Wikipedia alternative

How much would it cost to host a text-only version of Wikipedia?
Assuming 1/10 of wikipedia traffic at least. Excluding free hosting or partial hosting of data(such as css,js,fragments, templates,etc), i.e. everything on my own servers.

The reason i'm posting this is that i realize how much authority Wikipedia has and that all its competitors are using bandwidth-heavy pages(with pics/video/sound). A lean alternative to hosting a few million text pages with editing history would be much cheaper and faster.

It can use git as backend with wiki interface. A handful of github features with easy to edit article.

use this:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki
shouldn't cost too much, maybe like $5-10/month for a VPS or hosting or whatever

>Assuming 1/10 of wikipedia traffic at least
at least or at most?
1/10 at least is wishful thinking for a pet project
most sites get next to no traffic, wikipedia has so much traffic they probably use load balancers and CDNs and caching and backups and shit and tons of separate servers

The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog"

>>6
looks like a random note

>>8
Its a bbcode randomizer script

Hmm... you can use ipfs and it will be free.

https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6uco/wiki/

>>8
I know bb

>>9
How do you edit it then?
What guarantees it will stay they?
Who decides the right version?

https://ipfs.io/blog/24-uncensorable-wikipedia/ Looks like a static snapshot of past wikipedia. That doesn't mean much, however if you can upload new versions.
They say they have this in mind:

The long term goal is to get the full-fledged read-write Wikipedia to work on top of IPFS. This is much more difficult because for a read-write application like Wikipedia to leverage the distributed nature of IPFS, we need to change the how the applications write data.

>>12
Once this is done, I'll start editing IPFSwikipedia daily.
Without those admins and bureaucrats, without the need to register an account and without censorship.
The question how politically incorrect articles they will tolerate? Say an article on soy or fluoride from a more ""fringe"" perspective, for a start.
An article on circumcision which doesn't parrot the official narrative, or Gamergate without feminist screeching?
Even some neutral articles like """Proton decay""" have significant influence, for example proton decay existing at all means all atomic matter in unstable in principle and will decay eventually.

>>9
There is no IPFS. It's just someone else's computer.

>>14
there is no internet, it's just someone else's BGP table

Why would you want to preserve that shitheap?