Citizendium (10)

1 Name: 404 - Name Not Found : 2006-09-17 22:47 ID:RhGVj37p This thread was merged from the former /net/ board. You can view the archive here.

An interesting [or rather, uninteresting] fork of Wikipedia that is going to be Wikipedia, but editor controlled and no anonymous editing. Am I the only one that thinks the name of it will be its downfall, comrades?

2 Name: 404 - Name Not Found : 2006-09-18 00:38 ID:s7vN33Wa

What happened to Larry's last project, hmmm?

3 Name: 404 - Name Not Found : 2006-09-18 04:26 ID:Heaven

so it's a fork of wikipedia that's exactly the same but with a name that's even more gay? why?

4 Name: 404 - Name Not Found : 2006-09-18 04:31 ID:RhGVj37p

it's just like nupedia, the editor controlled encyclopedia that registered users could contribute to. nupedia was wikipedia's predecessor, and it failed. now larry is just trying to capitalize on wikipedia's success to bring it back from the dead.

5 Name: Albright!LC/IWhc3yc : 2006-09-18 08:41 ID:vgXJnhu5

But experts will be involved and made into editors. Aren't you trying to turn the successful "bazaar"-style Wikipedia model into a failed "cathedral" style of project?

Again, no. Experts will be expected to work shoulder-to-shoulder with ordinary people in this project in more or less the same bottom-up fashion that Wikipedia uses. The difference is that, when content disputes arise, whatever editors are paying attention to the article will be empowered to articulate a resolution--if the article falls in their area of specialization. Furthermore, their decisions will be enforceable. Think of editors as the village elders wandering the bazaar and occasionally dispensing advice and reining in the wayward. Their presence is merely a moderating, civilizing influence. They don't stop the bazaar from being a bazaar.

A noble idea, I guess. But fighting Wikipedia's momentum is gonna be an uphill battle.

6 Name: 404 - Name Not Found : 2006-09-18 09:41 ID:JOvKCNvY

Well, if they keep the licensing model (I guess they will/wil have to), then they and wikipedia can at least use each others articles. I kind of like the idea (The drama on some wikipedia articles is just to much, it would be good if there was a possibility for someone to step in and just stop it), but I don't think it will work. People seem to like to directly edit the articles over and over again, and debate over if everything is correct. Plus, "Wikipedia" sounds much cooler than "Citizendium".

7 Name: 404 - Name Not Found : 2006-10-04 09:58 ID:yC3ChW7+

Oh goody. This must be the "open meritocracy" he'd been blathering about. Too bad it's just another euphemism for rule by celebrity.

8 Post deleted.

9 Name: 404 - Name Not Found : 2017-04-19 18:26 ID:HVK9upEJ

10 Name: 409 - Name Conflict : 2021-04-01 01:05 ID:jfC1RnC+

Citizendium is heinously anus

Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
More options...