[WikiEN-l] We've been overtaken.

[Sherool]

On Tue, 21 Apr 2009 16:13:46 +0200, Nathan <nawrich at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 7:51 AM, Ian Woollard  
> <ian.woollard at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On 21/04/2009, Scientia Potentia est <bibliomaniac_15 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > I'm not too concerned. Their notability standards seem to be very  
>> loose,
>> and
>> > they have few of the trappings that we emphasize: BLP, neutrality,
>> reliable
>> > sourcing, brilliant prose, etc.
>>
>> That's exactly the kind of thing that the Encyclopedia Britannica said
>> about the Wikipedia!
>>
>> --
>> -Ian Woollard
>>
>
> Exactly what I thought. Better integration and support for wikiprojects
> (have to say, I sort of prefer "task groups" as a name...), better
> recognition on the wiki of top contributors to various articles -- those  
> are
> things we could really learn from. And if we could approach the  
> proprietor,
> and encourage a more compatible licensing scheme, our Chinese language
> projects could really benefit (and their project could benefit from
> Wikimedia content).
>
> Did this thing just appear out of nowhere? Suddenly a collaborative  
> online
> reference site larger than the English Wikipedia?

Well they have been around for 2-3 years. I'm a bit fuzzy on the details I  
have to admit. I'm under the impression that it came about as a  
"replacement" for the Chinese Wikipedia since the Chinese government kept  
blocking access to it because it didn't conform to the party line when it  
came to scertain aspects of history and political borders (Taiwan etc.).

Although looking at our articles I might be thinking of [[Baidu Baike]],  
wich "only" have about 1,5 million articles aparently despite operating  
for about a year longer than [[Hudong]].



-- 
[[:en:User:Sherool]]