I love Wikia – CEO Gil Penchina, a former eBay executive, says he works harder than anyone in Silicon Valley at building his startup. I routinely point out to him that his startup doesn’t actually do anything – their wiki software is based on the open source MediaWiki project, Google, Looksmart and FM Publishing handle all the revenue via ad sales, and their users create every drop of content on the site. All he has to do is make sure the lights stay on (to be fair, Wikia has made substantial contributions to MediaWiki).
Anyway, back to the news: Wikia is launching Wikia Gaming tonight, a collection of video game focused wikis. The sites contain over 250,000 articles on games already, on all major platforms. The World of Warcraft site is the largest single wiki, with 43,000 articles.
Wikia, which has raised $14 million from Bessemer and Amazon, claims a quarter billion monthly page views. 800,000 articles on 3,000 topics have been created and edited by over 200,000 registered users in 70 languages.
Very nice. I’ll leave that comment live.
I thought the largest wikia-page was the Star Wars wiki.
http://www.wiki.../wiki/Big_wikis
And I agree no site on the web uses space better.
Rumors that by October they will have the AdCenter up and running.
Via their private label PPC platform, leased from LookSmart you will be able to buy pay per click ads on the wikis.
That’s not a very nice comment “Michael”.
Sergei is correct: Star Wars is the largest single wiki –> “The largest wiki on Wikia, with 52,000+ pages on everything Star Wars.”
BTW, Arrington have u seen this? Barack Obama posted a question on LinkedIn.com (Answers section) an hour or 2 ago…it has almost 200 answers.
http://www.link...hp?trk=techent1
The Washington Post has already picked up on this:
http://blog.was...ead_of_the.html
This is a startup worth watching, LOTS OF CONTENT.
Hah, why do people leave such negative comments? Anyways there’s a difference between enabling and exploiting users and we all know which side Wikia leans to. The problem is one that Squidoo(?) faces, where users get part of the revenue but because there’s little collaboration if any the quality of articles sucks, and there’s spam and it attracts the wrong people with the wrong motivations. What can Wikia do but exploit? At best it could give a significant share of its revenues to wikimedia, in lieu of sharing with its users. A suitable substitute in my opinion.
Mike with all respect, I disagree with you.
There is might be a lot associated with leaving the light on.
First, we have to make sure that the infrastructure is built,
monitored ,and updated as needed.
Also everyone trying to offer something useful and unique
to the web is working hard.TechCrunch.com is a good example
of that usefulness I am talking about.
Finally, I agree with you that users need to be give more credit
for their contributions. It would even be honorable to reward contributors
financially. Without user input Web 2.0 technologies might only be Web 1.5.
TO USERS:
YOU do the hard work.
Keep up the great work !
To say the CEO isn’t working hard because the site leverages other technology platforms doesn’t make any sense – those are engineering tasks, and the CEO does not execute those tasks, normally.
Of course he works hard – marketing is hard work! That’s like saying Tom Sawyer didn’t so anything – he got everyone else to paint the fence, but he had to talk them into doing it 1/2
http://seattlep...ding.asp?id=634
“You can make a fair amount of money on advertising when you have basically no costs”
Wouldn’t Answers.com be a far better choice if you’re going to call someone out for profiting off of someone elses wiki work.
one more new great website has born.
john from acheter kamagra