Wikipedia is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

Article milestones Date Process Result February 5, 2005 Peer review Reviewed March 9, 2005 Peer review Reviewed April 4, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted April 9, 2005 Featured article candidate Not promoted May 4, 2005 Featured article candidate Promoted April 1, 2006 Articles for deletion Speedily kept August 1, 2006 Featured article review Demoted September 15, 2006 Good article nominee Listed February 25, 2007 Peer review Reviewed August 12, 2008 Peer review Reviewed August 15, 2008 Good article reassessment Kept July 21, 2009 Peer review Reviewed July 26, 2012 Peer review Reviewed November 7, 2012 Featured article candidate Not promoted August 25, 2014 Guild of Copy Editors Copyedited September 5, 2014 Good article reassessment Delisted May 21, 2021 Peer review Reviewed February 4, 2023 Featured article candidate Not promoted March 12, 2023 Peer review Reviewed A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on January 15, 2005. This article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of February 7, 2007. Current status: Former featured article

This  level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Wikipedia Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's encyclopedic coverage of itself. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. Please remember to avoid self-references and maintain a neutral point of view, even on topics relating to Wikipedia.WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject WikipediaWikipedia Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Websites: Computing Top‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (assessed as Mid-importance). Internet High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Internet culture Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Internet culture To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles Expand : Pick an article from here or here Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images Stubs : All stubs are located here Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}} See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention Brands Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Books: Reference works This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook This article is supported by the Reference works task force. Spoken Wikipedia This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Spoken WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaSpoken Wikipedia Guild of Copy Editors This article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors on September 10, 2014.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors

	Other talk page banners

It is no good saying you are not logged in without providing an easily accessible link by which to do it 80.41.3.131 (talk) 06:37, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A good place to discuss this would be WP:Teahouse. This page is to discuss the article Wikipedia. Johnuniq (talk) 07:11, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You may want Special:UserLogin (or Special:CreateAccount for creating an account). SeaDragon1 (talk) 20:55, 1 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Weekeepeedeeah has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 26 § Weekeepeedeeah until a consensus is reached. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 09:25, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Randy Kryn Hi, the "first line" should contain "definition", therefore it should follow Occam's razor. So if you think these two definitions:

Wikipedia is a free online multilingual encyclopedia written and maintained by a community of volunteers, known as Wikipedians, through open collaboration and the wiki software MediaWiki.

and

Wikipedia is a free online encyclopedia written and maintained by a community of volunteers, known as Wikipedians, through open collaboration and the wiki software MediaWiki.

For most people have the same explanatory power, then according to Occam's razor we should select the second one, and we can remove "multilingual". But I don't think so. Because being "multilingual" is a very important aspect of Wikipedia. Please note that the second paragraph does not contain the definition, and follows separate rules. Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 07:01, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hooman Mallahzadeh. The first line of the second paragraph fleshes out the language edition aspect of Wikipedia, which adequately covers this information. The word "multilingual" may confuse some readers, especially presented so early (first sentence) and adds redundant lead data which is soon presented in a better description. Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia, is singular, while Wikipedia as multiple encyclopedias - its hundreds of language editions - would be plural. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:07, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia search peak: Nov 2007 (100 searches)^[1]
Wikipedia search dip: Jun-Jul 2025 (10 searches)^[1] SeaDragon1 (talk) 05:30, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t know *_*JX*_* (talk) 22:27, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded by Something Sinister. Legit source? Espngeek (talk) 04:20, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fascinating, but not a source in my opinion. Maybe see also? Regards, a most likely very cozy Cooldood5555 ✈️ (let's talk) 03:21, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No, we don't use non-reliable links as see alsos either. Someone's niche YouTube channel is not anything we need to mention or link to. Meters (talk) 03:50, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Wikipedia's has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 January 2 § Wikipedia's until a consensus is reached. Thepharoah17 (talk) 00:38, 3 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In the "Accuracy of content" subsection, we have Joseph Reagle suggested that while the study reflects "a topical strength of Wikipedia contributors" in science articles, "Wikipedia may not have fared so well using a random sampling of articles or on humanities subjects."^[1]

Using sarch on the PDF, I am unable to find either of those quotes there (no use of "topical", "random", or "humanities".) Perhaps he said them somewhere else? I've flagged for a failed verification, but this should be cleaned. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 22:22, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

 Self-trout I'm so sorry! I've literally been sleeping at 12-3 AM so my sanity might not be good --pro-anti-air ––>(talk)<–– 03:54, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear for those looking on, p-a-a is not apologizing for some thing they've done to the article; they posted a intended-to-be-helpful-but-not-appropriate-to-the-situation response, and then undid it, then posted the trout. (I'm only pointing this other edits don't think they're saying they were the one who posted the material in question, or have done something to correct the matter; the matter is still unaddressed.) -- Nat Gertler (talk) 04:31, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]