There’s a Wikipedia app? I find that baffling.
Comment on The bizarre secrets I found investigating corrupt Winamp skins
victorz@lemmy.world 1 month agoPeople not having the Wikipedia app baffles me. Sharing from there gives you reasonable links.
Plopp@lemmy.world 1 month ago
victorz@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Try it. It’s great.
Plopp@lemmy.world 1 month ago
How much time do you spend on Wikipedia?
bitfucker@programming.dev 1 month ago
My man, I think I have over a hundred tabs and saved wikipedia articles alone that I always refer to when needed. The app works great for me
victorz@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Time? Pff, no clue. But I look things up all the time and don’t have time to finish articles the first time round, ever (two kids under six).
So it’s great to have and get back to articles.
Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
Yes that works, and you can also use something like URLCheck and just drop that path
victorz@lemmy.world 1 month ago
What is what, an extension?
Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
mr_satan@monyet.cc 1 month ago
Why use an app when there’s a web site? In case of Wikipedia I fail to see any functional benefit for an app.
victorz@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Better reading experience overall. Compartmentalizing all my Wikipedia reading so as not to mix it with my other many open tabs. (Wikipedia app has tabs, too.) Sections are not collapsed by default. Easier to search on the page by default than in the browser.
I can probably go on it I made a more in-depth comparison after using the web version for a bit…
bitfucker@programming.dev 1 month ago
The app has offline capabilities and to save articles on a named list. I use it as a reference when forgetting something or to save the list type article as a starting point when researching a software to use. Or just generally a reading material when on the go (yes, I find reading wikipedia articles entertaining)
mr_satan@monyet.cc 1 month ago
Ok, offline functionality does make sense