Forums: Helping Hand > Content rescue from Wikipedia

Use the following template for a nicely presented post:

{{Forum post|Write your message here!|~~~~}}

I'm a rather frustrated veteran (donor, occasional editor, frequent user) from Wikipedia, where the whole of the FR content seems to be under the guillotine blade. In a discussion there, I drew the conclusion that Wikipedia doesn't really want any D&D story content, and found this site, which seems to be just the solution. I'm wondering if there is any reason we can't or should not start trying to pull the content on Wikipedia over here, wholesale, starting with the topics tagged for deletion.
Cold Blast 10:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
David Latapie, the guy who started doing the Forgotten Realms Project on wikipedia got in contact with us a while back but hasn't been seen much around here since. You can check out why all those pages started disappearing at Wikipedia FRProject closure (in short, your conclusion is correct). We don't tend to like the idea of copy/pasting content from wikipedia as is but if there's relevant information that we don't have on a topic regarding the Forgotten realms then we might as well attempt to bring it over here before it gets baleeted at the very least.
hashtalk 16:48, 12 July 2008 (GMT)
Hi Cold Blast, I'm glad you found us over here. We have repeatedly tried to mark Wikipedia's Realms-related articles with links here, because they keep getting deleted, but these links also keep getting deleted, as spam! Wikipedia's general policy appears to have become "if it's not notable enough for inclusion here, then nobody deserves to know about it", which is a shame, and a major diversion from Wikipedia's original mission, especially considering Jimmy Wales himself is very much behind the use of "special purpose" wikis like those on Wikia!

I consider that wholesale copying of articles from Wikipedia for the purposes of preservation is a very good idea, but some work will be required for each. Help:Converting from Wikipedia can provide some guidelines on how articles will need to be altered (and I imagine that the vast majority will need at least some alteration). I have always been of the opinion that an article with no sources is still better than no article at all, because referencing can be added later.

Fw190a8 20:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
Thank you both for your insights! I'm glad to see that most of the content has already been rescued. I'll spend what time I have looking for anything that may have been missed.
Cold Blast 00:45, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.