposed by Niklitov

Discussion

• I don't think this is viable due to trademark issues. --Yair rand (talk) 02:18, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:43, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• I understand that "x" could be an input variable, but it is not immediately obvious from the name what the project is about, and it is not supposed to be an (encyclo)pedia. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:11, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiLink

Voting

• Proposed by 77.158.33.42

Discussion

• Could vaguely convey the idea of functions or translation, in the sense that input is linked to output, that might be a stretch. The word "wikilink" is already used to refer to a hyperlink to a wiki article, but I don't know if that's a dealbreaker. PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:48, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Honupedia

Voting

• Proposed by Eltomas2003

Discussion

• No - it is not easy to translate (not transliterate) to Chinese if the translated name needs to be informative. In Chinese, names of Wikimedia project are never transliterated.--GZWDer (talk) 13:37, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:43, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• The only thing I found about "honu" is that it is a taxon of turtles, and I'm not sure turtles are intrinsically related to functions. Moreover, the project is not supposed to be an (encyclo)pedia. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:15, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Holopedia

Voting

• Proposed by FocalPoint

Discussion

• The prefix "holo-" means "whole" in Greek, but in common use it is most associated with holograms, or maybe with the Holocaust, neither of which really fits as far as I can tell. Holomorphic functions are a thing in complex analysis, but the functions we're concerned with here have little to do with that. PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:41, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• I'm Jewish, and the similarity to "holocaust" doesn't bother me. It's also used in words like "holistic", and it's not a big deal. For better or worse, however, "Holopedia" is used as a nickname of the Minnan Wikipedia, so it can become ambiguous. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:25, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• No - it is not easy to translate (not transliterate) to Chinese if the translated name needs to be informative. In Chinese, names of Wikimedia project are never transliterated.--GZWDer (talk) 13:37, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:43, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• I also agree that the prefix "holo" has no direct relation to nazi's Holocaust. It is related to the English term "holy" (saint/spirit); "holocaust" is a composed as a name created after the genocide to describe it as a mass murdering/attack ("caust", related to "caustic") based on spirituality/religion ("holo"). And this is not proposing the use of "caust".
  Yes the proposal is highly related to "holomorphic functions" ("holo" because the space where the transform is not defined is very thin, almost invisible/transparent, insignificant, infinitesimal, compared to the space where it has a defined meaning, so it is difficult to observe and it just exists as a "spirit"; you can like it as well to "hologram" where this transparent space is diffused/spread "everywhere" but you don't see anything if you try to locate a point where this occurs; it also applies to "fractal spaces" and "fractal dimensions", i.e. non-integer dimensions that smoothly link spaces with countable finite dimensions), but it's too much technical for people not aware in advanced mathematics (and that also have difficulties to understand the base concept of "morphism", which actually means a transform by a regulated relation between different entities so that some properties are preserved by the transform, and which sometimes an produce no result or multiple results, possibly with uncertainty margins, i.e. just probabilistic or fuzzy results for which no universal decision can be concluded). Note that "morphism" is based on the greek radical "morph" (used also on Slavic languages) which just translates to the "form" radical in Latin (and most Italic or Germanic languages).
  But Greek terms in Italic/Germanic languages are considered too much scientific terminology. If we reduce "homomorphism" just to "holo" (which is also used on scientific terms based on Greek), we loose the important "form"/"morph" meaning that this feature better describes ("holo" is not a requirement), that's why I would not use it in "holopedia" which would be better used to describe a wiki-based encyclopedia about religions/spirituaty... I would largely prefer some variation based on the term "mutate" (change of form/morph, i.e. "transform"). verdy_p (talk) 14:26, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • I suppose you meant "holomorphism" when you mentioned "homomorphism", as you did not mention homomorphisms in your text before. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:20, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
    • You suppose badly. see w:en:Holomorphic function which is also mostly the same as "holomorphism", but don't confuse it with "homomorphism" which exists too (not all homomorphism are homoporphisms, this remark applies also to the reverse; however all holomorphic functions are holomorphisms, the reverse being false). Yes it is a too technical term for what would in fine would be a repository of code to transform a set of data from any types to another set of data, plus some design feature to describe them like an API, and implement them with some guided processing model matching the described API. For Abstract Wikipedia only the output would be limited to some wikitext that is embeddable in some page, a sort of "supertemplate", except that its input would not limited to just text, and its implementation not limited to be using the wiki syntax or a Lua module and the output is still transformable. The above functions could take the whole existing database of some wiki or external source in input, so the functions are just like "bricks" you can combine in a graph-like structure and it may also have timing constraints and synchronization points I can think these "functions" like an extensible API offering a set of objects with accessors or methods but working as standalone modules and insatiable many times with their own internal state, much like a javascript or Lua "object" (that you can duplicate with a "new" to copy its internal state), and in fact the "functions" describes above are most like "morphisms" rather than true "functions" in the strict mathematical meaning.verdy_p (talk) 01:00, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
• Too technical for most external visitors. Also, the project is not supposed to be an (encyclo)pedia. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:20, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiZinfo

Voting

• Proposed by GrounderUK

Discussion

• I get why the Z is there, but it still looks weird. Maybe InfoWiki would be better, although that's probably taken already. In any case, the name doesn't really convey a sense of functions/transformations/translations IMO, and maybe would be better suited to Abstract Wikipedia than to Wikilambda. PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:07, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• No - it is not easy to translate (not transliterate) to Chinese if the translated name needs to be informative. In Chinese, names of Wikimedia project are never transliterated.--GZWDer (talk) 13:38, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikistream

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• This name does not indicate what it is about.--GZWDer (talk) 04:09, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per GZWDer; how is this related to functions? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:23, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikimorph

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• Comment: I have proposed Wikimorphisms now, which provides more context in my opinion. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 07:49, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Transmutewiki

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• Not so bad, but hard to translate. Can only be transliterated, and even that is not so easy, because it can be surprisingly hard to transliterate the word "transmute" to some languages, with all those consonant clusters. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:27, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:43, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Hmm, reminds me of TranslateWiki. Not sure this is on point enough for a project of functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:14, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

NeoWiki

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• Same comments as for "NewWiki" proposal. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:13, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:43, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Too vague, unclear connection to functions. See NewWiki. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:12, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikilibs

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu
•  Support weakly. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:38, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• Is this the wiki that owns the libs? Okay, more seriously, I guess a name based on "library" has potential insofar as it could refer to a library of functions, but it doesn't seem directly connected to the idea of functions or translation. PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:10, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Is this referencing the /lib directory naming convention? --Yair rand (talk) 02:24, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Pretty good, although I'm wondering whether people won't confuse it with a library of books, which is what Wikisource is about. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• I'm unsure if this slang abbreviation is generally understood by external viewers. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:18, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• This has too many associations with libraries and books. Husky (talk) 09:29, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

---

UniWiki

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• This name does not indicate what it is about.--GZWDer (talk) 04:12, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:43, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Where "uni" has what relevance to functions? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:19, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wiki-optimum

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• optimum. The best. This name does not in the least remind me of functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:20, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikiverse

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• Wikiverse is used to describe the "world of wikis", (or, maybe the "world of Wikimedia"). This would rather fit Meta, but not a project for functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:22, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikimedia Ultimate

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• Ultimate does not suggest any relation to functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:22, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikimedia compendium

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• No - This is not a wiki for summary of concepts.--GZWDer (talk) 04:13, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Compile-Wiki

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• Too narrow aspect.--GZWDer (talk) 04:12, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:43, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • It could still be "WikiCompile" on that matter. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:23, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikimedia TITAN

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• Is this supposed to stand for something? PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:30, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • The only thing this could remind me of is the TI-89 Titanium, but that isn't closely related to functions either. The name, as some others suggested by the user (UniWiki, Wikiverse, Wikimedia Ultimate), fails to address the purpose of the project. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:27, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• No - it is not easy to translate (not transliterate) to Chinese if the translated name needs to be informative. In Chinese, names of Wikimedia project are never transliterated.--GZWDer (talk) 13:38, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• This reminds me of either a comic with robots and superheroes or the Large Hydron Collider, i don't think it's a good fit. Husky (talk) 09:31, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Primewiki

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• This name does not indicate what it is about.--GZWDer (talk) 04:14, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:44, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Zen-Wiki or Wikizen or ZenithWiki

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• ZenWiki and Wikizen sound Buddhism-related. All three names have unclear connection to the purpose of the project. PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:06, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Layman's Wiki

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• This seems like a misnomer, since the main content of the wiki will be technical, not something intended to be used directly by laypeople. Unless I'm missing something. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:03, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Maybe this was supposed to refer to the goal of Abstract Wikipedia to provide information to a "layman author"? Either way, this is not a name that would generally be associated with functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:31, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:44, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wiki of Everything

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• Clearly this isn't a Wiki of Everything. It's a Wiki of Functions. This name doesn't tell you anything about the goals of the project. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:50, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• I agree with PiRSquared17. I also dislike the use of multiple separate words in the project's name in general, especially the preposition "of". 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:46, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Tempo Wiki

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• Sounds like a wiki about music or something. Unclear connection to the ideas of functions, templates, translations, etc. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:24, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• No - it is not easy to translate (not transliterate) to Chinese if the translated name needs to be informative. In Chinese, names of Wikimedia project are never transliterated.--GZWDer (talk) 13:38, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:44, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikiabs

Voting

• Proposed by tbiw

Discussion

• I don't know how to parse this. WikiAbdominis? WikiAbsoluteValue? WikiaBS? PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:00, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • @PiRSquared17: Reading Talk:Abstract Wikipedia/Name#Name suggest, I had the flash of insight that this is actually a proposal for the name of Abstract Wikipedia. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:37, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
• Still Wikipedia Abstract but just shortened to make it simple. opinion,Tbiw (talk) 21:29, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
• I'm not a fan of this one because I keep reading it as "Wikilabs". - Nikki (talk) 21:31, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Tractwiki

Voting

• Proposed by tbiw

Discussion

• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:44, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• How is this related to functions? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:50, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Okay, this seems to be a proposal for the name of (abs)tract Wikipedia: Talk:Abstract Wikipedia/Name#Name suggest. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:39, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikitedia

Voting

• Proposed by tbiw

Discussion

• This name is funny if it's supposed to be a plural of "tedium/taedium", I like it for that reason. Doesn't really translate and maybe we don't want to label the project as tedious/boring, but humorous nonetheless. PiRSquared17 (talk) 01:53, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• No. This name is too easy for confusion.--GZWDer (talk) 04:11, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Agree. We have enough problems with Wikipedia and Wikimedia. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:30, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• No - it is not easy to translate (not transliterate) to Chinese if the translated name needs to be informative. In Chinese, names of Wikimedia project are never transliterated.--GZWDer (talk) 13:38, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• The name does not suggest the project is related to functions, to me at least. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:30, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikimuldia

Voting

• Proposed by tbiw

Discussion

• What is this referring to? The name does not suggest the project is related to functions, to me at least. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:31, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikioperator

Voting

• Proposed by Data Gamer

Discussion

• from Operator
• I'd prefer the plural, as the project would collect multiple functions/operators, similarly to Wikibooks. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:33, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikend

Voting

• Proposed by Data Gamer

Discussion

• from Wiki and end, meaning fulfillment
• resembles Weekend? sounds like "wicked" if I put on my German accent. :-) --Thadguidry (talk) 02:12, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

  "Weekend" was my first thought too. I'm also not sure how this relates to the purpose of the project. PiRSquared17 (talk) 02:16, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

  @PiRSquared17: The backend to Abstract Wikipedia? Might propose Wikibackend, actually. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:51, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

• "fulfillment" of what? I wouldn't associate fulfillment with functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:30, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Lingista

Voting

• Proposed by Killarnee

Discussion

• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:44, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose: The name should not restrict the wiki only towards the goal of the Abstract Wikipedia or be only about natural language and content abstraction, but should reflect the potential that the functions may be used in a large diversity of ways and places. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:54, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikidatopedia

Voting

• Proposed by 217.117.125.72

Discussion

• Same comments as for Datapedia. Also sounds like Wikidata. PiRSquared17 (talk) 03:04, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Yes, it was origin of the name. 217.117.125.72 18:26, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
• I get that the functions will be used for Abstract Wikipedia, which will be part of Wikidata, but I agree the name is confusing (additionally, "pedia" suggests the project will be an encyclopedia, which is not the case). Furthermore, it violates The name should not restrict the wiki only towards the goal of the Abstract Wikipedia or be only about natural language and content abstraction, but should reflect the potential that the functions may be used in a large diversity of ways and places. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:17, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikiglobia or Globipedia

Voting

• Proposed by ExpertEnterpriseProgrammer

Discussion

• As with Wikiuniverse and similar, this name is very generic and does not indicate the project's relation to functions. "Globipedia" additionally suggests the project will be an encyclopedia, which is not the case. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:22, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikifedia

Voting

• Proposed by WikiBayer

Discussion

• the f stands for Future
• No. This name is too easy for confusion.--GZWDer (talk) 04:11, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Too easy to mispronounce in a lot of languages, and totally untranslatable to Hebrew, because P and F are the same letter. So in Hebrew it will look the same as Wikipedia! --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:33, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• No - it is not easy to translate (not transliterate) to Chinese if the translated name needs to be informative. In Chinese, names of Wikimedia project are never transliterated.--GZWDer (talk) 13:39, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • "if the [...] name needs to be informative", I suggest we not use this name in English either. An external visitor will not understand the intended meaning of the f, the project will not be an encyclopedia, and it is not going to be the "future" in a couple years any more. At the same time, the name does not indicate the project's relation to functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:31, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikiquest

Voting

• Proposed by Verdy_p

Discussion

• How's a quest related to functions? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:32, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • quest for short question. Also because the project has strong links to the search feature in MediaWiki that really needs to be smatter (cf. the "smart bar" now in most common search engines, that can take this input and produce many interesting outputs in various forms). verdy_p (talk) 17:57, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
    • I'm not sure the wiki of functions will be used to improve MediaWiki search. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 13:56, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikireply

Voting

• Proposed by Verdy_p

Discussion

• Unclear how "replying" relates to the idea of translation, or functions, or templates. "Reply" evokes two-way communication, which is not what the site is for. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:21, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Isn't a function sothing where you give some input and the function will return a response with some output? If there's no input, there's no output; if there's input but no output, it's just a blackhole that has no use... The description above seems to indicate that the "'function" will have some intelligence, look like an "artificial brain" (possibly using IA technologies, or BigData collection and aggregation to produce something else in various forms, not just translating the input?). verdy_p (talk) 00:24, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
    • If you're meaning "artificial intelligence" by "IA", I'm unsure this will be used at all (there is enough of that already), and it certainly will not be the only aspect of the project. How your description fits "replying" is unclear to me either, and I don't think it will be clear to an external visitor. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:40, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
    • Similar to wikiquest: two necessary parts of the same thing. The initial description is too much centered to functions described in mathematical terms. But clearly the goal is not mathematical "functions": there's not necessary any valid output and there can be output without any input of custom data. The goal is too abstract to be usable, when in fact it will not be that but will ba a shared reusable library that will extend the API and that will also be largely independent of the language used (not just Lua modules, or Javascripts, or a set of extensions to Mediawiki API, or Mediawi hooks abut any mix of them and using also the potential of data already inside Wikimedia projects (pedias, dictionnaries, data, commons media) and related support projects (Phabricator, GitHub or other open source code repositories and open data repositories, and external open APIs based on web services or file sharing protocols and communication tools: social medias, RSS, mailing lists...). Each described "function" may be in fact composed of multiple components workign together. The result/output may also be variable over time, evolutive. And translated if possible (both in the questions or the replies and in input forms that could be used, where the input form will also be part of the function and will have various forms bving the result of another function generating it). These results may also be evaluated (with some automated metrics or from user's notation in order to qualify or order them under various criteria). verdy_p (talk) 18:10, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Smartwiki

Voting

• Proposed by Verdy_p

Discussion

• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:44, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Not sure how smart the wiki itself would be. I wouldn't associate this name with functions either. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:58, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Flexipedia

Voting

• Proposed by Verdy_p

Discussion

• No - it is not easy to translate (not transliterate) to Chinese if the translated name needs to be informative. In Chinese, names of Wikimedia project are never transliterated.--GZWDer (talk) 13:39, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• For consistency, I will not prefer any names that do not start with "Wiki".--GZWDer (talk) 13:44, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• How does "flexi-" relate to functions? Moreover, the name suggests the project will be an encyclopedia, which is not the case. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:41, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikiama

Voting

• Proposed by Fnielsen

Discussion

• "ama" is the first lexeme in Wikidata with the identifier L1. "ama" is sumerian. It has a meaning in that language (mother). The vowel and consonant are probably easy to pronounce for most. — fnielsen
  • The English Wiktionary has several listings of the meanings of "ama" across languages. Most seems unproblematic with the sense of, e.g., mother, father, origin or love. In some languages it could mean mistress, but I am unsure whether that is actually a problem, see also, https://ordia.toolforge.org/representation/ama — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 14:37, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose: The name should not restrict the wiki only towards the goal of the Abstract Wikipedia or be only about natural language and content abstraction, but should reflect the potential that the functions may be used in a large diversity of ways and places. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:43, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikimentum

Voting

• Proposed by Verdy_p

Discussion

• I wouldn't directly associate this name with functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:49, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• Mentum means chin, and it's also used to refer to a part of insects' mouths. I don't think that was the intended meaning here though. PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:55, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Module Wiki

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• Does not start with "wiki", so I'd oppose this for consistency. I've also created Abstract Wikipedia/Wiki of functions naming contest/WikiModules. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:43, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Mod-wiki

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• Reminds me of w:UseModWiki. Not sure the slang term "mod" will be understood by many external visitors, and it is ambiguous as a slang term as well. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:47, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
• The first connotation that pops into my mind for "mod" is w:modding, where it means "modifying", not "module". PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:07, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Axial wiki

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• I don't see the name's connection to functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:45, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Pref wiki

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• Whatever "pref" stands for (I assume prefernce/-s), it doesn't seem to sufficiently address the topic of the project, functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:52, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Algo-wiki

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu
•  Support Pelagic (talk) 12:28, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• I like "algo" in some form: algo-wiki, wiki-algo, AlgoWiki, algo.wikimedia.org, ... (I considered making a late proposal for WikiAlgo after seeing "Wikimedia Algorithms". We have split entries elsewhere for a-b and b-a, but we also need to consider that in some languages word order will be swapped.) Pelagic (talk) 12:28, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

---

Para-wiki

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

---

Wikivars

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• I personally dislike it refers to variables rather than functions directly, but maybe others disagree. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:54, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Structwiki

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

---

Wiki++

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu
•  Support. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 08:50, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• "++" wouldn't work in a domain name, but we could have wikiplusplus.org or plusplus.wikimedia.org. It is programming-related, and I like it for that reason, but it's perhaps too tied to C++ which probably isn't a language that will be used in the project itself. PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:05, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Perhaps, but at least it's not the only thing referenced. We have wikipedia:Wikipedia:Scripts++ on Wikipedia although user scripts don't use C++. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 08:56, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Bashwiki

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• I don't want to be bashed, but I think this is too narrowed down onto one specific language. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:57, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wiki-sharp

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• Unlike Wiki++, I think this is actually too tied to one specific programming language, C# (also possibly F#). 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 08:52, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Build wiki

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• Too generic: every wiki is "built" in a sense. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:01, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikimedia sharp

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• As with "Wiki-sharp", I think this is too tied to some specific programming language names like C# and F#. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 08:54, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wiki logics

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

Bonwiki

Voting

• Proposed by Bonzg

Discussion

Wikiport

Discussion

• Too far away from the project's scope, functions, in my opinion. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:43, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

Wikimedia Polymorph

Discussion

---

Wiki gate

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

• WikiGate, when WMF implemented superprotect. More seriously, as "gate" is ambiguous, I think this name could be rather confusing and not directly associated with functions when heard for the first time. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:04, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wiki-progs

Voting

• Proposed by Path slopu

Discussion

---

Curry

Voting

• Proposed by ABaso (WMF)

Discussion

• Does mention the project will be a "wiki". Also, "curry" will not generally be associated with functions by external visitors, even if this seems to be based on the programming language with the same name – that, by the way, no-one said will be used in the project, let alone be one of the main languages. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 09:09, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

  It's not a reference to that one language, it's a reference to Haskell Curry in general, a mathematician who studied lambda calculus/combinatory logic (which relates to functions), and who gave his name to currying, which is another function-related concept. PiRSquared17 (talk) 14:14, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

  Thanks, I'd forgotten the name of the mathematician the programming language Haskell is named after. This shows the background of the name will probably not be clear to everyone, which would be new for WMF projects. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:25, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

• This would be difficult for people to search for. - Nikki (talk) 15:52, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiREPL

Voting

• Proposed by ABaso (WMF)
•  Support --denny (talk) 18:35, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• Probably to technical for some visitors, but I don't think the project will be directly viewed by that many visitors either. What about translatability? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:49, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
• Will the wiki actually have a REPL? PiRSquared17 (talk) 18:51, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
• I actually thought about this one also last night before falling asleep!, the entire REPL as a flow, which we definitely will have and currently do! REPL, in general can be thought of as overlapping workflows or just processes. R, read, is the extraction parts that will mostly be automated when the community opt-in to have pages created or maintained. But for a Wiki of Functions, that will only be the E, eval part from REPL, so maybe that's a subtle vote for WikiEval. The P, print, I would say would perhaps be renderers and I quite like that aspect of alignment. L, loop, could be thought of as the continual refinement as well as counter vandalism operations. Overall, REPL is a good way to think of the entire set of workflows or processes that generates knowledge and would probably be a great way to document as an example of those very new to Wikidata/Wikipedia and wondering/hearing about how the "Wiki of Functions" fits into the whole picture. --Thadguidry (talk) 22:14, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Functionwiki

Voting

• Proposed by ABaso (WMF)

Discussion

• Does not start with "wiki", so I'd oppose this for consistency. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 09:01, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
• Descriptive, should be easy to remember and translate · · · Peter (Southwood) ^(talk): 07:17, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikihana

Voting

• Proposed by GoEThe
•  Support Also reminds me of Ohana, so nice double blend. --denny (talk) 18:44, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• Wiki + Hana. Wiki as in wiki wiki, and hana as in function in Hawaiian. Hana also means flower in Japanese. [1]. GoEThe (talk) 10:27, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
• This has quite a negative sound/bad connotations in Czech. --Mormegil (cs) 09:47, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiNexus

Voting

• Proposed by nixahn

Discussion

• Nexus – link. I wouldn't associate that with functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:42, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiAlchemy

Voting

• Proposed by NeilK
•  Support Pelagic (talk) 12:09, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• Transmutation of substances, with a little bit of magic. "Alchemy" is such an old idea there are direct translations in European and Middle Eastern languages, and similar concepts for most others, as far as I can tell.

---

Wiki Etymology

Voting

• Proposed by ZI Jony

Discussion

• Etymology is about words, but [t]he name should not restrict the wiki only towards the goal of the Abstract Wikipedia or be only about natural language and content abstraction, but should reflect the potential that the functions may be used in a large diversity of ways and places. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:26, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
• The name suggests a wiki that discusses the etymology of words (something Wiktionary already does), but that is a far cry from the project's goals. PiRSquared17 (talk) 20:09, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikigenerator

Voting

• Proposed by George Ho

Discussion

• I'm not sure what is meant to be generated. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:46, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikistructure

Voting

• Proposed by George Ho

Discussion

• Too broad in my opinion; does not restrict the project to functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:45, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Also, we already use the term structured data, and this could potentially cause confusion. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 08:02, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikiinfo

Voting

• Proposed by George Ho

Discussion

• There is a conflict with https://wikiinfo.toolforge.org but that's not insurmountable. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 19:42, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
• I find "info" too generic when the matter is specifically functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:35, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikibasic

Voting

• Proposed by George Ho
•  Support I had the same idea JAn Dudík (talk) 07:34, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• Is this supposed to be a reference to the BASIC programming language? If so, I'm not sure it's appropriate, since that language will probably not be used on the wiki. If it's supposed to refer to something else, I don't understand its intended meaning. PiRSquared17 (talk) 22:03, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiTrans or TransWiki

Voting

• Proposed by User:Ny cs2

Discussion

• "Trans" can be hint to "transformation", "translation", or any process that takes some input(s) and returns something else instead. The "trans-" prefix comes from the Latin trāns meaning “on the other side of”.
• Don't know if this is trans-latable. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:47, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
• "Transwiki" already has another meaning.--GZWDer (talk) 00:00, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiAda

Voting

• Proposed by User:Pharos
•  Support --denny (talk) 18:40, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• Since it is a wiki of essentially bits of programming, I thought it might make sense to name it after Ada Lovelace. Apologies for the CamelCase, it's not necessary, but I thought it might make the meaning a bit clearer.--Pharos (talk) 00:49, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiCalculator

Voting

• Proposed by User:Ny Cs2
•  Support Though maybe "Wikicalc" would be better? ArthurPSmith (talk) 12:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• To quote the definition of function provided for this contest "In short, functions make a calculation on the data you provide, and answer a question you have about it." The WikiCalculator will provide (the definition for) various calculations that could be useful in different Wikimedia projects.

---

WikiMath

Voting

• Proposed by User:Ny Cs2

Discussion

• To quote the definition of function provided for this contest "In short, functions make a calculation on the data you provide, and answer a question you have about it." WikiMath allows people to do all kind of (math) operations to transform some inputs into new outputs, which then can be used in different Wikimedia projects. Also, the word "Math" is universally recognizable, as it is taught starting with elementary school.

---

WikiQuarks

Voting

• Proposed by User:Ny Cs2

Discussion

• Quarks are the elementary particles that build up and give mass to every atom in the universe, as well as to the WikiMedia projects. :) See also WikiBlocks.
• I find this name's relation to functions marginal and think the name is likely to cause confusion—however, I have no knowledge if this word is commonly used in marketing to convey the meaning the nominator described. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:54, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikiexec/-s

Voting

• Proposed by 1234qwer1234qwer4

Discussion

• Listing a variation on my proposal of Wikimedia Executables. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:27, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wixecutable/Wikiexecutable

Voting

• Proposed by 1234qwer1234qwer4

Discussion

• Listing a variation on my proposal of Wikimedia Executables. As with Wikompute, the name would be translated as "Wikiexecutable", as it is done with Wiktionary. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:28, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

Could there be issues with w:Wix.com? PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:27, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

• The beginning of Wixecutable sounds just like the German Wichse, which is slang for semen. I’d rather not have to utter this particular name all the time. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 19:08, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

---

f(Wiki)

Voting

• Proposed by apassant
•  Support --Yair rand (talk) 23:48, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• unsuitable for a domain name with the parentheses. verdy_p (talk) 07:03, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
  • @Verdy p: I think that's not a big problem, one can still have fofwiki.org, for example — The preceding unsigned comment was added by 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:15, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
    • c'est encore moins parlant... on s'éloigne de l'objectif cité plus haut. verdy_p (talk) 22:43, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
      • Je suis d'accord avec vous, mais pourquoi avez-vous changé de langue? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:01, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikiutilities / Wikitilities / Wikimedia Utilities

Voting

• Proposed by PiRSquared17
•  Support, although rather not the middle one. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 07:57, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• From wiki and utility (in the computing sense).

---

WikiIO / WikIO

Voting

• Proposed by PiRSquared17

Discussion

• From wiki and IO (input/output). I'm not sure how universal "IO" is, though.

---

Wikipoly

Voting

• Proposed by Sargoth

Discussion

• πολύς means "many", nothing I would personally connect to functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:46, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  • The name is aiming to the abstract Wikipedia itself, with the function-platform being subordinated; maybe we keep my proposal in mind for the central platform. Sargoth (talk) 09:32, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikiresult

Voting

• Proposed by TeKaBe

Discussion

• From the point of view of a user, the contents of this wiki will be the result of some function or computation.

---

Wikiμ

Voting

• Proposed by Man77

Discussion

• μ naturally follows λ.
• Even more cryptic than the preliminary name, this name is even less likely to be connected to functions, as this play on the name of lambda calculus is a complete insider. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:44, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
• The only connection between "μ" and "function" in my mind is the concept of μ-recursive functions. This model of computation is functionally equivalent to the lambda calculus and Turing machines, but much less well-known. "Lambda" is something lots of programmers would be familiar with. PiRSquared17 (talk) 17:48, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikisoft

Voting

• Proposed by User:Daniel Mietchen
•  Support I could see this one working. ArthurPSmith (talk) 12:36, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• From "software". -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 05:30, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikido

Voting

• Proposed by User:Daniel Mietchen
•  Support --denny (talk)

Discussion

• From English "do", which is a reserved word in a number of programming languages, e.g. Pascal. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 05:54, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Not sure if that will be clear in translations. "Wikitun" does not remind me of "for...do". 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 08:39, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikibutton

Voting

• Proposed by User:Daniel Mietchen

Discussion

• Because a common use of the functions on the site will be as a backend to some kind of button. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 06:16, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
• Would prefer the plural form, as every function is likely to have a separate button. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:28, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
• @1234qwer1234qwer4: Plural now available — Wikibuttons. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 22:26, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikibuttons

Voting

• Proposed by User:Daniel Mietchen

Discussion

• As per the singular: because a common use of the functions on the site will be as a backend to some kind of button. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 22:22, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiThought

Voting

• Proposed by User:Sabas88

Discussion

• A library of functions to tie concepts. Naming comes from H2G2's w:Deep Thought --Sabas88 (talk) 08:33, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikifx

Voting

• Proposed by User:Sabas88

Discussion

• Literally a mathematical function with an argument, it can be styled Wikif (x) --Sabas88 (talk) 10:47, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
• "fx" is often short-hand for special effects... maybe not the right connotation? ArthurPSmith (talk) 12:35, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  • I also thought briefly about something based on f(x) or f_x (the latter like "there are x-number of functions here: f₁, f₂...", and a slight nod to pharmacy's R_x), but then the "effects" meaning came to mind. Pelagic (talk) 12:36, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
• This seems a good idea, however the result is quite underwhelming… --Mormegil (cs) 09:45, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikiroutine

Voting

• Proposed by User:Daniel Mietchen

Discussion

• After "software routine". -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 13:06, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikireturns

Voting

• Proposed by User:Daniel Mietchen

Discussion

• Because the point of a function is that it returns something based on some input. While the wiki would host the functions, it would serve the returns, so this name would kind of emphasize the service nature of the project. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 22:32, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikilisp

Voting

• Proposed by User:PiRSquared17
•  Support denny (talk) 02:28, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• From wiki and w:Lisp programming language, because Abstract Wikipedia/Function model is LISPy
  • No: too narrow concept. You likely can not accept Wikiracket.--GZWDer (talk) 22:59, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikompose or Wikicompose

Voting

• Proposed by User:PiRSquared17
•  Support. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:53, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• From wiki and function composition
• I like this, because translation functions will also "compose" text from structured/abstract data. Not sure how this will be represented in translations though. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:53, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikombinator(s) or Wikicombinator(s)

Voting

• Proposed by User:PiRSquared17
•  Support. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 11:32, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• From wiki and combinatory logic (related to lambda calculus)
• The idea is good, the result is underwhelming. --Mormegil (cs) 10:13, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikimorphisms

Voting

• Proposed by 1234qwer1234qwer4
•  Support. PiRSquared17 (talk) 21:52, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• Proposing this because Abstract Wikipedia/Wiki of functions naming contest/Wikimorph exists but is less specific. I also like that translations from the abstract content will always preserve some semantic structure of the topic, which is, informally, what morphisms are about. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:49, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
• Almost  Support but this is a little bit too much technical/abstract, I guess. --Mormegil (cs) 10:05, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiLogic or WikiSense

Voting

• Proposed by User:Ny Cs2

Discussion

WikiLib

Voting

• Proposed by Ralf Roletschek

Discussion

• See also Abstract Wikipedia/Wiki of functions naming contest/Wikilibs. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:12, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikifuncs

Voting

• Proposed by Eissink
•  Support Eissink (talk) 21:58, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
•  Support 4nn1l2 (talk) 04:51, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• Not sure this ad hoc shortening will be translatable to many languages. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 14:08, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

• There is no need to translate a name. It's just a name. Eissink (talk) 14:23, 2 October 2020 (UTC).
  • @Eissink: no. It says The name must translate well in the name proposal criteria. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 14:28, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

• Names don't translate. We don't translate "Wikipedia" or "Wikidata". I thought it meant "it should not have an ambivalent meaning in other languages". Anyhow, this proposal has no chance anyway, so let's not bother too much. Eissink (talk) 14:52, 2 October 2020 (UTC).
  • @Eissink: Who told you that? Quoting GZWDer, "the translated name needs to be informative. In Chinese, names of Wikimedia project are never transliterated". 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 14:04, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

• ​ What do you mean: "Who told you that?" I wrote "I thought it meant etc.", wasn't that enough information? And now please stop this useless discussion, especially since I find your tone pretty aggressive and not pleasant at all. Not to mention the amount of your comments in this contest is proposterous and bizar already. Eissink (talk) 14:08, 3 October 2020 (UTC).

---

WikiCore

Voting

• Proposed by User:VulpesVulpes825

Discussion

• The Wiki media’s core for article abstraction, templates, module, and more. VulpesVulpes825 (talk) 04:04, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Arithmowiki

Voting

• Proposed by User:MJL

Discussion

• It's wikt:arithmo- + wiki. I hate how almost every proposal uses the Wiki + ??? format. Let's be a bit more creative than that. For the record, this is also what I propose we name the database –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 02:52, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

  in a stoic voice: I'm never going to support any other name. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 02:28, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikialgebra

Easy to translate (d:Q3968) or even transliterate to many other languages; Meaningful name; Not too short, not too long; In rhyme with Wikipedia.

Voting

• Proposed by User:4nn1l2
•  Support denny (talk) 17:00, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
•  Support Mardetanha ^talk 22:30, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
•  Support Mahdi Mousavi (talk) 17:26, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
•  Support Ταπυρ (گپ) 18:22, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

---

Wikigebra

Pros:

• Portmanteau of Wikipedia and algebra;
• Easy to translate (d:Q3968) or even transliterate into many other languages and in many other scripts;
• Meaningful and memorable name related to math (see algebraic function and abstract algebra: the word algebra is a link between the two new Wikimedia projects; math is probably one of few abstract and international languages understood anywhere in the world);
• Not too short, not too long (both gebra and pedia have 5 letters), and in rhyme with Wikipedia and Wikidata (all of which finish with the letter a);
• Interwiki links will be possible by the distinct and available letter g, for example g:test.

Voting

• Proposed by User:4nn1l2
•  Support Nightdevil (talk) 12:26, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
•  Support Mrs.Alef (talk) 08:40, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• Hi GZWDer, Is this name translatable into Chinese? 4nn1l2 (talk) 05:18, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Yes, but I will not support as this is only one of aspects of "Wiki of functions".--GZWDer (talk) 06:09, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
• Hi Amire80, Is this name OK in Hebrew and Russian, two languages I don't have the slightest clue about? 4nn1l2 (talk) 06:38, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

  Translatable, though not necessarily easy to understand. And hey, I expressed my opinion about Hebrew and Russian because that's what I know, but there are hundreds of other languages, and I hope people share their view about them, too! --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 06:55, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

• Hi DVrandecic (WMF), As I far as know, you were the one behind these two new Wikimedia projects. While canvassing is allowed[2], this is not meant to be canvassing. I just want to know if "algebra" is close to what you had in mind about Wikilambda. I have already read the guide pages, but I'm not sure if I have a clear vision of this project. Thanks for your time. 4nn1l2 (talk) 08:49, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

  Thanks for the proposal! Calling it an 'algebra' isn't too bad. I saw this proposal, and was considering it. The rationale for the name is good, but the the mere sound of it didn't ring with me. Regarding canvassing, you probably saw this already. --DVrandecic (WMF) (talk) 14:18, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

---

curate.wikimedia.org

Voting

• Proposed by User:M-Mustapha

Discussion

• Curating what? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 14:11, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Curating info. Em-mustapha ^{User | talk} 09:23, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikiphi

Voting

• Proposed by User:M-Mustapha

Discussion

• Like Wikilambda, I find this name too cryptic. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 14:12, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiCalc

Voting

• Proposed by User:MichaelMaggs
•  Support Nokib Sarkar (talk) 13:35, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

---

FunctionalWiki

Voting

• Proposed by Alex Blokha
•  Support Asadbek Botirqulov (talk) 16:20, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• Inconsistent with most other Wikimedia projects: Does not start with "wiki". 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 13:54, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiMix

Voting

• Proposed by --Gejotape (talk) 16:40, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• Not sure what meaning this is intended to convey, and how it is related to functions. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 14:14, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiProcessor

Voting

• Proposed by Nokib Sarkar (talk)

Discussion

---

Phrasemaker

Voting

• Proposed by User:Ziko

Discussion

• I'd oppose this per The name should not restrict the wiki only towards the goal of the Abstract Wikipedia or be only about natural language and content abstraction, but should reflect the potential that the functions may be used in a large diversity of ways and places. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:30, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiLua

Voting

• Proposed by User:Kittycatttmattt

Discussion

• Too tied to one specific language in my opinion. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 13:56, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiFunk

Voting

• Proposed by Thadguidry
•  Support Who doesn't like the funk? Dirac (talk) 23:51, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• This is a wordplay, and I am not sure it is possible in other languages. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 14:24, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

---

WikiEval

Voting

• Proposed by Thadguidry

Discussion

---

WikiEquals

Voting

• Proposed by Thadguidry

Discussion

---

WikiPlex

Voting

• Proposed by User:Ny Cs2
•  Support --denny (talk) 18:44, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
•  Support Acceptable. --Mormegil (cs) 10:00, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• With WikiPlex we will be able to raise to the power the value provided by the different WikiMedia projects, by weaving into their content newly created information through functions (check out this for the multiple meanings of -plex). Plus WikiPlex is just a cool, catchy name.

---

Wikiware

Voting

• Proposed by Luk3
•  Support. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 07:52, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
•  Support Not great, but still there’s something to it… --Mormegil (cs) 09:48, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• ware comes from software, following the same way pedia comes from encyclopedia. --Luk3 (talk) 01:34, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
• This will probably need to be translated like "Wikisoftware" into some languages, similarly to Wiktionary. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 07:51, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikimedia Executables

Voting

• Proposed by 1234qwer1234qwer4
•  Support. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:39, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
•  Support Good idea, the result just about usable, I guess. --Mormegil (cs) 10:11, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• I'm surprised nobody has suggested anything playing on the aspect of execution yet, even though we have Wikigram, Wikiprogram, and Wiki-progs, so I listed some possibilities for it; this one is based on the name of Wikimedia Commons. However, I understand CamelCaseNick's point in the Wikirepo proposal. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:27, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

• I think this would be a pretty decent name, although technically I guess the wiki will not host binary executable files. PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:26, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Eval

Voting

• Proposed by ABaso (WMF)
•  Support --Thadguidry (talk) 23:16, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
•  Support for Wikimedia Eval or Wikeval, but not Eval on its own. PiRSquared17 (talk) 00:41, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

• A bit too cryptic imho; does not suggest the project will be a wiki. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:46, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

  Maybe Wikeval? PiRSquared17 (talk) 23:25, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

  Addition: Does it only sound like "evil" to me? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:25, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

• While I like it, this is basically unlocalizable, I guess (only by completely substituting the name with something like Wikicompute for the localization). --Mormegil (cs) 09:59, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikibackend

Voting

• Proposed by User:1234qwer1234qwer4

Discussion

• The backend to translatable content on Abstract Wikipedia and other uses the project will have. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 13:59, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

---

Wikifyit

Voting

• Proposed by User:Elwinlhq

Discussion

---

WikiFyIt

Voting

• Proposed by User:Elwinlhq

Discussion

---

WikiWidgets

Voting

• Proposed by User:Chuck Entz

Discussion

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.