Wikipedia vs. Citizendium: Fight!

My favouritest lexicon, Wikipedia, has a competitor. One of the co-founders of Wikipedia—Larry Sanger—has forked the project into something he calls “Citizendium”. Yeah, it’s like citizen + compendium, real clever. The idea is that of a new Wikipedia, but without the “problems” with the inherent openness of a wiki. That is, not everyone is allowed to edit the Citizendium, and “accountability” is emphasized.

Well, the pilot project of Citizendium has launched. Ars Technica comments. What do you think? Would you rather pool your knowledge in Wikipedia, or the Citizendium?

Ironically, the best source of information regarding the Citizendium seems to be an article on Wikipedia.

4 thoughts on “Wikipedia vs. Citizendium: Fight!”

  1. I would go with wikipedia until such time as citizendium has amassed an amount of content that would make it in the same league as wikipedia. Then I would reconsider whether citizendium had any merit to it’s method.

    Incidentally, wikipedia is an infinitely better name.

  2. Joen says:

    Well, that’s honest.

    I suppose you’re right: If the Citizendium actually turns out to be a better thing than Wikipedia, sure, we should use that. I guess my immediate barrier would be “the bastards, they forked Wikipedia”.

  3. Well, forking isn’t bad. But it remains the burden of the forker to show that their fork has any merit.

  4. Fred says:

    The day that, Citizendium has information on caf?s and stories situated in my own district (and written in French, about a not-so-known Northern City), I’ll reconsider looking back at it.

Comments are closed.