I'm not in favour of this.

"Endorse" and "approved" - meaning what?

Note everyone here would go for that. And once you start picking favourites or play the left-right crap, it all starts sliding downhill.

InfoGalactic is less transparent than Wikipedia though it's more free / unregulated. I have posted countless ideas through the last few years as to how they might better improve the site, content, functionality, aesthetics, policies, community, and their publiciity - almost entirely to no response or effect. Further, they are religious, alt-right, and not left or truthers, whether they are Corporate Dem SJWs or authentic left-leaning progressives or anarch-Marxists. I may be the only one there who leans left or be a truther.

InfoGalactic is NOT friendly as a site and of the interactions with people I've only had issue with one Ayn Rand fan, Froglich. I ignored him and he stopped arguing. My conflict solution remains: https://infogalactic.com/info/Chomsky_(disambiguation)

I REALLY like the classic Wikipedia format and the deep, if outdated, encyclopedia to link to almost anything, or import it if still absent.

I'm all for collaborating and building bridges, but I'd rather "officially" team up with WikiSpooks, as /u/Robin (also as /u/WikiSpooks) is already SaidItron and posts primo content here on the regular. (FYI, Robin provides a weekly ZIP (<5gb) of the entire WikiSpooks content to download should anything happen to WS.)

Better still IMHO, would be to easily create a SaidIt.Wiki and manage it ourselves. I don't see a need to reinvent the wheel and decentralize information that will get out dated. While we could do the InfoGalactic thing and scrape WP for content or we could upload WS, maybe stealing it's thunder, I'd rather just start a new wiki.

There are other Wikipedians here too. We could start by saying that our rules are all the same as Wikipedia's, and then amend them as necessary. For example, instead of eliminating all "fringe" media we could allow it as sources to cite. We could also allow "fancruft" and long articles that delve into detail. We could allow other wiki-projects beyond the scope of an encyclopedia, like opinion pieces, essays, blogs, personal vanity pages, and open projects. The possibilities are endless. The encyclopedia might be the smallest part of it.

All this being said, it makes more sense, in my mind NOT to call it SaidIt.wiki but something entirely new, and have it under the NET of SaidIt.net. (Being creative I could come up with a hundred names in a second but that's not what this is about, and it should be democratic.) I'd be willing to buy the domain on May 1 if we can come up with something by then.