Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

MediaWiki

175
87
+ 1
0
Wiki.js

53
141
+ 1
2
Add tool

MediaWiki vs Wiki.js: What are the differences?

Introduction:

In this Markdown code, we will discuss the key differences between MediaWiki and Wiki.js. MediaWiki is a popular open-source wiki software that powers websites like Wikipedia, while Wiki.js is a modern and lightweight wiki software built on Node.js. Now, let's delve into the key differences:

  1. Architecture: MediaWiki is built on PHP and uses a relational database like MySQL or MariaDB to store data, while Wiki.js is built on Node.js and uses Markdown files as its database. This architectural difference makes MediaWiki more suitable for large-scale wikis, while Wiki.js is more lightweight and easier to deploy.

  2. User Interface: MediaWiki has a traditional wiki interface with a classic look and feel, reminiscent of Wikipedia. On the other hand, Wiki.js offers a more modern and intuitive user interface with a clean and customizable design. This difference in user interface can make Wiki.js more appealing to users who prefer a sleek and modern look.

  3. Editing Experience: MediaWiki provides a visual editor, similar to a rich text editor, where users can edit pages without needing to know markup languages. Wiki.js, on the other hand, relies on Markdown for editing pages. While Markdown can be simpler and more straightforward for experienced users, it might have a steeper learning curve for users familiar with visual editors.

  4. Customizability: MediaWiki offers extensive customization options, allowing administrators to create intricate templates and extensions to suit their specific needs. Wiki.js, although customizable, has a more limited range of customization options compared to MediaWiki. This difference can be important for organizations or websites with complex requirements.

  5. Plugins and Extensions: MediaWiki has a vast ecosystem of plugins and extensions developed over its long history, providing a wide range of additional functionalities. In contrast, Wiki.js, being a newer software, has a smaller but growing collection of plugins and extensions. This difference in the availability of plugins and extensions can impact the choice of software, depending on the specific functionalities required.

  6. Community and Support: MediaWiki has a large and active community, given its long-standing presence and popularity. This translates into abundant user support, extensive documentation, and regular updates and security patches. Wiki.js, being a newer software, has a smaller community and may have fewer support resources available. This community difference can play a role in choosing the right software, particularly in terms of long-term maintenance and support.

In summary, MediaWiki and Wiki.js differ in their architecture, user interface, editing experience, customizability, availability of plugins and extensions, and community support. The choice between the two will depend on the specific needs and preferences of the organization or website looking to implement a wiki system.

Get Advice from developers at your company using StackShare Enterprise. Sign up for StackShare Enterprise.
Learn More
Pros of MediaWiki
Pros of Wiki.js
    Be the first to leave a pro
    • 1
      Fast speed by node.js
    • 1
      Open Source

    Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions

    Cons of MediaWiki
    Cons of Wiki.js
      Be the first to leave a con
      • 1
        No tree structure by default

      Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions

      - No public GitHub repository available -

      What is MediaWiki?

      It is a free server-based software. It is an extremely powerful, scalable software and a feature-rich wiki implementation that uses PHP to process and display data stored in a database, such as MySQL.

      What is Wiki.js?

      It is an open source, modern and powerful wiki app based on Node.js, Git, and Markdown. It runs on the flamingly fast Node.js engine and is optimized to conserve CPU resources.

      Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

      What companies use MediaWiki?
      What companies use Wiki.js?
      See which teams inside your own company are using MediaWiki or Wiki.js.
      Sign up for StackShare EnterpriseLearn More

      Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions

      What tools integrate with MediaWiki?
      What tools integrate with Wiki.js?
      What are some alternatives to MediaWiki and Wiki.js?
      Microsoft SharePoint
      It empowers teamwork with dynamic and productive team sites for every project team, department, and division. Share and manage content, knowledge, and applications to empower teamwork, quickly find information, and seamlessly collaborate across the organization.
      WordPress
      The core software is built by hundreds of community volunteers, and when you’re ready for more there are thousands of plugins and themes available to transform your site into almost anything you can imagine. Over 60 million people have chosen WordPress to power the place on the web they call “home” — we’d love you to join the family.
      Confluence
      Capture the knowledge that's too often lost in email inboxes and shared network drives in Confluence instead – where it's easy to find, use, and update.
      DokuWiki
      It is a simple to use and highly versatile Open Source wiki software that doesn't require a database. It has clean and readable syntax. The ease of maintenance, backup and integration makes it an administrator's favorite. Built in access controls and authentication connectors make it especially useful in the enterprise context and the large number of plugins contributed by its vibrant community allow for a broad range of use cases beyond a traditional wiki.
      Drupal
      Drupal is an open source content management platform powering millions of websites and applications. It’s built, used, and supported by an active and diverse community of people around the world.
      See all alternatives