Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
Assuming that good content (if any) in sangers project will be added to wikipedia, why would potential editors prefer to edit these articles that are copied back to wikipedia too on sangers project, rather than on wikipedia? There has to be some added value to editing on sangers project, rather than on wikipedia, for his project to flourish. What is it? I genuinely want to know.
As an expert who has left Wikipedia more or less, I can give you an answer: 1. I would write there for Citizendium, not for Wikipedia. 2. Content from there included in Wikipedia will deteriorate at Wikipedia over time, there is will remain sound. 3. Content there, if the right editing paradigm is chosen, will continue to improve, which would either require Wikipedia to repeatedly insert the newest version, of basically fall behind.
Your response is based on the premise that Wikipedia will keep the lead, and that forks are just to feed stuff to Wikipedia. Maybe, but my prediction will be that some smarter hybrid between general community involvement and experts guarding quality will in the end replace Wikipedia. It is just a matter of time. Whether Citizendium will be that alternative, I do not yet know. What I do know is that experts have in general a short life span at Wikipedia (if they join at all), and that is not going to change.
Kim