Ok, so I'm recycling the idea from my older blog, I like it and I can do it if I wanna. Don't judge me!
This week I'm posting a new kind of wiki you may have heard of since it's been gathering media attention. It's called Citizendium. It was started by Larry Singer, the guy who co-founded Wikipedia back in 2001. Think of it as a Wikipedia but with valid information. Everyone who signs up to write articles must reveal their full name as well as credentials to write on their subject. There is significantly less articles (only about 8,000), but all of them cite valid sources, so if you're doing some research you need not fear.
here's the Wikipedia article about Citizendium
and the Citizendium main page.
Wiki of the Week
Ok, so I'm recycling the idea from my older blog, I like it and I can do it if I wanna. Don't judge me!
This week I'm posting a new kind of wiki you may have heard of since it's been gathering media attention. It's called Citizendium. It was started by Larry Singer, the guy who co-founded Wikipedia back in 2001. Think of it as a Wikipedia but with valid information. Everyone who signs up to write articles must reveal their full name as well as credentials to write on their subject. There is significantly less articles (only about 8,000), but all of them cite valid sources, so if you're doing some research you need not fear.
here's the Wikipedia article about Citizendium
and the Citizendium main page.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
As one of the early -- and for some time most active -- contributors to Citizendium, I would have to say I can't recommend it as a reference source. There are just too few articles to make it worthwhile, and Larry Sanger exercises far too much control over the site to make any real experts interested in contributing. Nevertheless, I do think that the named editor system was a strong idea, and this has now been adapted by Google's Knol, so the experiment has had some worth, at least.
Russell Potter
August 13, 2008 at 7:52 PMcongrats and thanks for being our first commenter!
hmm, that's a shame if what you say is true. In the few minutes I spent there it seemed as though at least the references cited were a little more robust than Wikipedia.
As for the lack of articles and contributors, I realize now that the "Article of the Week" on DNA seems not to have been changed since July! You'd think they'd get on that.
I suppose we'll just have to wait and see if Knol ever catches on.
BackDoorAngel
August 26, 2008 at 9:21 AM