On 30 August 2010 01:14, William Beutler <williambeutler(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I do think alternative wiki projects that seek to fill
"gaps" created by
Wikipedia's choice not to include some types of information stand the best
chance of success -- going head-to-head with this entrenched incumbent is
foolhardy, unless the Wikipedia community falls apart and the site falls
into total disrepair -- even then I think there is so much value here
already that it's far more likely Wikipedia would be resuscitated, than any
rival wiki encyclopedia taking the lead.
I said a few years ago that in ten years (so 2015 or so), the only
general encyclopedia would be Wikipedia or a fork of it. This was
intended with trepidation, not triumphalism.
There are various niches for other wikis.
* Subject-specific and allowing original research. This is quite a
common format.
* Subject-specific and allowing opinion. (TV Tropes is a huge winner here.)
* Just use MediaWiki as a CMS, not functionally a wiki at all. (Wikileaks.)
Having a lax notability policy is a common divergence, but others are possible.
* Multiple articles on a topic - Wikinfo, arguably Knol. Gives some
writers what they want, not a hit with the public.
* Credentials required. Dangerous - CZ tried this and was infested
with cranks and pseudoscience. Cranks may not have expertise, but they
sure know about pieces of paper.
What have I missed?
- d.