Changes

This article builds on the information at [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_wiki_software Wikipedia] which is rather superficial but does allow you to dive into each product page. There is also the 'WikiMatrix' site that provides a more in-depth analysis and comparison of wikis (eg. [https://www.wikimatrix.org/compare/BlueSpice-MediaWiki+Confluence+MediaWiki BlueSpice vs MediaWiki vs Confluence]. ) But, that site is often incorrect, or at best stale.  == Comparing MediaWiki to Confluence == In comparing MediaWiki to Confluence, we're also looking at what other vendors or analysts say about their comparisons. BlueSpice, a MediaWiki distribution which is specifically aimed at the enterprise market, is built by the German company Hallo Welt!. They offer an [https://blog.bluespice.com/2017/05/17/bluespice-mediawiki-vs-confluence-the-wiki-alternatives-1/ in-depth point-by-point analysis of the MediaWiki platform compared with Confluence] (and give you the spreadsheet to see the details: 275 metrics in 18 categories!). Contrast their honest, "scientific" analysis with the completely [https://blog.seibert-media.com/2014/12/12/the-wikipedia-of-the-company-yes-but-not-with-mediawiki/ inaccurate and biased marketing disguised as opinion by Siebert Media] == Executive Summary ==A simplistic conclusion when considering the origin of these products and their respective strengths would be that if your organization is a bunch of developers trying to push code out the door, then Confluence may be better because it does the essential "wiki" work; with integration into other tools needed in Software development. If you're an organization that has "Knowledge Workers" and you want to increase productivity, and revenue or decrease expenses around managing "company knowledge" then MediaWiki is probably the best solution. It excels at finding relevant information, collecting knowledge centrally, giving it context and structure, and curating its quality. Are you a MediaWiki expert or consultant? Discuss this topic over at the [https://discourse.equality-tech.com/t/confluence-v-mediawiki/191 QualityBox Discourse]. Edits, corrections and contributions here are welcome!!

| MediaWiki can be, and is, integrated with a wide variety of other systems. Most importantly for the Enterprise user, a whole open [[authentication framework ]] allows MediaWiki to be integrated with just about any existing authentication system. Because MediaWiki is open source software, with rich internal and external APIs, you can see exactly how you should integrate new functionality, new systems, etc. In contrast, Confluence is a closed system that supports only what is built into the system. "If you attempt to use an unsupported or custom JDBC driver collaborative editing will fail. You must use a supported driver." <ref>https://confluence.atlassian.com/doc/database-jdbc-drivers-171742.html</ref>

| If someone tells you that Confluence is better because MediaWiki isn't in the Gartner MQ, this argument <abbr title="A logical falacy that leads audiences towards a false conclusion">This is a red herring</abbr>. There is no way that MediaWiki would ever be listed by Gartner since they review (large) '''vendors'''. MediaWiki is produced by the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF), a non-profit foundation. They are not a software vendor. They'll never be listed by Gartner in any MQ unless Gartner changes their methodology. <ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_Quadrant#Criticism</ref> Besides, Atlassian was named in the 2017 MQ for "Enterprise Agile Planning Tools" <ref>https://www.atlassian.com/gartner</ref>, not for Confluence, not for wikis, not for collaboration, not for knowledge management.

| MediaWiki software is Free Software (as defined by it's license). Vendors charge for added value such as hosting, support , training and service-- including customization for your specific needs.

You pay per the seat for a Confluence license. There is a free option for open-source projects. There is a reduced price option for non-profit organizations. You also With Confluence, you even pay for add-ons simple features (Title redirects!) that are included with MediaWiki (even simple ones like Title redirects!). You also pay for added value such as On top of the licensing and software costs, you would still have to budget any remaining dollars toward hosting, support, trainingand service. Some things are just not available at any price (e.g. customization).