Proposal : Wikipedia x Dfinity

Dear all,

Please find below a proposal about the a partnership that I think would be beneficial for the IC : The World Reference of Information : Wikipedia.

You will find below the link for the google drive information I gathered so far, feel free to add/modify it : Dfinity x Wikipedia - Google Docs

Basically instead of waiting for some international known compagnies to adopt us, we could provide our help for free to have a first SUCCESS STORY to show the example for other big group to follow.

What do you think ?


I love this. I can’t think of a better project to demonstrate the powers of the ICP. I have no idea how feasible it is, but if it is at all it should definitely be pursued. It could ultimately create a self funding wikipedia (one of the most important resources in the world to date), that also encourages users to post high quality content.

Just a thought on the tokenisation model. Would it not be better to use a regular gas model (users pay for every article they read… $0.0001 kind of thing). When setting up a wiki account, it could also create the user with a wallet. This wallet could be used to access and pay for articles. But, rather than having a wiki token, I think the articles should be payed in a stablecoins USDC or maybe the ICP stablecoin. Reads of the artice could go both to the Wikipedia foundation and also a portion to those who helped write the wikipedia page.

Sorry it’s late and I feel like I’m rambling. But I love the idea!

1 Like

IMO Wikipedia is actually one of the more successful “web2” services out there. Literally life-changing software that did well without any tokenization.

But I think it could be an interesting experiment… maybe it’d be easier to start with a smaller, more specialized wiki as a POC?

Btw in case you haven’t seen this, check out They are a blockchain-based Wikipedia founded in 2015.


Maybe starting with Dfinity web sites?

1 Like

So what you suggest it to make a better version of wikipedia where people will pay to read articles ?

What you suggest is a step back from the current version of Wikipedia.

Will never work

1 Like

Yeah I am aware of this wikipedia like. As you can see in 5 years it is still unknown, that is why my suggestion is to take the REAL Wikipedia to us. I dont see any reason why we should be competitors.

I’m talking about paying a tiny amount (such a small amount you don’t even think about it). Hopefully enough traffic would be generated though to pay for the up-keep. Micropayments have never before been possible so I’m not sure how you know it ‘will never work’?

“Micropayement has never been possible”

Comme back to earth… It has been possible since the existence of money. Or maybe you think that now people will buy toilet paper leaf after leaf ?

In the risk of repeating myself

"What you suggest is a step back from the current version of Wikipedia.

Will never work"

Wikipedia is provided to users for free according to the original method, and it is better to issue a set of its own tokens for distribution in accordance with the warrants, and to charge advertising fees for daily living expenses, isn’t it better! Or you need to pay a small amount when downloading some authoritative materials, and you need to consume some tokens when publishing resources, and the article will be rewarded when users read a certain number. If there is a report or the article is deleted, a certain amount of punishment will be imposed in the reward section. Will it be more exciting to adopt this method? Just a small suggestion

You’re missing the point as I don’t think you understand what micropayments are. Micropayments are fractions of a penny; a payment which wouldn’t be feasible or possible for a bank to send.

Love the toilet paper example, really clever (you might be better of comparing something in the digital world though)! The part I’m interested to know is, when before has it been possible to pay per read of a web page (say $0.0001)?

1 Like

As I said, its was always possible. Just look at some currency that worth 1/10000 of a penny, just like indonesian rupiah or others. Now am gonna stop answering you.

What you suggest is also a step back from the actual version of Wikipedia.

Right now, if you dont know yet, its FREE just DONATION and NO ADS.

Anything worse than that, is simply NOT the solution.

IMO if you really want to tokenize something, it would be a DONATION token that would have an increasing price and would reward first donaters.
That would attract both investors and new donators since everyone might get rewarded, and both would keep the system working. Of course editors and creators would be rewarded the same way, if you take time to read the google drive, you would have read it there.

1 Like

Hahaha I’m not sure if that is a serious answer or not. Surely you understand:

  1. No currency is worth 1/10000 of a penny unless there has been hyperinflation and thus, it’s unusable.
  2. You could not send such a currency digitally (it’s not profitable for banks to send payments under $0.20) 3) If a currency’s lowest denomination is even 1/100 of a penny, it is because their cost of living is significantly cheaper than the US/UK (so wouldn’t be accepted in either country).

But yes, I’m sure you’re right. It’s always been possible to send micropayments.

That sounds very much like a ponzi scheme. You’re creating nothing of value to justify wanting/needing a token. Why would the token increase in value?

Is it fine to share a helping verb into Wikipedia internal help option??