Topic on Template talk:Used by

I am asking because Encyc was added to this template. Currently, I fail to see how to get a new wiki with them. To me, it looks more like a single wiki.

Oh, I didn't notice the Encyc addition before. Yes, this does look like a single wiki, and it should probably be removed.

We're all friends here, trying to make the most out of MediaWiki. I was a little unsure whether this template should exist at all, but Yaron gave some good reasons, including that we can use it as an indicator of an extension or a skin's popularity. As it stands, the template includes some sites of limited interest, and that's ok, as long as we all look out for each other and support independent wikis as well as the farms.

Including stand-alone wikis would actually undercut both of the purposes of this template: to help people discover managed and self-hosting options with the functionality that they want; and to help gauge the popularity of different skins and extensions - since allowing for the inclusion of any wiki could potentially bring up the number of options here to the hundreds or even thousands, which would make reading or analyzing the results almost impossible. If you want to see an uncurated listing of all wikis that use a particular skin or extension, there's already a site for that: WikiApiary. (To be fair, WikiApiary is only for public wikis, and it's extremely slow, but hopefully the latter at least will be fixed at some point.)

Let's be clear. The template includes a number of for-profit organizations that either charge users a fee or choke their wikis with ads. Encyc does neither of those things, and has been around for fifteen years, completely free. MediaWiki is for independent wikis as well as wiki farms and Wikimedia. I am proposing that we all try to get along and include each other.

Does Encyc let people create their own wikis? If not, it's an irrelevant comparison. If there are packages or farms listed here that you think shouldn't be included because they're too expensive or for any other reason, that's certainly a valid viewpoint, and it could be the subject of a separate discussion.

I don't want to criticize anyone's site. Let's just enjoy things as they are.

FWIW, I am of the opinion that this template should only be scoped to major wiki hosts. Doing otherwise would make this template pretty counter productive.