Wikijunior/Project name/Final vote

Final name


The final name of the children's project of the Wikimedia Foundation has been voted as Wikijunior.

Final vote



Vote for one of the following. Add your reasoning in 20 words or less on a seperate line. Vote ends September 24, 2005 00:00 UTC.

  • user:zanimum September 17, 2005 10:26 am EST
    • If Kiki fails, then we have to rename the magazine/website. Imagine could be a copyvio.
  • I suppose that naming it "Wikijunior" could keep it in line with all the other project names. Messedrocker 16:44, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Risk 23:04, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's simple, it doesn't try to be something it's not and it keeps in line with other wikimedia projects. The name is descriptive of what it is (to some degree).
  • Quadraxis 21:25, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Im voting wikijunior because Imagine is not notable to many people, and is probably copyvio, and Kiki/Keiki doesn't connect easily with the rest of the Wikimedia projects.
  • Garrett 01:34, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Keiki" means bugger all to the vast majority of visitors; "Wikijunior" immediately clues ALL visitors in on what we're doing.
  • Roberth 19:34, 23 September 2005 (UTC) - I don't see any real problem with renaming anything so far, so the technical issues of renaming everything are irrelevant. Still, Wikijunior has been widely used and recognized within the Wikimedia community, and most people who are general participants don't seem to mind the name. Indeed, far more people are contributing to Wikijunior than are voting in this proposal.[reply]

Old stuff


Based on the Wikijunior/Project name/Vote, these three following names are left available.

  • 13/9, 39/15.75, 54.75 = Wikijunior (11 opposed)
  • 16/3, 48/5.25, 53.25 = Keiki/Kiki (14 opposed)
  • 9/9, 27/15.75, 42.75 = Imagine (9 opposed)

Discuss each at further length on this board until 9 PM EST, 14 June, 2005.

How should the final name be decided?

  • By a new vote?
    • If there is to be another vote, it would be useful if people would give reasons for their votes rather than just voting. Perhaps rating the three options on a scale would give more useful results than a simple support/oppose. Angela
    • I would suggest an Instant-runoff voting election instead of the standard voting typically used, because of the strong preferences to several proposals. This could also open the door back up to some of the earlier dismissed names, but it is unlikely they would get the majority. The point here is that rather than constant bikkering over what is the best name, just get the decision done. The procedure would be to simply put your preferences in the voting area (1st choice, 2nd choice, 3rd choice, etc.) followed by your name. This voting method gives a concensus as to what might be a good name, and avoids the names that a majority hate (that might win in a plurality winner system, or even successive voting runs). --Roberth 22:53, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • We're not getting anywhere. The first prints need to be done in December and we don't even have a name yet. We're not going to agree on a name unanimously, so let's just vote on it and go with the winner. Wikijunior needs to get moving, which means we need to decide on a name now. Nobody seems to disagree horribly with a final vote, so let's go with that. I suggest, setting up a page, contacting all the voters from the previous rounds and putting a link on the meta frontpage. That way, we can probably close the vote in one or two weeks. I don't think the voting system will make much of a difference towards the outcoome in this stage. Risk 21:22, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • By the vote that was already done?
  • By focus groups of kids?
    • Focus group sounds good, where are you going to get the kids? Messedrocker 23:38, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • That's exactly it. Someone even suggested this replace the elimination round I did, and the voting from the last two weeks. I said to them to find a teacher on Wikipedia, no response. It's so near the end of the year, I don't know if anyone would even be able to fit it in to the last weeks of school. I know there was someone with Wikijunior that home schools about 8 or so kids. -- user:zanimum
    • It's not only kids who should influence the decision. The objections to the name "Kiki" or "Keiki" are more likely objections adults would have, not children, but that doesn't mean those objections won't affect the successful distribution of these books. Angela
  • By the Board?
    • Yes, by the board. I resolve to spend more time on the books. It is a good use of time. Who knows what will inspire a kid. These books will go to kids that may not have computers or even other books. Yes it is hard, but so is everything else worthwhile.
    • No. I don't see why the Board should make this decision. Two members of the board (basically 2/3 of the active board) have already voted here anyway. Anthere and I both voted support for Wikijunior and Imagine. Angela
  • By the people who have been working on Wikijunior?
  • Something else?
  • This exercise should be forgotten. Considering the halted progress of some Wikijunior books, superficial decisions such as this only help us procrastinate. -- Lotsofissues, It's summer for me and I'm ready to go to the library so let's just forget and do some work.
    • Look at it this way: There was no policy discussion, or anything else in Meta relating to this project, from November until I started this in April. This may not be the best use of our time to you, but without a name, we can't register a domain, we can't get an ISSN, we can't attract future sponsors, we can't easily attract educators to review the content's relevance, we can't do much of squat. -- user:zanimum
  • What about using both Wikijunior and Kiki, considering the suggestion to create a Kiki character for the books, why not use Wikijunior as the book series name, and Kiki as the character? --Quadraxis 20:58, 2 Jul 2005 (UTC)


  • To put it short, I don't think children will want to be called "juniors". It seems degrading, and they'll think that it's ran by "the man" who is out-of-touch with children. Messedrocker 00:44, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • I don't think they will find it degrading. It's for 8-11 year olds; they are still kids and they know it. I think it's also good to have the name include "wiki" in it, as wikijunior would be a gateway into the wonderful world of Wikipedia, and it's nice for the name to acknowledge that. Brendan OShea 01:14, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • I thought the game Monopoly Jr. had a stupid name when I was 8-11 years old because it made me feel that it was for someone much much younger than me. Messedrocker 23:37, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • I like WikiJunior. I've never heard children nor anyone else complain about the use of the name 'Yahooligans' even though it clearly has some bad connotations. As long as the page has some cool stuff on it, folks won't worry much about the name of it. --Wikiczar 22:22, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
        • It's ok for you to like the name "Wikijunior", but how old are you? Also, "Yahooligans" sounds like an OK-name because it doesn't sound very child-like, as opposed to say, Yahoo Junior. Messedrocker 19:42, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
          • Of course kids hate the word so much, they've made Nick Jr is the highest rated kids-channel. -- user:zanimum
            • But, Nick Jr isn't focused at 10 year olds it geared towards 3 year olds. BrokenSegue 02:09, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
              • BrokenSegue was right, the markets for Wikijunior and Nick Jr. are different. Messedrocker 15:42, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
              • In all fairness, is geared for kids between the ages of 1 - 8 and their parents, see. Also, this does nothing to keep my 9 and 10 year old neices and nephews from logging on an getting into the puzzles, games and assorted content on the site. I'm actually partial to WikiJunior to a degree as it maintains a common thread to sites geared for kids. Granted, i'm not a kid anymore, but my wife calls me one. --Hopskotch (Wiki-Hops) 17:40, 1 Jul 2005 (UTC)
                • Thanks for that fact, Hopskotch. Also, when you think about it, Nick Jr is "less than" Nickelodeon, which is for tweens and teens. Wikijunior is "less than" a site with scholarly-level information. So thus, in both cases, the "junior" is just "younger than" the "superior". -- user:zanimum
    • I think that Wikijunior is a great name, because it connects the books to Wikimedia. My younger brother (9 years old), after i explained it to him said that he liked all the names, but wikijunior best. I asked him if it bugged him that it had the name "junior" in it, but he said it was fine, and wikijunior fits great (he also suggested wikilearning, since they are learning books, but i think we are beyond that stage of choosing names) --Quadraxis 20:51, 2 Jul 2005 (UTC)
      • Well if that's the opinion of a member of the market we're trying to attract, then let's find out more opnions and see if this -is- a good name. Plus, it does match with the other names... Wikipedia, Wikinews, Wikisource, and so forth. Messedrocker 7 July 2005 02:24 (UTC)


  • While Keiki/Kiki is indeed a good name, there are many negative Internet community connontations behind it. Keiki rhymes with KEKE, which is an Internet pejorative making fun of the laughter of people with Asian accents. Imagine how mortified the contributors will be when people from the Internet will make fun of Keiki, that is, if we decide to name it that. Messedrocker 00:43, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • Messedrocker, since you seem to be the only one objecting on these grounds, can you point to a page on the web where this word is actually being used to make fun of Asians? I've certainly never heard of it. Besides, if it only rhymes with this other word, I don't see the problem. It seems an awfully low bar for rejecting this name... - dcljr 07:31, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • See User:Messedrocker - I have a section for it. I just started it, I'll expand it later.
        • Those all seem to be Koreans writing. So if they're making fun of their own way of laughing, I wouldn't say it was offensive to them. -- user:zanimum
          • Well I've heard non-Koreans saying "KEKE" to make fun. Either way, it's still not the best name. Messedrocker 18:49, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • No disrespect to anyone on this topic, but i think there's a lot of worry of offense over what could be arguably little reason for doing so, especially with this proposed name. For starters, if you give me enough time, i can probably find you a handfull of folks who will be rightly upset at anything you call them, regardless of whether its a compliment or a derogatory comment. Words which have started out as honorable titles have ended up derogatory simply because another race chooses to use it as such - the words dont change, merely the usage - see "Bahadur" and "brother". I think Keiki/Kiki is great as it's playful, it embodies the Wiki spirit and doesn't belittle the target audience. You'll probably never find a single word which doesn affend someone at some level; so why not choose something that fits? short of calling it "Wikid", this is a great choice, i'd vote this one over WikiJunior. (sorry for the long comment) --Hopskotch 18:08, 1 Jul 2005 (UTC)
    • No offense, but the concern has been twisted. My problem with the name is not that people will get offended. It's that people will make fun of the fact it rhymes with "keke". I'm worried people might ridicule the encyclopedia with exclamations such as "Hey look, the Korean encyclopedia!" or similar torts. Messedrocker 7 July 2005 02:21 (UTC)


  • I would imagine that, in part because of the popularity of the song Imagine, there are plenty of trademarks on the word "Imagine". Has some research been done on whether any US-registered trademarks might conflict with the intended use?--Eloquence
    • I think that such a simple word can't be trademarked. If it can, then I think we'd be allowed to use it considering this isn't a music project. Messedrocker 00:46, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
      • Of anybody to have to fight, Apple Music (or anything related to the Beatles) is going to give massive heartburn and problems for the Wikimedia Foundation. Apple Computer went through this, and still had to go through a very diffficult lawsuit dispite the fact their products had very little, if anything, to do with music or what the Beatles had ever done. And they had the money to fight the lawsuit. The IPod has perhaps even opened the door up to push that lawsuit forward. In short, avoid, avoid, avoid. Especially if we already know of a potential trademark conflict.Roberth 12:41, 28 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • "Imagine" doesn't seem to be a recognizable word, compared to the other two. It isn't something the average person/kid would be able to differentiate from other things as well as with the words "Wikijunior" or "Kiki"--Quadraxis 03:05, 30 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • Agreed. I dont think Imagine provides the relationship with the term Wiki, nor does it really provide any branding. --Hopskotch 17:45, 1 Jul 2005 (UTC)
      • Both Wikijunior and Kiki keep a connection to wiki, so i don't have problems with either of them, though i prefer Wikijunior. --Quadraxis 20:55, 2 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Wikijunior: Different books for different kids?


I've moved this to Talk:Wikijunior#Wikijunior: Different books for different kids? as it's not really about the name.