actually i read somewhere that wikia.com too has "articles" on it, and wikipedia (of course) has articles. then what is the difference between both? and if they both are similar, then won't they cannibalise each other?
2006-12-11 16:05:27 · 4 answers · asked by Rishabh Singla 2 in Computers & Internet ➔ Internet
This is a difficult question to answer in a little box at Yahoo Answers. There are actually lots of differences between the two, but since you mentioned articles, let's look at how those differ between the two sites, especially in terms of audience.
Wikipedia is a general purpose encyclopedia. Wikia is for community-focused content on any topic, especially non-encyclopedic topics that wouldn't be permitted in Wikipedia.
Many of the wikis hosted by Wikia are made up of communities of fans writing articles on whatever topic they are passionate about from a fan point of view (rather than Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View), and they're writing for their own community - people interested in the same topic (Star Wars, Cats, Google, or whatever) whereas Wikipedia is aimed at a general audience and can't assume too much prior knowledge on the part of the reader.
If you want any more information on this, feel free to contact me.
2006-12-11 17:56:17 · answer #1 · answered by Angela 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Wikipedia is an encyclopledia using the Wiki content management system, whereas Wikia is a catalogue of sites using the Wiki system.
2006-12-11 16:14:07 · answer #2 · answered by shapesizeandsound 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i stood on my canine's foot the day before the day earlier to this as i replaced into weeding with him preserving me employer. he yelped, and that i replaced into horrified and lamented the awfulness of having harm him. he on the instantaneous sensed my misery and moved closer and reached out his hose to me, so i made very a lot of him and apologised emphatically. i puzzled an same element you probably did on the time and got here to the end that he DID comprehend after seeing me taken aback reaction that it replaced into unintentional. canine are plenty smarter than we provide them credit for. we assume of because they could be able to't study books that they are no longer sensible, yet they have a unique type of concepts, and of their own way are smarter than we are in that similar way. imagine about it; they ought to stay in our international, lower than out situations, at the same time as a good type of the time we can't even artwork out what they're wondering and feeling. They do so a lot extra adapting, gaining expertise of out language, after we do not study theirs. They comprehend precisely what we are feeling, and they could be able to study our intentions in ideas that look uncanny till you artwork out how somewhat mushy and perceptive they're. in case you've were given a canine who likes to play at preserving the toy from you, attempt making him or her believe you're not to any extent further drawn to that toy once you somewhat are. it truly isn't any longer basic! besides, having a kind-hearted, empathic canine convenience ME at the same time as it truly is me who's purely stepped on HIS foot purely blows me away. they're only awesome, awesome persons, canine. Non-animal enthusiasts, do not come that 'canine are not human beings' crud! stumble on a significantly better time period that elevates them to the status of conscious, feeling animals of an same entityhood as people which could no longer species-certain and we can all use it henceforth! to quote Radar, 'canine are human beings too!'. large question
2016-11-25 22:09:04 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wikipedia is a free open-source encyclopedia. I have not heard of 'Wikia', maybe it is the parent company or something.
2006-12-11 16:08:43 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋