I looked at their review process... I do not see
how it could work...
Eh, it reminds me of Nupedia !
I agree, but it's different from Nupedia in that they've got tons more
resources than Nupedia did. Still, I don't see encarta becoming the
largest encyclopedia in the world, since there is little reason for
people to contribute. It doesn't even seem like they give attribution
(do they? If so, where?).
I don't think that there will be dedicated editors like there are on
Wikipedia, and like there were on Nupedia, since encarta is completely
for profit- they're in it for the money and NOT for providing free
access to "the sum of all human knowledge." There might be some casual
editors who, upon finding something that wasn't previously there, will
submit it (eg. if somebody died). There is little reason I see for
anybody going on the site for the purpose of improving it.
While it will help keep the encyclopedia more up-to-date, I doubt it
will ever become nearly as popular as Wikipedia is.
Wikipedia is an increasingly hostile environment. Don't dismiss
alternate venues because the wave is cresting on wikipedia.