Most of us probably know that the name Wikipedia, the online community encyclopedia, originates from the joining of two words, wiki and encyclopedia. However, many of us may be hazy regarding the origin or meaning of the first word, unless you happen to hail from Hawaii. Yes, that’s right, “wiki” is one half of the Hawaiian word wikiwiki, which means quickly in the vernacular.
As with many other borrowed words that have made it to the English lexicon, wiki now enjoys the full stature accorded to such words with its own derivatives such as wikicize or wikify, which means to create a wikilink on a page so that the linked text points to another Wikipage.
The distinguishing features of Wikipedia are collaborative authoring and free content. It also boasts of multilingual format. It has become my first choice of reference on practically any subject. Lately, the site has suffered some form of online vandalism and we may yet see some changes to the access protocol.
Now an upstart is threatening the premier position of Wikipedia as the ultimate online reference. “Like Wikipedia, the Citizendium or "the Citizen’s Compendium," will be a wiki project open to public collaboration. But, unlike Wikipedia, the community will be guided by expert editors, and contributors will be expected to use their own names, not anonymous pseudonyms.” So noted the first press release dated Oct 17, 2006 linked at its website.
So an encyclopedia versus a compendium, both conjuring up images of knowledge nuggets that are easily accessible. But that’s not the only thing that the two share. Dr. Larry Sanger, a co-founder of Wikipedia in 2001, is also the impetus behind as well as the “public face”, albeit a temporary one, of the citizen initiative.
At the initial stage, the two will not be distinguishable as Citizendium will be the “mirror” of Wikipedia. But as Citizendium matures, the original Wikipedia articles will be refreshed to reflect updates and new articles introduced.
Why the need for two seemingly parallel efforts with largely congruent objectives of providing free and accessible information? It seems to be an issue of reliability, and a matter of accountability as made clear in the Citizendium’s first press release mentioned earlier.
Citizendium aims to be a paragon of reliability and accountability by eliminating anonymous contributions and engaging experts and the academia. The “alpha” phase involving a select group of authors, editors and “constables” (the enforcers of rules, and perhaps standards) and held in private is ongoing and the overall mood that I gather from visiting the website can be described as “cautiously optimistic”.
It’s too early to tell whether this “responsible, expert-managed fork of Wikipedia” will mature into a reference of choice on its own right. But those who subscribe to its Statement of Fundamental Policies are welcome to apply to be part of the team. Just make sure that you have the right level of credentials.
2 comments:
I am a big fan of Wikipedia, and I don't believe I've heard of this "Citizen's Compendium" until now. I read an article on Wikipedia some months ago, and while pretty much anyone can go in and edit an article, it seems that Wikipedia does have its own 'panel' of experts, albeit self-proclaimed ones, who will check up on updates to fact-check and correct any wrong edits. Of course, there are scores of subjects that are not being monitored regularly or that need more information (just look up Elizabeth Bathory), but it is super convenient.
It's always good to have alternatives so that each will keep each other at each's toe so to speak. Lately there has been some heated debate and demontrations in Malaysia because of the sale of the controlling stock of Nanyang Siang Pau to the boss of Sinchew Jit Poh. See how wary people are regarding any monopoly.
Post a Comment