Comments on: Citizendium https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/ Speculations on the Frontiers of Science and Culture Sun, 13 Jul 2008 06:39:00 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0 By: Sven https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-100 Sun, 13 Jul 2008 06:39:00 +0000 https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-100 Good Job! :)

]]> By: Mike https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-101 Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:05:00 +0000 https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-101 I have always enjoyed that phrase. :)

]]> By: Anonymous https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-102 Tue, 04 Mar 2008 13:03:00 +0000 https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-102 500-lb gorilla? ;-)

]]> By: Mike https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-103 Sun, 05 Aug 2007 12:10:00 +0000 https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-103 “Anonymous”,

I do see the point you’re arguing toward, but 1. that’s just the way the license works, 2. Citizendium has plenty of home-grown content, and that percentage will increase as time goes on, 3. at least a few of our approved articles which do use Wikipedia content were imported by their original authors at Wikipedia to continue to improve at Citizendium.

We do encourage people to write articles from scratch instead of importing them from Wikipedia– though we do leave them that option. I’m not sure it’s the institutional bias you seem to be arguing for.

As to “trumpets its superiority on pages such as this”, this was written before Citizendium had any content, and indeed goes into many potential shortcomings of Citizendium.

At any rate, High on a Tree, I said this conversation is over. I mean it.

]]> By: Anonymous https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-104 Sun, 05 Aug 2007 10:27:00 +0000 https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-104 I have no problem with releasing my content, and of course I don’t mean that it’s legally theft, because yes – free license is free license. But if you take a huge bulk of our work, put a little gloss on it, and then say “look, we’re doing it so much better than you,” then morally that’s theft in my book.

Also please note that Citizendium credits Wikipedia at the bottom of the article itself, but it trumpets its superiority on pages such as this. Not the same thing at all.

]]> By: Mike https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-105 Sat, 04 Aug 2007 13:13:00 +0000 https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-105 Anonymous,

I would have to strongly disagree. When you write for Wikipedia, you consent to release your content under a free content license. That’s part of the contract you have with Wikipedia, and indeed, the world. If you don’t wish to release your content so others may do with it as they wish, don’t release your content under the GFDL. Simply put, you can’t have it both ways.

Also note that Citizendium credits Wikipedia when it sources Wikipedia content (as required by the GFDL).

]]> By: Anonymous https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-106 Sat, 04 Aug 2007 12:59:00 +0000 https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-106 What makes me angry, as a Wikipedia editor, is the idea that Citizendium can take my good work and then “improve” on it, thus taking the credit for years of hard work by me and literally millions like me, and that I won’t even be able to influence what is done with it without disclosing my personal details and maybe having to send a CV. If the project is going to start from scratch, that’s fine and I wish it luck, but if it’s going to import WP articles and then claim to be better than WP, well that’s just theft, pure and simple.

]]> By: Drew https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-107 Tue, 23 Jan 2007 02:56:00 +0000 https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-107 Hey Mike,
I was impressed by your article, which I skimmed through as I was doing other things, and which I’ll probably devote more time to reading in its entirety when it’s not 3:45 in the morning.
As a journalist facing an exodus of my colleagues from print to online journalism and a rapidly changing professional climate, one of the issues I’ve studied lately is how the Wiki format is affecting news production and consumption. Several news sites now are using unconventional methods of obtaining their material, by allowing users to write and edit the news, much in the style of Wikipedia and Citizendium. This raises a few issues that follow in much the same vein.
In my studies, I’ve seen a lot of people of the opinion that professional editors need to be in place for these establisments, to weed out error and fact-check. Others call it the most democratic form of news and claim it should be left as is. It’ll be interesting to see how a lot of these projects choose to progress, and how they try to be economically viable. If a user-generated content news source has to have advertisements to survive, and it employs professional editors, does it edit the content appease the advertisers?
I could go on, but this is just a comment box and not my own blog (which I don’t have anyway).
Just wanted to drop by and let you know I enjoyed the article. I’ll drop you a line if I’m in Boston this summer.
-Andrew “Kata” de Geofroy

]]> By: Anonymous https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-108 Sun, 21 Jan 2007 06:45:00 +0000 https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-108 Terrific analysis of Citizendium, particularly the final bit hinting at collaboration. Whether Wikipedia or Citizendium will do the better job misses the point – there is room for them to be complementary. If CZ is allowed to be complementary it can only be a good thing. But if it prefers to keep its head in Middle Earth it will likely dwindle away…

]]> By: omninaïf https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-109 Mon, 23 Oct 2006 11:49:00 +0000 https://archive.opentheory.net/2006/10/citizendium/#comment-109 I use Wiki on a daily basis. I find that some content submitted by normal joes like you or I interests me more. Be that good or bad.

Good story.

]]>