Proposed logo for wikidirect

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ WikiDirect aims to provide free reliable information as a liberate guidebook. With the main purpose of helping the community get through certain situations, this project will stand under the foundation's umbrella to build a collaborative community constructive.

Basic IntroductionEdit

Mission statementEdit

  • it has been over 18 years since the creation of the worlds most prominent free online encyclopedia, and almost 7 years since the last launch of a wiki project. Right now, WMF projects have been peaking over technology, breaking all the challenges and fitting into the technological era, where it is hard to engage in activities without proper guidance. Wikidirect is a project proposal for a free online guidebook which anyone can edit freely and use freely, something that would help future generations to get through difficult situations or to find answers to simple questions. Something that would inspire generations to come.
Wikidirect plans to create a database of Q&A after most frequently asked questions that exist in the society at present by the help of the modern society itself. The idea for Wikidirect originated from the phrase Do something different. Which led up to the fact that the foundation has never created a Q&A before, alongside the fact that all the Q&A's that exist within the web are corrupted with the lack of freedom. Anytime we visit such a website, they start bothering us with persistent pop-ups and advertisements, making it hard for the users as well as editors to surf through the articles. constant requests to allow notifications, and constant requests to rate the websites get on the top of it.
We believe that we can create a free, successful and functional guidebook that operates by the risks and hardships of society to guide the future into a better history.

Difference from existing projects (outside WMF and inside)Edit

  • WikiDirect is an authentic idea with numerous factors that differentiate it from existing projects that are already published in the web. most users will ask the question which creates curiosity in them most... aren't there question wiki's outside Wikimedia like Quora, stack overflow and etc...? Well, the answer as obvious is a simple yes. There are many Q&A websites, but every one of them are proven to be non-free with advertisements sprawled all over, and the provision of a definitive answer is not confirmed. A Free collaborative guide would benefit the society in many ways.
  • Wikipedia- Wikipedia is the reason for the creation and maintenance of the Wikimedia foundation. However, Wikipedia tends to stand by the rule- Wikipedia is not a guide, therefore, not many similarities can be found between these two projects.
  • Wikivoyage- Wikivoyage is a travel guide, the comparison of these two projects are extremely divergent. Even though it is also labeled as a guide the view of WikiDirect is entirely discrete to the view of Wikivoyage.
  • Wikihow- One of the major questions asked when such projects are proposed is how is it any different from WikiHow. The first reply is that Wikihow is not any part of the WMF, even though a few relationships remain, it has no other known alliance. The second reply is that the tagline of Wikihow is How to do anything, Wikidirect plans to focus on the question What to do when or What, which is far from the overview of Wikihow. For example, a wikihow article would have the header How to prepare for an exam while Wikidirect would answer questions such as What is longest river in the world and What to do if you have broken your arm. The contrast of the two wiki's can clearly be seen by the explanation. WikiDirect will have a wider and different range of questions than WikiHow, making it's similarities dispatch. WikiDirect plans to be a What, when and who question wiki, where you can ask logical questions to be logically answered. The distinction is pretty obvious, even though it has the relation of both being question wikis and both are open to the public for editing. WikiDirect also plans to work on the 1911 Britannica format, which is a clearer way of data representation. This project will also stand by the line- The free worldwide guidebook , which would be a perfectly viable tagline.
  • Wikilife- A project proposal initiated by The user who suggested Wikidirect.

What does this mean? (concept)Edit

  • In a much more simplified aspect, Wikidirect can be designated as a question wiki, Which provides answers to reasonable questions such as What medicine to take if you have fever. Nonsensical questions such as What to do if aliens attack will not be provided an answer. Information will be derived from reliable sources such as books, wikipedia, wikisource and etc... an article's data representation would be simple and unbiased. It would be prepared in a Quick flick hypothesis which is basically the elucidation of the Hawaiian word- WIKI, however, the article will have certain extents with a concotion of links that leads into further attributes such as consuming patterns of the medicine in a none-detrimental way. See the complete explanation on WikiDirect/ Introduction

How can reliability be confirmed?Edit

Reliance is something that lacks in a community which can be edited freely, but Wikidirect would only display information under full confirmation (if wrong information in the article causes any defilement to the ones who read it). Any suspicious edits fom i.p users and new users will have to be checked twice or thrice. Credibility as many a times mentioned is important to the maintenance and prevention of the downfall of open editing websites.

Why a new wiki?Edit

At present, no other wiki exists that was built for such a purpose, Even when someone asks google, they present answers from other websites. A wiki that provides answers to general questions cant be put into any other wiki as well. A seperate website which would provide free answers to questions that goes by who, what, where and all other sorts would be the perfect idea for a next generation Knowledge flourishing wiki.

What WikiDirect would/would not haveEdit

While WikiDirect will be a free world wide guidebook, there are a few things that it will not include, it is of great importance to the WMF to maintain their set of rules and lead the projects to a better future. Hereby, this documentation has been prepared to make this proposal more understandable.

NPOV-The specialty and authenticity of this proposal is that the guide would be neutral to whatever point of view. Even in war articles (say- Who started the world war) we would not be supporting or opposing to any group no matter what debate comes upon. Neutrality will be highly maintained. We would only apply the facts with a pint of skepticism to show that equality is present in each article.

Advertisement spaces-One of the major objectives of this proposal is to create a Q&A which is 100 percent ad free. While it is ok to recommend products in articles, it is never ok to start an entrepreneurship within the article.

  • Example one  Y
Apple is the most used phone brand in region X by demographic Y for use case Z.
  • Example two  N
Apple is the greatest cellphone brand recommended for such a situation. with over 60 years of trust, apple stands to be reliable by many users around the world!


  • Editing can get out of hand, unfaithful edits will always be done by hateful comeback users. Prevention would be unimaginably hard for admins, check users and etc... several tool ideas for the wiki have been put up here.
  • Auto-search- the tool used by wikipedia which auto-searches the article topic on the browser to retrieve information from the web. This would help in researching purposes. It would also help in faithful edits by new auto-confirmed users due to the easier facilities (new users may edit carelessly and add false data because of the absence of will to dedicate themselves.).
  • Twinkle- the well-known wikipedia tool that prevents vandalism. A guidebook, being a website which would be subjected to vandalism often, will need such a tool to support the pillars that hold it up. Twinkle enables user's to edit Behind the scenes in a more convenient way.

Frequently asked questionsEdit

  • WikiDirect articles will provide detailed articles with a good percentage of accuracy to support development of trust. From the lowest point to the highest it would be of great significant detailing. Hopefully, after time passes and the community has built the wiki in to a usable state, many users will join to support the journey. Given below are some answers to questions asked more than often.

How would this be any different from existing Q&A's?

  • As many a times mentioned, all the existing Q&A's tend to have a great deal of corruption within them. They constantly advertise products, they force you to accept their cookies and notifications, and every so often, wastes your time and internet. WikiDirect would go by the good old Wiki format which would increase loading speed and decrease usage of internet. It would be free for editing and free for viewing. Vandalism would be a hard sight to see and the answers would be arranged in a way that enables readers to freely read. in most Q&A's, answers are hard to find and read due to the mixture of advertisements shown every once in a while, and their tweetlike format is uneasy to process. WikiDirect has a free format arranged for articles as shown in WikiDirect/ Example Article.

cant you just ask google?

  • You can, but the real question is, where does google get the answer... At present, google uses answers from websites to answer to questions. Maybe if the Wiki gets developed enough, we could be the main source of answers for google and become one of the greatest online guidebooks ever to be.

What would happen if someone publishes the wrong information

  • Wrong information can be given to anyone at anytime, the reasons for spread of unreasonable rumors. To avoid this, WikiDirect would take extreme measures. Any suspicious edits will be rechecked. Normally, users after passing 100 faithful edits do not tend to vandalize the wiki, hence making it easier to double check information and confirm reliability. With the help of a tool like Auto search, the percentage of trust would increase due to convenience.


a Demonstration website is under construction under the local host, FTP would be done within the next few months and soon it would be ready for viewing and editing. While it is prepared, you can see a few example process websites that has being retrieved for viewing.

Name URL data
Wikihow en:wikiHow
Quora en:Quora
Stack overflow en:Stack Overflow
Blurtit en:Blurtit
Ehow en:eHow

Domain namesEdit

  • some names were collected, maybe they would help out in choosing out a name. A few names of other languages were put up as well to reduce the anglocentric nature(after @Zerabat:s suggestion. Please feel free to suggest a new name or even vote for a name in the discussion.
  • WikiGuide- A name which was taken from a proposal which was closed in 2010.
Wikiguia- Spanish for Wikiguide
Wikiguida- Italian for Wikiguide
Wikicanllaw- Welsh for Wikiguide
  • WikiDirect- The first and mainly proposed name for this project
Wikidirecto/wikidirecta- Spanish for Wikidirect
Wikidirecte- French for wikidirect
Wikidiretta/Wikidiretto- Italian for Wikidirect
  • Guidepedia- A name originated from Wikipedia.
  • Wikiask- Simple name for the wiki.
Wikifragen- German for wikiask
Wikipedir- Spanish for wikiask


Please ping the proposer (User:Arepticous) when adding your message

People interestedEdit


  1.   Support- Per proposal Arep Ticous 10:56, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
  2.   Support Seems good. We need a competitor to WikiHow. Calvinkulit (talk) 11:13, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
  3.   SupportIt is a great idea Omda4wady (talk) 07:45, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
  4.   Support - Good plan :) Josephine W. (talk) 01:09, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
  5.   Support Good idea. JackCrazy5 (talk) 23:20, 30 December 2019 (UTC)


  1.   Oppose Guidebooks belong on b:, collaborative learning projects on v:. This seems redundant. —Justin (koavf)TCM 22:05, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
  2.   Oppose I think this belongs on Wikibooks rather than needing to be a fully seperate project. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 16:03, 20 October 2019 (UTC)


Direct ist sicher passent (bin aber noch neu bei wiki) Gibt es diese Seite auch auf deutsch? --Georgfotoart (talk) 11:24, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

@Georgfotoart: noch nicht Arep Ticous 08:36, 12 September 2019(UTC)

  • This sounds like a Q&A. There are plenty of Q&A's on the internet, and I don't understand how this one would be different or better. Additionally, what is the connection between a "guide" and a Q&A? Or is this more of a "how-to"? If you're thinking of creating a tutorial website, check out Wikihow, a non-Wikimedia website that serves that function. SelfieCity (talk) 20:27, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
  • @SelfieCity: It is a Q&A Wiki, and i agree with you, there are many, but many do not provide definitive answers. They are open for vandalism and do not run by a proper protocol. Only one site that lies prominent is [], even in that website, an answer would be provided only if someone is willing to give you one, and one other thing is that, in those Q&A's we cant ask questions like Who invented the light bulb or what is the rarest animal in the world (these are just light examples.) cannot be asked. It is not a Wikihow based website... it is explained here. If you have any more questions... feel free to ask. Arep Ticous 14:46, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

@Arepticous: Yes you can ask questions like Who invented the light bulb on existing sites, for example Plus the example "What medicine to take if you have fever." above has no definite answer. (Please don't use blockquote when you reply and don't quote someone.) --Malyacko (talk) 10:22, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
@Malyacko: WikiDirect is something that plans to be entirely different. Its answers would already be supplied in a formal way along with tips and etc... See- WikiDirect/ Example Article. Not to forget that WikiDirect would also be a free guidebook, while all the other Q/As are infested with advertisements that bother their readers. Arep Ticous 16:00, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment @Arepticous: (1) you have made a false claim in your example:

    Advertisements can disrupt websites at a rapid rate. A live example for such a quick disruption can be put forward as the former Wikimedia project-Wikitravel[1]. We can easily see how it used to be an how it is now by comparing it with Wikivoyage[2]. In 2013 after WikiTravel was bought by Internet brands many of the users turned against the fact that it was turned into a non-free wiki with constant advertising... this made them to propose Wikivoyage- a new free travel guide which was exactly the same as WikiTravel. Building up a new website was hard enough, and at the moment Wikitravel is practically abandoned.

Wikitravel is not and never was a Wikimedia sister projects neither a Wikimedia-endorsed project. Wikitravel started as a project of some individuals, that some time after was bought by Internet Brands, company that later on put lots of advertisements on the site, and that, along with the poor infrastructure issues not being addressed, part of the community decided to leave that project and to fork contents (CC-BY-SA licensed) and create their own travel guide project. Some years later that project requested to be adopted as Wikimedia project and here we are. There were a legal litigation between IB and WMF; but there was an agreement to settle the plaint. Both project exists, but not interact almost at all each other.
(2) For your information, the project overlaps partially with an existing space within English and some other language editions of Wikivoyage: Tourist Office. There, you can ask a tourism or travel related question and you will recieve an answer and maybe a link to a relevant page.
(3) Regarding your suggestions of name and branding (and its translations, that by the way I thank you that you considered the fact that the name does not have to be in English), the "direct" reference of your project may have sense in English, but it does not make sense in Spanish and may not in other languages. You could ask "direct to what?". That is how I see it. On the other hand, "guide" may not be an accurate depiction of the proposed project, because a guide implies a "step by step", "manual" or "how to". If your project intends to be a Quora/SOF-like project but free and open, then guide could not be always a Q&A. I think "ask" is more appropriate (by the way, in Spanish would not be "wikipedir", but something like "wikipregunta"). Of course, other suggestions not yet made are also welcome.
(4) What would be the content model? Plain wikitext like Wikipedia? Would it require any additional (existing or to-be-created) feature or mediawiki extension? How information/Q&A content would be organized? One page per question (plus its answers) or one page per topic (that could contain several Q&A)? Would it require additional features in order to reach Wikidata integration? Could you please make an image to depict how a page would look like?
(5) What would be the inclusion criteria? Would there be any limit of questions allowed? Do you have any plans to require proper credentials when answering complex or high-qualification questions (such as hard science topics) or everyone would be allowed to answer regardless of their education? Are you willing to write a rough draft about it? --Zerabat (discusión) 02:00, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @Zerabat:I have read your message an since it is posted apart, i will answer each separately.
(1) Word! I thought that it was a former Wikimedia website! I guess i should confirm facts before publishing it onto the project. I removed it, please, if you see any more data that proves not to be true, inform me ASAP.
(2)That space challenges only the travel field, Wikidirect would be something that would help give initial advice to a person from all possible fields. And Wikidirect plans to answer questions in article form.
(3)The idea to use a non-English name is inspirational, i wrote the translated names to inform the community that this project is widened and respective, and that the name can be of any language, whatever fits best is accepted. Pardon me for the linguistic error, i dont know many languages, so i had to pluck that off google translate which supposedly gives Weak translations. Wikiask is actually a great name for such a project, but i wish to seek more further and find something that is better.
(4) Plain wikitext is the plan for now. One page per question is what the projects basis is formed on, I'll update an image soon enough, i just have to update the PHP and grab the screenshot. Pages in WikiDirect will be written in Article format as shown in the example Article page. It would help the user identify and read the information swiftly.
(5) Non-Qualified users will not get to answer complex questions, since it could harm the person who follows article instructions. I will write a draft on it. Arep Ticous 12:04, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
Canvassing by proposer

@Arepticous: this, this, this, and many more talk page messages are not appropriate. It is called "canvassing". If someone is interested in your proposal, they will make comments, there is no need for you to direct them to it. Please stop right now. Masum Reza 23:13, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

  • Understood, terribly sorry for spamming. Arep Ticous 11:34, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Discussion regarding oppositionsEdit

  • @Koavf: I believe that maybe you have jumped straight into conclusion. Wikibooks contains recipes for cakes and other sorts of guidance articles, while WikiDirect would be something that would come to use in situations. Hence, making it resourceful. A given instance would be- What to do when someone is choking- Wikidirect would have a format that would cooperate in such situations and help out the person cope with it successfully. Not to forget that it is an Q&A. My view of this project is not understandable for many, i am developing an example image and a draft as User:Zerabat suggested to help viewers understand better. Arep Ticous 14:07, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • That sounds like something that fits at v:. —Justin (koavf)TCM 17:16, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @Koavf: How exactly would this fit into Wikiversity? WikiDirect is not such a learning material. It has a different view. Please read this and this for a significant intro. Arep Ticous 07:23, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Wikiversity is for collaborative learning modules, broadly construed. Basic first aid would actually be a very good set of instructions to have there. —Justin (koavf)TCM 08:20, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
@Koavf: WikiDirect is not just first aid. see- WikiDirect/ Introduction Arep Ticous 08:49, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
@Rubbish computer: dear user:Rubbish computer... I understand that Wikibooks is a compatible enviornment for this proposal, but however, i dont think that it would be a practical idea. Wikibooks already has a different purpose. Wikibooks doesn't fulfill the definition of a Q&A or a guidebook. And even if this project was to be taken into wikibooks, it would be of great inconvenience. Plus, multitasking of a wiki website is not approved by the public per-se... WikiDirect would have thousands of articles if you think about it and Wikibooks currently has alot. Arep Ticous 13:53, 25 October 2019 (UTC)