CZ:Myths and Facts: Difference between revisions
imported>Larry Sanger No edit summary |
John Leach (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "CZ:Workgroup Weeks" to "Archive:Workgroup Weeks") |
||
(113 intermediate revisions by 17 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<br> | <br /> | ||
<font color=darkgreen><big> | <font color=darkgreen><big>We enjoy considerable goodwill from many people. But the ''Citizendium'' is also misunderstood. This page is devoted to correcting many errors about us.</big></font><br /> | ||
<br /> | |||
__TOC__ | |||
- | ===Myth: we're experts-only.=== | ||
:Fact: we love experts—we admit it. And [[Archive:Workgroup Weeks|we want more of them]]. And we want your knowledge too, even if you aren't an expert in anything. Everyone has something to contribute; everyone has some area of special strength. You do not need to be a credentialed professor to contribute what you know. | |||
===Myth: we're a top-down project, with expert editors giving orders to underlings.=== | |||
:No, we're very much bottom-up. If you join, you work on whatever articles ''you'' want to work on, whenever ''you'' want to. We are a radically collaborative project. This means we share ownership and work together; nobody "owns" articles or "gives orders". We aren't the first to use this method; it gained currency online with the [[open source software]] movement. [[Eric S. Raymond]], a theorist of that movement, compared communities that create free software collaboratively to "[[bazaar]]s," as opposed to the old-fashioned "[[cathedral]]" model where everyone has a specific role and function, and orders are given from the top. (See [http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ "The Cathedral and the Bazaar."] We, too, are a bazaar. We have merely added "village elders" wandering the bazaar. Their presence does not convert the project into a cathedral; it only helps make the bazaar a little less anarchical and unreliable. | |||
::''See [[CZ:Group Editing|Group Editing]] and [[CZ:How to collaborate|How to collaborate]].'' | |||
: | ===Myth: edits appear on the ''Citizendium'' only if they have been approved by editors.=== | ||
: | :No. Once you're signed up, you can '''immediately''' change ''any'' article (or, for approved articles, any article draft—[[Biology/Draft|example]]). Editors ''are not'' standing over your shoulder. Any contributor may critique and edit the work of other contributors. It's like we said. This is a wiki—a real, bottom-up wiki. | ||
===Myth: we're Serious. Writing here is no fun=== | |||
:This is a work in progress, and we have fun! Yes, we have some highly educated people here, who write wonderful prose as if it is no effort. But we have no problem with you making a rough start on ''any'' topic. We are [[CZ:Under Construction|permanently under construction]]. You do not have to be painfully careful, as if you might break something and people will start screaming at you if you do. We want everybody to [[CZ:Be Bold|be bold]]. And it's fine to start a [[CZ:Stubs|relatively short article]], just a paragraph or two (we call these "stubs"). | |||
: | ::''See [[CZ:Be Bold|Be Bold]], [[CZ:Under Construction|Under Construction]], and [[CZ:Stubs|Stubs]].'' | ||
::'' | ===Myth: privacy will be violated, as our bios will be accessible from Google!=== | ||
:Fact: biographies are ''not'' indexed by [[Google]] (or any other search engine that respects the "noindex" tag). | |||
:We feel that the advantages of real names outweigh the small sacrifice of allowing our work-in-progress to be viewed publicly. Using real names makes people behave more civilly; it also makes our articles more credible, since readers know that there are people willing to put their names behind them. | |||
: | ::''See Sanger's "[http://www.larrysanger.org/realnames.html Defense of Modest Real Name Requirements]."'' | ||
:: | ===Myth: as this is an academic project, we are not open to articles about pop culture.=== | ||
:Nonsense; see [[Led Zeppelin]] and [[Metal Gear Solid]]. We are a hybrid academic/public project. We reject ''both'' the idea that knowledge belongs exclusively in the academy, ''and'' the idea that that the academy has no special role to play. We think the most productive ''and'' reliable system involves the marriage of expertise with public interests and knowledge. | |||
::''See [[CZ:Content Policy|Content Policy]], [[:Category:Games Workgroup]], [[:Category:Hobbies Workgroup]], and [[:Category:Media Workgroup]].'' | |||
: | ===Myth: since this is an academic project, our articles will have an academic bias.=== | ||
:Our [[CZ:Objectivity_Guidance|objectivity guidance]] requires that our articles feature the full range of opinion on a subject, including opinion outside the mainstream of expert opinion. The important thing is that all opinion be properly labelled and attributed. | |||
: | ===Myth: there is no point to the ''Citizendium,'' because Wikipedia exists.=== | ||
:Fact: Wikipedia has uneven quality, and is off-putting to most experts. We believe that, in the end, more people will be comfortable with the CZ model. The world can use ''more than one'' "go to" source for free reference information. | |||
::''See [[CZ:Why Citizendium?|Why Citizendium?]]'' | |||
: | ===Myth: most ''Citizendium'' articles are copied from Wikipedia.=== | ||
No; copying material from other sources, such as Wikipedia, is [[CZ:Import|allowed under certain conditions]], but most of our articles are original. Most [[:Category:External Articles|articles sourced from Wikipedia]] are ''not'' counted in our [[:Category:CZ Live|CZ Live]] article count (currently {{PAGESINCAT:CZ Live}}). We encourage people to start over, to give the public "added value", or at least work to improve imported material quickly. | |||
: | ::''see [[CZ:How to convert Wikipedia articles to Citizendium articles|How to convert Wikipedia articles to Citizendium articles]] and [[CZ:Introduction to CZ for Wikipedians|Introduction to CZ for Wikipedians]].'' | ||
::' | == Some other facts == | ||
* Though we are an open wiki, we have almost no vandalism and little if any "trolling." | |||
* Our well-developed articles feature [[CZ:subpages|subpages]] ([[:Category:subpages|here's a list]]), which cover many other kinds of reference information. | |||
* CZ articles are intended to be [[CZ:Article mechanics|coherent narratives]], not random grab-bags of facts. | |||
* The person [http://www.larrysanger.org/roleinwp.html who led Wikipedia in its first year], and designed many of its fundamental policies, is also the [[User:Larry Sanger|founder of Citizendium]]. | |||
* It is easy to get a [[CZ:Quick Start|quick start]]. In [[Help:Index/Join|our sign-up procedure]], we don't ask that much information about you. Someone will review your account request, and let you into the system typically within 72 hours. Once you've signed up, it is easy to [[CZ:Start Article|start a new article]]. | |||
* As of 2020, there is no longer an elected [[CZ:Council|Council]], although inevitable certain pages still refer to such. Editorial policy and management decisions are made by a team of folks who work offline from the wiki; if you are an active author here, you can ask to join it. For that purpose, please email us at manager A T citizendium.org. | |||
* We no longer have an elected [[CZ:Managing Editor|Managing Editor]], but our management team is still about to make swift decisions and help resolve disputes if necessary. Please use the [https://forms.gle/uEsckP5hCkAiifus7 Enquiry Form] to learn more. If you would like to become on the managing editor of this wiki, it might be possible, but you need to join and contribute here for a while so we have confidence in you. | |||
* We are a non-profit, civic project that uses [[Creative Commons]] Attribution-ShareAlike as the license for our content, and our contributors can help make decisions about the project. | |||
* Citizendium's site moderators, responsible for monitoring the project for behavior issues, used to be called "[[CZ:Moderator Group|Constables]]". Now, our management team, who are (or have been) active users themselves, will respond at need or upon submission of the [https://forms.gle/uEsckP5hCkAiifus7 Enquiry Form]. | |||
== Why all the myths about CZ? == | |||
There are probably two reasons. | |||
First, this is a ''genuinely innovative'' project. The expert-public hybrid model and several other innovations are ''new.'' But most people are not able to take such novel things on board easily; to them, we are ''like'' a traditional academic project, or ''like'' Wikipedia. In short, most people naturally think in terms of stereotypes, and so we have been stereotyped. This means only that we need to educate people—which this page attempts to do. | |||
Second, a lot of Web 2.0 advocates, whose favorite online platforms are websites like Wikipedia and [[YouTube]], are opposed to our basic policies (i.e. they are opposed, on egalitarian principles, to the notion of expert guidance). <!-- They tend to be [http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/sanger07/sanger07_index.html radical egalitarians] and [http://edge.org/3rd_culture/lanier06/lanier06_index.html closet anarchists.]-->So they dislike the idea that we ask people to take real-world responsibility for their contributions and that we make even a low-key "gentle guidance" role for experts. <!-- Our opponents have usually just created [[straw man|straw men]], which they have proceeded to knock down.--> We hope that a more nuanced understanding of what we are up to will eventually emerge anyway. | |||
'''See also:''' [[CZ:Why Citizendium?|Why Citizendium?]] | |||
{{Getting Started}} |
Latest revision as of 01:45, 8 March 2024
We enjoy considerable goodwill from many people. But the Citizendium is also misunderstood. This page is devoted to correcting many errors about us.
Myth: we're experts-only.
- Fact: we love experts—we admit it. And we want more of them. And we want your knowledge too, even if you aren't an expert in anything. Everyone has something to contribute; everyone has some area of special strength. You do not need to be a credentialed professor to contribute what you know.
Myth: we're a top-down project, with expert editors giving orders to underlings.
- No, we're very much bottom-up. If you join, you work on whatever articles you want to work on, whenever you want to. We are a radically collaborative project. This means we share ownership and work together; nobody "owns" articles or "gives orders". We aren't the first to use this method; it gained currency online with the open source software movement. Eric S. Raymond, a theorist of that movement, compared communities that create free software collaboratively to "bazaars," as opposed to the old-fashioned "cathedral" model where everyone has a specific role and function, and orders are given from the top. (See "The Cathedral and the Bazaar." We, too, are a bazaar. We have merely added "village elders" wandering the bazaar. Their presence does not convert the project into a cathedral; it only helps make the bazaar a little less anarchical and unreliable.
- See Group Editing and How to collaborate.
Myth: edits appear on the Citizendium only if they have been approved by editors.
- No. Once you're signed up, you can immediately change any article (or, for approved articles, any article draft—example). Editors are not standing over your shoulder. Any contributor may critique and edit the work of other contributors. It's like we said. This is a wiki—a real, bottom-up wiki.
Myth: we're Serious. Writing here is no fun
- This is a work in progress, and we have fun! Yes, we have some highly educated people here, who write wonderful prose as if it is no effort. But we have no problem with you making a rough start on any topic. We are permanently under construction. You do not have to be painfully careful, as if you might break something and people will start screaming at you if you do. We want everybody to be bold. And it's fine to start a relatively short article, just a paragraph or two (we call these "stubs").
- See Be Bold, Under Construction, and Stubs.
Myth: privacy will be violated, as our bios will be accessible from Google!
- Fact: biographies are not indexed by Google (or any other search engine that respects the "noindex" tag).
- We feel that the advantages of real names outweigh the small sacrifice of allowing our work-in-progress to be viewed publicly. Using real names makes people behave more civilly; it also makes our articles more credible, since readers know that there are people willing to put their names behind them.
- See Sanger's "Defense of Modest Real Name Requirements."
Myth: as this is an academic project, we are not open to articles about pop culture.
- Nonsense; see Led Zeppelin and Metal Gear Solid. We are a hybrid academic/public project. We reject both the idea that knowledge belongs exclusively in the academy, and the idea that that the academy has no special role to play. We think the most productive and reliable system involves the marriage of expertise with public interests and knowledge.
Myth: since this is an academic project, our articles will have an academic bias.
- Our objectivity guidance requires that our articles feature the full range of opinion on a subject, including opinion outside the mainstream of expert opinion. The important thing is that all opinion be properly labelled and attributed.
Myth: there is no point to the Citizendium, because Wikipedia exists.
- Fact: Wikipedia has uneven quality, and is off-putting to most experts. We believe that, in the end, more people will be comfortable with the CZ model. The world can use more than one "go to" source for free reference information.
- See Why Citizendium?
Myth: most Citizendium articles are copied from Wikipedia.
No; copying material from other sources, such as Wikipedia, is allowed under certain conditions, but most of our articles are original. Most articles sourced from Wikipedia are not counted in our CZ Live article count (currently 16,469). We encourage people to start over, to give the public "added value", or at least work to improve imported material quickly.
Some other facts
- Though we are an open wiki, we have almost no vandalism and little if any "trolling."
- Our well-developed articles feature subpages (here's a list), which cover many other kinds of reference information.
- CZ articles are intended to be coherent narratives, not random grab-bags of facts.
- The person who led Wikipedia in its first year, and designed many of its fundamental policies, is also the founder of Citizendium.
- It is easy to get a quick start. In our sign-up procedure, we don't ask that much information about you. Someone will review your account request, and let you into the system typically within 72 hours. Once you've signed up, it is easy to start a new article.
- As of 2020, there is no longer an elected Council, although inevitable certain pages still refer to such. Editorial policy and management decisions are made by a team of folks who work offline from the wiki; if you are an active author here, you can ask to join it. For that purpose, please email us at manager A T citizendium.org.
- We no longer have an elected Managing Editor, but our management team is still about to make swift decisions and help resolve disputes if necessary. Please use the Enquiry Form to learn more. If you would like to become on the managing editor of this wiki, it might be possible, but you need to join and contribute here for a while so we have confidence in you.
- We are a non-profit, civic project that uses Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike as the license for our content, and our contributors can help make decisions about the project.
- Citizendium's site moderators, responsible for monitoring the project for behavior issues, used to be called "Constables". Now, our management team, who are (or have been) active users themselves, will respond at need or upon submission of the Enquiry Form.
Why all the myths about CZ?
There are probably two reasons.
First, this is a genuinely innovative project. The expert-public hybrid model and several other innovations are new. But most people are not able to take such novel things on board easily; to them, we are like a traditional academic project, or like Wikipedia. In short, most people naturally think in terms of stereotypes, and so we have been stereotyped. This means only that we need to educate people—which this page attempts to do.
Second, a lot of Web 2.0 advocates, whose favorite online platforms are websites like Wikipedia and YouTube, are opposed to our basic policies (i.e. they are opposed, on egalitarian principles, to the notion of expert guidance). So they dislike the idea that we ask people to take real-world responsibility for their contributions and that we make even a low-key "gentle guidance" role for experts. We hope that a more nuanced understanding of what we are up to will eventually emerge anyway.
See also: Why Citizendium?
Citizendium Getting Started | |||
---|---|---|---|
Quick Start | About us | Help system | Start a new article | For Wikipedians |