Wikipedia talk:Mirrors and forks

Welcome to the official Mirrors and Forks talk page. You can leave comments, answers, questions, and concern about the page here.
Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.
Start a new talk topic.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mirrors and forks page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Shortcuts

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4: 90 days

Old talk is at:

Wikipedia talk:Sites that use Wikipedia as a source

? seems a (chinese) copy of entire wikipedia ?

http://en.wiki.hancel.org/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.95.169.110 (talk) 17:48, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reworking this page

The usage of this page has changed a lot over the past decade. Nowadays, Wikipedia is so popular that listing every source copying from us with the intent of taking some form of legal task is a fools' errand.

Instead, I think this is more useful as both a resource for documenting mirrors, for editors - as well as for tools like Earwig's copyvio detector, to prevent false positives. This is currently implemented, but due to the inconsistent nature of entries here, performs poorly.

I've created an example of what I'd like to change the page to look like at User:Elli/Mirrorsandforkstest. Notably, the format would change to a sortable table, and each domain name would be an entry, instead of each website. This is to mirror the more spam-blocklist nature this has taken on. Thoughts? I'd be happy to implement this change, but I'd like to get feedback from people who contribute to or use this list before going ahead. Elli (talk | contribs) 02:34, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Elli,

I do like your table suggestion and would support it. Even though, the readability of the Notes table is difficult...

(as a relatively new "editor", I may not know yet the right words here) Villamondial (talk) 15:44, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How can I tell if an apparent mirror is malicious?

I think the article should explain what to look for in a mirror site to tell if it's malicious or not. For example, I just found a site called en.wiki.hereiszyn.com, which appears to be an exact copy of Wikipedia (it's not listed here). Is that allowed, or does it need to indicate that it's a mirror in some way? If you try to edit a page on the site, it displays a page saying that your IP has been blocked from editing, which might be just because it's directly piping you through to real wikipedia, except real wikipedia sees your IP as this other domain. Or, it could be a phishing scam to try to get people to put in their actual wikipedia credentials before they notice that the domain is wrong. I mean, they got me to do just that, although I quickly realized that something was up when it didn't actually log me in, so I went to real wikipedia and changed my password. But it could also be a harmless mirror that just doesn't have a functioning login system, because it doesn't need one. I don't know what to look for to tell the difference. I also would like to understand more about how to identify a live mirror as opposed to a fixed one, if that's even possible from a user perspective.

Thedeseuss (talk) 19:45, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Low/None"?

The page here says to select from three compliance ratings of "High", "Medium" or "Low/None" when using the {{Wikipedia mirror}} template, while the template documentation itself says to pick from "High, Medium, Low, None". Which is correct? --Lord Belbury (talk) 19:14, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

wiki fork: zxc.wiki

found a wiki fork called zxc.wiki at https://de.zxc.wiki/wiki/Main_Page. mayby somebody can look into it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.150.245.219 (talk) 08:47, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

wikivisually.com

This site appears to have copied all wikipedia articles as it is and seems to mix other articles with it 178.248.114.81 (talk) 15:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

k12academics.com

This site appears to have copied a bunch of Wikipedia articles without attribution or the correct copyright license. The site says "© 2004-2023 K12academics.com". For example, https://www.k12academics.com/education-united-states/elementary-secondary-education appears to have copied from an old version of Education in the United States (before 30 July 2014), and https://www.k12academics.com/education-united-states/education-west-virginia from Education in West Virginia. -- Beland (talk) 22:20, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

mdwiki.org

I don't see mdwiki.org listed here. Should it be listed here under mirrors and forks, or does the connection to wikimedia make it something other than a fork? Their main page states "This site is growing out of Meta-Wiki and Wikipedia. We have attribution to Wikipedia, where much of the content originates, in the footers. We are working on a full history import. This project is run by a Wikimedia thematic organization and not by the Wikimedia Foundation." The footers for many pages say "This page may contain content developed from Wikipedia or Meta" even when the relevant talk page includes a link showing that the entirety of the page is mirrored from wikipedia. Dialectric (talk) 17:20, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

YouTubers reading off Wikipedia articles

Are instances of YouTubers making videos that are just reading off Wikipedia articles count towards this list? FMecha (to talk|to see log) 19:03, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]