– IRC News

All about Internet Relay Chat

A Wiki for all things IRC

IRC-related information can sometimes be hard to come by – with resources either being outdated, unmaintained or due to a lack of interest completely gone offline and forever lost in time.

Wikipedia and other Wikis are a good source for all kinds of information and to a certain extent also for content pertaining IRC – but articles that are to be found today might be gone forever tomorrow due to Wikipedias strict – and sometimes idiotic – notability guidelines.

When an article isn’t considered notable enough it then is put up for deletion and on a special page a discussion is held for and against the deletion of said article. In the event that there is no consensus regarding the deletion, most of the time the article is kept.

However, quite a large number of articles that would have been regarded being notable by the IRC community at large haven’t had much luck and have been deleted from the “free encyclopedia that anyone can edit” – which has raised many debates if their deletionism is completely out of control or not.

To have a comprehensive source, a few brave folks have set out and created a Wiki that is only for and about IRC-related content, free for anyone to edit and contribute. Since it was only started at the end of March it is still lacking much in content but according to them it already is the “largest IRC dedicated wiki in the world”.

People that want to contribute should take a look at the listing of pages that still need to be completed or improve one of the already existing pages.

We wish IRC-Wiki all the best and hope that many will contribute to it.

What is your experience and opinion on Wikipedias deletionism regarding articles about IRC?

Addendum: Of course, there already are a lot more IRC-related Wikis out there but for once, i’d like to see some collaborative effort -_-

Copyright secured by Digiprove
Category: IRC
  • Jonas Thiem says:

    It is kinda confusing that now tons of “IRC wikis” pop out of nothing, mostly just with copied content without giving proper credit to the original authors or source (which both the GFDL and CC license of Wikipedia require) or just with table content without proper, well-written texts.

    Everyone seems to start his own wiki instead of working together at a single thing that spawns either original texts or at least proper attributed Wikipedia texts (without just stupid copied-together info tables).

    I thought I would have made a good start but it seems as if everyone preferred to force his own thing through hoping to obtain the holy IRC wiki grail himself.

    April 8, 2010 at 7:51 pm
  • Trixar_za says:

    I don’t believe we copied content from anywhere nor did we intend to grab any kind of holy grail. All we wanted a Wiki with concise and reliable information about IRC that was free from any affiliation with IRC networks or websites because there didn’t seem to be any one like that out there.

    Maybe the claim about being the biggest is a little boasting in nature, but from what I’ve seen from other wikis, it either lacks content, information or just depth. We’re trying not to do that, while stying as open as possible. We want it to grow through a community, but we’re also not shy about putting in some work ourselves. It worked so far and I assume it will continue to work when we finally move over to MediaWiki in the coming week.

    April 9, 2010 at 12:04 am
  • Name says:

    Connecting to||:80… connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response… 302 Moved Temporarily


    April 11, 2010 at 7:16 am
  • phrozen77 says:

    [quote comment="2946"]Connecting to||:80… connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response… 302 Moved Temporarily


    Ouch – i shall investigate what is up with that

    April 11, 2010 at 9:25 am
  • phrozen77 says:

    Looks like that was due to them moving to MediaWiki – works for me now…

    April 11, 2010 at 11:44 am
  • Trixar_za says:

    Yeah, that’s how my host protects against spam from domains and sub-domains pointing to their web server and not actually being registered within their services.

    We’re on MediaWiki now with most of the bells and whistles going.
    I have noticed that “cound not connect to database” errors might crop up and I’m working on fixing it now. If this happens to you, just reload the page because it tends to be only for a couple of seconds while the load on the MySQL servers are a bit too high.

    April 11, 2010 at 3:21 pm
  • Trixar_za says:

    Ok, fixed the database issue now too. Anybody that’s willing to contribute can just create an account (it’s free, fast and no e-mail activation required) and away they go :)

    April 11, 2010 at 7:21 pm
  • AnthonyThrash says:

    wikipedia contributor’s deletion of IRC related material, on the scale they have done recently, is vandalism through deletion. They basically rely on google hits to decide on notability issues, which is a sad method of research. The definition of reliable third party sources is vague at best. Many of the networks and clients that have been deleted from wikipedia, were definately notable within the IRC domain. I’m happy IRCer’s have begun an IRC wiki independent from wikipedia.

    April 14, 2010 at 10:11 pm
  • Bertrum says:

    Over a year on and we are still going strong. Chances are nobody will read this but I’m going to post anyway.

    We took in to account a lot of the points made here, such as Jonas joining up with myself and Trixar, Jonas helped irc-wiki a lot and he is a really valued member of the team.

    And to Phrozens points about collaborative effort, we have collaborated with quite a few different people. Such as Jonas joining up with irc-wiki as I mentioned above, the Janus project using our resources, which helped both of us. Software authors contributing to their software articles, adding more irc-wiki staff to help run the wiki, a lot has been done to ensure we make irc-wiki a community run wiki that anybody can edit.

    irc-wiki has been up for around a year and a half now, and we are approaching 200 thousand page views, here’s to the next year & a half and the next 200 thousand page views.

    September 17, 2011 at 5:22 pm

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *