Comments on: Citizendium Turns One. Point Still Unclear http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/ The Technology Liberation Front is the tech policy blog dedicated to keeping politicians' hands off the 'net and everything else related to technology. Mon, 01 Dec 2008 22:39:52 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Elijah http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-39739 Elijah Tue, 01 Jan 2008 05:41:26 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-39739 Sanger has always had enough free time to comment on the scarce Citizendium-related stories that appear on blogs and (more scarcely) news sources. Citizendium is flawed as a commons-based peer production model, in that it presents too significant a barrier to use. This was obvious a year ago and continues to play itself out. If they're smart, they'll lighten the anti-Wikipedia tone and try to become something more like an expert colony of Wikipedia, constantly feeding their assumably improved contributions back to the big W. As long as Sanger and the Citizendium crew have a chip on their collective shoulder, though, this is pretty much impossible. Sanger has always had enough free time to comment on the scarce Citizendium-related stories that appear on blogs and (more scarcely) news sources. Citizendium is flawed as a commons-based peer production model, in that it presents too significant a barrier to use. This was obvious a year ago and continues to play itself out.

If they’re smart, they’ll lighten the anti-Wikipedia tone and try to become something more like an expert colony of Wikipedia, constantly feeding their assumably improved contributions back to the big W. As long as Sanger and the Citizendium crew have a chip on their collective shoulder, though, this is pretty much impossible.

]]> By: Elijah http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-46837 Elijah Tue, 01 Jan 2008 05:41:26 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-46837 Sanger has always had enough free time to comment on the scarce Citizendium-related stories that appear on blogs and (more scarcely) news sources. Citizendium is flawed as a commons-based peer production model, in that it presents too significant a barrier to use. This was obvious a year ago and continues to play itself out.<br><br>If they're smart, they'll lighten the anti-Wikipedia tone and try to become something more like an expert colony of Wikipedia, constantly feeding their assumably improved contributions back to the big W. As long as Sanger and the Citizendium crew have a chip on their collective shoulder, though, this is pretty much impossible. Sanger has always had enough free time to comment on the scarce Citizendium-related stories that appear on blogs and (more scarcely) news sources. Citizendium is flawed as a commons-based peer production model, in that it presents too significant a barrier to use. This was obvious a year ago and continues to play itself out.

If they’re smart, they’ll lighten the anti-Wikipedia tone and try to become something more like an expert colony of Wikipedia, constantly feeding their assumably improved contributions back to the big W. As long as Sanger and the Citizendium crew have a chip on their collective shoulder, though, this is pretty much impossible.

]]> By: P G Palmer http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-39738 P G Palmer Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:59:42 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-39738 Methinks you protest a little too much. I expect Citizendium will grow much more slowly than Wikipedia, but eventually, it will have higher quality across the board. And from a personal standpoint, I'm putting all my effort on Citizendium from now on, and none on Wikipedia, because it's simply more satisfying. It's amazing how much better people behave when they are not acting anonymously. That, and mainly that, in my view, is the difference in Wikipedia and Citizendium. Methinks you protest a little too much. I expect Citizendium will grow much more slowly than Wikipedia, but eventually, it will have higher quality across the board.

And from a personal standpoint, I’m putting all my effort on Citizendium from now on, and none on Wikipedia, because it’s simply more satisfying.
It’s amazing how much better people behave when they are not acting anonymously. That, and mainly that, in my view, is the difference in Wikipedia and Citizendium.

]]> By: P G Palmer http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-46836 P G Palmer Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:59:42 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-46836 Methinks you protest a little too much. I expect Citizendium will grow much more slowly than Wikipedia, but eventually, it will have higher quality across the board.<br><br>And from a personal standpoint, I'm putting all my effort on Citizendium from now on, and none on Wikipedia, because it's simply more satisfying.<br>It's amazing how much better people behave when they are not acting anonymously. That, and mainly that, in my view, is the difference in Wikipedia and Citizendium. Methinks you protest a little too much. I expect Citizendium will grow much more slowly than Wikipedia, but eventually, it will have higher quality across the board.

And from a personal standpoint, I’m putting all my effort on Citizendium from now on, and none on Wikipedia, because it’s simply more satisfying.
It’s amazing how much better people behave when they are not acting anonymously. That, and mainly that, in my view, is the difference in Wikipedia and Citizendium.

]]> By: Mike Linksvayer http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-46835 Mike Linksvayer Sat, 03 Nov 2007 19:13:00 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-46835 Citizendium's point is quite clear to me and Shirky explains it well if unflatteringly. I'm pretty skeptical of CZ's point, but I wouldn't say it's a solution in search of a problem -- although Wikipedia works great, 100x better than one who had never encountered similar would intuit -- it is not without problems. I doubt CZ's approach will constitute an improvement, but it is well worth trying out, and cheap to do so. Even total failures provide useful lessons, and I doubt CZ will be an utter failure, except when held up against Wikipedia.<br><p>Another public source of website ranking and traffic data: <a href="http://siteanalytics.compete.com/wikipedia.org+citizendium.org/?metric=uv" rel="nofollow">http://siteanalytics.compete.com/wikipedia.org+citizendium.org/?metric=uv</a></p> Citizendium’s point is quite clear to me and Shirky explains it well if unflatteringly. I’m pretty skeptical of CZ’s point, but I wouldn’t say it’s a solution in search of a problem — although Wikipedia works great, 100x better than one who had never encountered similar would intuit — it is not without problems. I doubt CZ’s approach will constitute an improvement, but it is well worth trying out, and cheap to do so. Even total failures provide useful lessons, and I doubt CZ will be an utter failure, except when held up against Wikipedia.

Another public source of website ranking and traffic data: http://siteanalytics.compete.com/wikipedia.org+citizendium.org/?metric=uv

]]> By: Mike Linksvayer http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-39737 Mike Linksvayer Sat, 03 Nov 2007 18:13:00 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-39737 Citizendium's point is quite clear to me and Shirky explains it well if unflatteringly. I'm pretty skeptical of CZ's point, but I wouldn't say it's a solution in search of a problem -- although Wikipedia works great, 100x better than one who had never encountered similar would intuit -- it is not without problems. I doubt CZ's approach will constitute an improvement, but it is well worth trying out, and cheap to do so. Even total failures provide useful lessons, and I doubt CZ will be an utter failure, except when held up against Wikipedia. <p>Another public source of website ranking and traffic data: <a href="http://siteanalytics.compete.com/wikipedia.org+citizendium.org/?metric=uv" rel="nofollow">http://siteanalytics.compete.com/wikipedia.org+citizendium.org/?metric=uv</a></p> Citizendium’s point is quite clear to me and Shirky explains it well if unflatteringly. I’m pretty skeptical of CZ’s point, but I wouldn’t say it’s a solution in search of a problem — although Wikipedia works great, 100x better than one who had never encountered similar would intuit — it is not without problems. I doubt CZ’s approach will constitute an improvement, but it is well worth trying out, and cheap to do so. Even total failures provide useful lessons, and I doubt CZ will be an utter failure, except when held up against Wikipedia.

Another public source of website ranking and traffic data: http://siteanalytics.compete.com/wikipedia.org+citizendium.org/?metric=uv

]]> By: Stephen Ewen http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-46834 Stephen Ewen Fri, 02 Nov 2007 07:32:13 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-46834 Malda is spot-on about Alexa, and Don Marti equally on spot in his<br>following point about it.<br><br></br><br><br>As to how many are external articles (based on WP articles), the number<br>is 658: <a href="http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Category:External_Articles" rel="nofollow">http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Category:External_Articles</a><br></br><br></br><br><br>Taking the standards of WP and applying them to CZ is not particularly<br>fair.  They are different projects - obviously.  One trend<br>that can be seen pretty clearly is that a lot of CZ contributors tend<br>to focus on developing out particular articles rather than creating<br>lots of small articles.  I'd suggest the evaluation criteria of<br>CZ's approved articles up against WP's versions of the same articles one year out.  There's just no<br>comparison whatsoever.  To highlight one article--well, it is one<br>I helped author, so I'm well acquainted with it--consider <a href="http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Butler" rel="nofollow">http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Butler</a><br>and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butler" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butler</a><br></br><br><br></br> Malda is spot-on about Alexa, and Don Marti equally on spot in his
following point about it.

As to how many are external articles (based on WP articles), the number
is 658: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Category:External_Articles

Taking the standards of WP and applying them to CZ is not particularly
fair.  They are different projects - obviously.  One trend
that can be seen pretty clearly is that a lot of CZ contributors tend
to focus on developing out particular articles rather than creating
lots of small articles.  I’d suggest the evaluation criteria of
CZ’s approved articles up against WP’s versions of the same articles one year out.  There’s just no
comparison whatsoever.  To highlight one article–well, it is one
I helped author, so I’m well acquainted with it–consider http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Butler
and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butler

]]> By: Stephen Ewen http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-39736 Stephen Ewen Fri, 02 Nov 2007 06:32:13 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-39736 Malda is spot-on about Alexa, and Don Marti equally on spot in his following point about it.<br /> <br /> As to how many are external articles (based on WP articles), the number is 658: <a href="http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Category:External_Articles" rel="nofollow">http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Category:External_Articles</a> <br /><br /> Taking the standards of WP and applying them to CZ is not particularly fair.  They are different projects - obviously.  One trend that can be seen pretty clearly is that a lot of CZ contributors tend to focus on developing out particular articles rather than creating lots of small articles.  I'd suggest the evaluation criteria of CZ's approved articles up against WP's versions of the same articles one year out.  There's just no comparison whatsoever.  To highlight one article--well, it is one I helped author, so I'm well acquainted with it--consider <a href="http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Butler" rel="nofollow">http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Butler</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butler" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butler</a> <br /> Malda is spot-on about Alexa, and Don Marti equally on spot in his
following point about it.

As to how many are external articles (based on WP articles), the number
is 658: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Category:External_Articles

Taking the standards of WP and applying them to CZ is not particularly
fair.  They are different projects - obviously.  One trend
that can be seen pretty clearly is that a lot of CZ contributors tend
to focus on developing out particular articles rather than creating
lots of small articles.  I’d suggest the evaluation criteria of
CZ’s approved articles up against WP’s versions of the same articles one year out.  There’s just no
comparison whatsoever.  To highlight one article–well, it is one
I helped author, so I’m well acquainted with it–consider http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Butler
and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butler

]]> By: Don Marti http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-46833 Don Marti Thu, 01 Nov 2007 19:57:01 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-46833 <a href="http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/23/152243" rel="nofollow"><br>"Alexa doesn't work because of who will install it, and perhaps more importantly, who won't."</a> -- Rob Malda, <a href="http://slashdot.org">slashdot.org</a><br><br><p>Wikipedia and Citizendium <em>contributors</em> are probably equally unlikely to install the Alexa spyware, I mean stats collecting application, but Wikipedia gets the benefit of millions of regular users who come to them through Google searches.<br><br></p><p>Out of the 5 million words of Citizendium, though, how many are "forks" of Wikipedia articles?<br><br></p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_McClintock" rel="nofollow">Barbara McClintock on Wikipedia</a> </p><p><a href="http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Barbara_McClintock" rel="nofollow">Barbara McClintock on Citizendium</a></p>
“Alexa doesn’t work because of who will install it, and perhaps more importantly, who won’t.” — Rob Malda, slashdot.org

Wikipedia and Citizendium contributors are probably equally unlikely to install the Alexa spyware, I mean stats collecting application, but Wikipedia gets the benefit of millions of regular users who come to them through Google searches.

Out of the 5 million words of Citizendium, though, how many are “forks” of Wikipedia articles?

Barbara McClintock on Wikipedia

Barbara McClintock on Citizendium

]]> By: Tim Lee http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-46832 Tim Lee Thu, 01 Nov 2007 19:56:02 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-46832 Larry, thanks for commenting. It's hard to extrapolate growth rates based on a few months of data and starting from a small base. So it's certainly possible your traffic will skyrocket in the next few months and I'll be proven wrong. But Alexa, the only traffic metric I have access to, shows your traffic being basically flat over the last 6 months. As for the amount of content, I see that Wikipedia had 37 million words of content in January 2003. If CZ has that much content this time next year, then you'll have something to crow about. I'll be pretty surprised if that happens. Larry, thanks for commenting. It’s hard to extrapolate growth rates based on a few months of data and starting from a small base. So it’s certainly possible your traffic will skyrocket in the next few months and I’ll be proven wrong. But Alexa, the only traffic metric I have access to, shows your traffic being basically flat over the last 6 months. As for the amount of content, I see that Wikipedia had 37 million words of content in January 2003. If CZ has that much content this time next year, then you’ll have something to crow about. I’ll be pretty surprised if that happens.

]]> By: Don Marti http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-39735 Don Marti Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:57:01 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-39735 <a href="http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/23/152243" rel="nofollow"> "Alexa doesn't work because of who will install it, and perhaps more importantly, who won't."</a> -- Rob Malda, slashdot.org <p>Wikipedia and Citizendium <em>contributors</em> are probably equally unlikely to install the Alexa spyware, I mean stats collecting application, but Wikipedia gets the benefit of millions of regular users who come to them through Google searches. <p>Out of the 5 million words of Citizendium, though, how many are "forks" of Wikipedia articles? <p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_McClintock" rel="nofollow">Barbara McClintock on Wikipedia</a> <p><a href="http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Barbara_McClintock" rel="nofollow">Barbara McClintock on Citizendium</a></p></p></p></p>
“Alexa doesn’t work because of who will install it, and perhaps more importantly, who won’t.” — Rob Malda, slashdot.org

Wikipedia and Citizendium contributors are probably equally unlikely to install the Alexa spyware, I mean stats collecting application, but Wikipedia gets the benefit of millions of regular users who come to them through Google searches.

Out of the 5 million words of Citizendium, though, how many are “forks” of Wikipedia articles?

Barbara McClintock on Wikipedia

Barbara McClintock on Citizendium

]]> By: Tim Lee http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-39734 Tim Lee Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:56:02 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-39734 Larry, thanks for commenting. It's hard to extrapolate growth rates based on a few months of data and starting from a small base. So it's certainly possible your traffic will skyrocket in the next few months and I'll be proven wrong. But Alexa, the only traffic metric I have access to, shows your traffic being basically flat over the last 6 months. As for the amount of content, I see that Wikipedia had 37 million words of content in January 2003. If CZ has that much content this time next year, then you'll have something to crow about. I'll be pretty surprised if that happens. Larry, thanks for commenting. It’s hard to extrapolate growth rates based on a few months of data and starting from a small base. So it’s certainly possible your traffic will skyrocket in the next few months and I’ll be proven wrong. But Alexa, the only traffic metric I have access to, shows your traffic being basically flat over the last 6 months. As for the amount of content, I see that Wikipedia had 37 million words of content in January 2003. If CZ has that much content this time next year, then you’ll have something to crow about. I’ll be pretty surprised if that happens.

]]> By: Larry Sanger http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-46831 Larry Sanger Thu, 01 Nov 2007 18:49:17 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-46831 I'm not sure you actually read the essay you linked to, Tim. I think you missed the point by a mile: we are growing, at an accelerating rate. Alexa ranking and comparisons to Wikipedia are utterly and completely irrelevant--of course. And as anyone who knows much about the growth vectors of projects like this understands.<br><br>Another point left out of the essay, which I just found out about, is that CZ has slightly more words (5 million) than Wikipedia had after one year. See:<br><br><a href="http://blog.citizendium.org/2007/11/01/our-word-count-about-the-same-as-wikipedias-after-one-year/">http://blog.citizendium.org/2007/11/01/our-word...</a><br><br>As to the ridiculous notion that the Citizendium has no "point"--well, that's so silly it needs no reply. If you don't know what the point of the project is, you don't know anything about the project. I’m not sure you actually read the essay you linked to, Tim. I think you missed the point by a mile: we are growing, at an accelerating rate. Alexa ranking and comparisons to Wikipedia are utterly and completely irrelevant–of course. And as anyone who knows much about the growth vectors of projects like this understands.

Another point left out of the essay, which I just found out about, is that CZ has slightly more words (5 million) than Wikipedia had after one year. See:

http://blog.citizendium.org/2007/11/01/our-word...

As to the ridiculous notion that the Citizendium has no “point”–well, that’s so silly it needs no reply. If you don’t know what the point of the project is, you don’t know anything about the project.

]]> By: Larry Sanger http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-39733 Larry Sanger Thu, 01 Nov 2007 17:49:17 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2007/11/01/citizendium-turns-one-point-still-unclear/#comment-39733 I'm not sure you actually read the essay you linked to, Tim. I think you missed the point by a mile: we are growing, at an accelerating rate. Alexa ranking and comparisons to Wikipedia are utterly and completely irrelevant--of course. And as anyone who knows much about the growth vectors of projects like this understands. Another point left out of the essay, which I just found out about, is that CZ has slightly more words (5 million) than Wikipedia had after one year. See: http://blog.citizendium.org/2007/11/01/our-word-count-about-the-same-as-wikipedias-after-one-year/ As to the ridiculous notion that the Citizendium has no "point"--well, that's so silly it needs no reply. If you don't know what the point of the project is, you don't know anything about the project. I’m not sure you actually read the essay you linked to, Tim. I think you missed the point by a mile: we are growing, at an accelerating rate. Alexa ranking and comparisons to Wikipedia are utterly and completely irrelevant–of course. And as anyone who knows much about the growth vectors of projects like this understands.

Another point left out of the essay, which I just found out about, is that CZ has slightly more words (5 million) than Wikipedia had after one year. See:

http://blog.citizendium.org/2007/11/01/our-word-count-about-the-same-as-wikipedias-after-one-year/

As to the ridiculous notion that the Citizendium has no “point”–well, that’s so silly it needs no reply. If you don’t know what the point of the project is, you don’t know anything about the project.

]]>