Wikipedia Co-Founder Creates Rival Site with Editors

Donna Porter
Citizendium, short for "citizens' compendium," ended its pilot-testing phase on March 25th, and is now open to the public. The site is similar to Wikipedia as it allows the public to submit and edit information for a community-based encyclopedia. The primary distinction with Citizendium is that the site requires contributors to register with their real names or IP address. Moreover, an editorial board reviews articles and determines what is approved and what requires author expertise.

Wikipedia, with 3 million registered users, is a target of increasing attacks of cyber vandalism, bogus identities, and false information, by anonymous users desiring to tarnish the site or aggravate its readers. The successful non-profit reference portal, created by the public, has also lost credibility in the eyes of many former contributors and readers.

"When you put everybody in a system that is flat, where everybody can say yes or no, without any sense of authority, what you get is tribalism," Ewen, a former Wikipedia contributor, tells USA Today. "What has gone into the article creation is very often the result of this dysfunctional system. It presents itself with this aura of authority, whereas what goes on behind the scenes is anything but."

With an accountability system and peer-review, authority is something that Citizendium has the capicity to reclaim in a social encyclopedia, yet remain open to discourse and dissent. Contributors may confer on the discussion pages that escort every article. However, the decision of the editors appears to be final.

Another benefit is that Citizendium may attract experts that Wikipedia lacks. Many academics and professionals dislike the ease with which anyone can erase their work on Wikipedia. Conversely, Citizendium editors, known as "CZ Constables," will monitor submissions and eliminate this practice. The qualifications for a CZ Constable is a person aged 25 or over who possesses a Bachelor's degree.

Larry Sanger, founder of Citizendium and disputed co-founder of Wikipedia, claims to have over 800 authors and 180 editors, since testing the site privately in November 2005. Currently the site hosts 1,100 articles, with works imported from Wikipedia. Volunteers and editors revise the content to meet editorial and site template standards.

Volunteer authors can create or edit articles, but CZ editors ultimately decide what is approved and which articles require particular expertise or academic background.

While the success of Citizendium remains in limbo, the social reference site may replace Wikipedia as a source for bloggers and the media. The difficulties include building its narrow content base, 1,100 articles versus 1.7 million Wikipedia works, and word-of-mouth promotion to encourage new volunteers. Yet, Sanger appears optimistic.

"Let's say we only have one-quarter of the contributors of Wikipedia," Sanger says. "Would we be able to create a credible competitor for Wikipedia within not too many years? Yes, I think." But Sanger allows himself an even grander dream - "that Citizendium's professionalism and civility end up attracting more people than the self-organizing hue and cry of Wikipedia. "I don't see why not," he says. "This kind of thing hasn't been tested."

Source: ZDNet News, Citizendium, USA Today

Published by Donna Porter

Writer / Journalist -- A Yahoo News! Contributor Donna began her writing and internet career in 1995 in the health industry and became an early dot-com entrepreneur soon after. Masters certified in Internet...  View profile

  • Wikipedia is losing its credibility and a victim of cyber-vandals.
  • Citizendium has hurdles to overcome to compete.
  • Citizendium may offer a useful resource for media professionals and bloggers.

7 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Summer Banks7/7/2007

    Gonna check this one out soon!!

  • Wanda Leibowitz4/11/2007

    Excellent article! It'll be fascinating to see what happens with this new site. Thanks for the excellent write-up of the situation, I feel like you gave me a great grounding in what's going on.

  • Christine Bude4/1/2007

    Great information! Thanks.

  • Dana Richardson3/31/2007

    Excellent writing, earned 5 and no doubt about it, you got the facts nailed, and you got the spirit of "Wiki" movin' on nailed - way to go Donna! - Dana

  • Dreamweaverr3/29/2007

    I agree, the accountability is important. If people are using that site as a research source, the factsand information need to be correct. The name of the new site versus the old one, doesn't quite role off the tongue as easily though. I think I would have chosen a different name.

  • Question Everything3/28/2007

    This sounds pretty cool... Wikipedia's lack of accountability has made me cautious.

  • Paula Blanton3/27/2007

    I gotta check this out.

Displaying Comments

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.