Don't see that this is required really. Am an enormous fan of Wikipedia and find it pretty much indispensible (it's dead good for IT stuff quite apart from everything else). If it ain't broke...
I agree. Can't really see this taking off. Wikipedia is (as they acknowledge) little good for contemporary political issues or figures, but can't see how Citizendium will get round this ('experts' can be just as partisan as anyone else). On everything else (science, tech, literature etc), Wikipedia has already been proven to be incredibly reliable.
I actually donated a fiver to wikipedia last week in a moment of gratitude and elation at the wonder of it all. It's now quite common for me to use it for research at work, then 'reverse engineer' it by following the links to the original source and putting those in my footnotes. Don't tell - although I suspect I'm not alone.
3 comments:
Don't see that this is required really. Am an enormous fan of Wikipedia and find it pretty much indispensible (it's dead good for IT stuff quite apart from everything else). If it ain't broke...
I agree. Can't really see this taking off. Wikipedia is (as they acknowledge) little good for contemporary political issues or figures, but can't see how Citizendium will get round this ('experts' can be just as partisan as anyone else). On everything else (science, tech, literature etc), Wikipedia has already been proven to be incredibly reliable.
I actually donated a fiver to wikipedia last week in a moment of gratitude and elation at the wonder of it all. It's now quite common for me to use it for research at work, then 'reverse engineer' it by following the links to the original source and putting those in my footnotes. Don't tell - although I suspect I'm not alone.
Post a Comment