CZ:Why should experts join CZ?: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Larry Sanger No edit summary |
imported>Gareth Leng (Trimmed, but candidate for deletion?) |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
* Why community service of this sort; creating a free, online, encyclopaedia? | |||
** Many experts (especially academic experts) have as one of their primary roles the dispersal of their knowledge. Citizendium is a way to do this, and reach a world-wide audience. | |||
* Wikipedia has taken over the world. If I want to work on an online encyclopaedia that has a real-world impact, shouldn't I be working there? | |||
** Wikipedia has many critics, who have a number of complaints with a great deal of validity to them: you can't ''trust'' the contents of articles there (although most are usually fine); the articles often aren't well written (quick, un-considered 'drive-by' editing often degrades an article, rather than improving it); articles on contentious topics are always in a state of siege; etc. Don't get us wrong, Wikipedia was a fantastic 'first try' in the creation of a free online encyclopaedia; but it has major problems, problems that are probably too fundamental to the very nature of the Wikipedia community to be able to fix them. Citizendium is based on the Wikipedia experience, and tries to correct as many of the problems experience has revealed there as we can. Besides, once you have written content here, it can easily be copied to Wikipedia, if anyone wants to. | |||
* Wikipedia has taken over the world. If I want to work on | * Why is Citizendium better for experts? | ||
** Experts often find Wikipedia a less than welcoming environment, for a variety of reasons, among them the extreme egalitarianism. While Citizendium enthusiastically welcomes everyone (and, in fact, a number of our major contributors are in fact technically 'amateurs' at some of the fields in which they contribute here), we ''all'' understand that experts ''do'' usually know more - and should be listened to carefully. | |||
{{Editor Policy}} | {{Editor Policy}} | ||
Latest revision as of 13:14, 9 December 2010
- Why community service of this sort; creating a free, online, encyclopaedia?
- Many experts (especially academic experts) have as one of their primary roles the dispersal of their knowledge. Citizendium is a way to do this, and reach a world-wide audience.
- Wikipedia has taken over the world. If I want to work on an online encyclopaedia that has a real-world impact, shouldn't I be working there?
- Wikipedia has many critics, who have a number of complaints with a great deal of validity to them: you can't trust the contents of articles there (although most are usually fine); the articles often aren't well written (quick, un-considered 'drive-by' editing often degrades an article, rather than improving it); articles on contentious topics are always in a state of siege; etc. Don't get us wrong, Wikipedia was a fantastic 'first try' in the creation of a free online encyclopaedia; but it has major problems, problems that are probably too fundamental to the very nature of the Wikipedia community to be able to fix them. Citizendium is based on the Wikipedia experience, and tries to correct as many of the problems experience has revealed there as we can. Besides, once you have written content here, it can easily be copied to Wikipedia, if anyone wants to.
- Why is Citizendium better for experts?
- Experts often find Wikipedia a less than welcoming environment, for a variety of reasons, among them the extreme egalitarianism. While Citizendium enthusiastically welcomes everyone (and, in fact, a number of our major contributors are in fact technically 'amateurs' at some of the fields in which they contribute here), we all understand that experts do usually know more - and should be listened to carefully.