CZ:Managing Editor/2012/001 - Interview Correio Braziliense: Difference between revisions
imported>Daniel Mietchen |
imported>Daniel Mietchen |
||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
== Is it difficult to establish a new free encyclopedia when you have others such as Wikipedia and when you have search mechanisms such as Google ? == | == Is it difficult to establish a new free encyclopedia when you have others such as Wikipedia and when you have search mechanisms such as Google ? == | ||
It is always difficult to try to fill a niche that is already occupied, but Citizendium is trying to create its own niche in the world of free online encyclopedias by combining expert-based and crowd-based approaches. Wikipedia has recently scaled up, with some success, its efforts to increase expert participation, and it is not unreasonable to assume that the very existence of Citizendium has helped catalyze that. But still, Wikipedia's editorial policies are designed around consensus, ours around expert approval. The two are not necessarily aligned, and both can lead to editorial decisions that would, with hindsight, be regarded as wrong. The art, then, is to structure and manage the project such that the probability for errors of this kind is minimized, and Citizendium is an important experiment in this regard. Google's encyclopedic venture Knol is bound to close down later this year, and while Google searches are a major source of traffic to Citizendium, they only list and rank information and do not weave it into the structure of existing knowledge, so we do not see | It is always difficult to try to fill a niche that is already occupied, but Citizendium is trying to create its own niche in the world of free online encyclopedias by combining expert-based and crowd-based approaches. Wikipedia has recently scaled up, with some success, its efforts to increase expert participation, and it is not unreasonable to assume that the very existence of Citizendium has helped catalyze that. But still, Wikipedia's editorial policies are designed around consensus, ours around expert approval. The two are not necessarily aligned, and both can lead to editorial decisions that would, with hindsight, be regarded as wrong. The art, then, is to structure and manage the project such that the probability for errors of this kind is minimized, and Citizendium is an important experiment in this regard. Google's encyclopedic venture Knol is bound to close down later this year, and while Google searches are a major source of traffic to Citizendium, they only list and rank information and do not weave it into the structure of existing knowledge, so we do not see them as having significant overlap with the Citizendium niche. | ||
Revision as of 17:31, 10 January 2012
We received a request for an interview from Correio Braziliense, with the following set of questions. No word limit was stated. Anyone is invited to contribute to the replies until Friday, Jan 13 noon UTC.
How did the idea of creating Citizendium come up?
When was it created?
How does it work?
What is the importance of having such a vast offer of information?
How does this change peoples lives?
How do you see online collaboration nowadays?
How do you see it in the future?
How does Citizendium survive?
(in terms of money, is it by donations, publicity?)
Citizendium is currently financed entirely through donations. Advertisements are prohibited by our Charter.
What garantees the credibility of the information provided?
There is no guarantee for the credibility of any information other than, perhaps, that from primary sources. The advantage of freely accessible online resources is that anyone can verify the information provided there and - in the case of collaborative environments like Citizendium - correct or update it as necessary. This vindication process can be centred around expertise or the many-eyes principle, or combinations thereof, as we are trying at Citizendium.
Is it difficult to establish a new free encyclopedia when you have others such as Wikipedia and when you have search mechanisms such as Google ?
It is always difficult to try to fill a niche that is already occupied, but Citizendium is trying to create its own niche in the world of free online encyclopedias by combining expert-based and crowd-based approaches. Wikipedia has recently scaled up, with some success, its efforts to increase expert participation, and it is not unreasonable to assume that the very existence of Citizendium has helped catalyze that. But still, Wikipedia's editorial policies are designed around consensus, ours around expert approval. The two are not necessarily aligned, and both can lead to editorial decisions that would, with hindsight, be regarded as wrong. The art, then, is to structure and manage the project such that the probability for errors of this kind is minimized, and Citizendium is an important experiment in this regard. Google's encyclopedic venture Knol is bound to close down later this year, and while Google searches are a major source of traffic to Citizendium, they only list and rank information and do not weave it into the structure of existing knowledge, so we do not see them as having significant overlap with the Citizendium niche.