[WikiEN-l] Citizendium vs. Wikipedia

[WJhonson at aol.com]

In a message dated 4/22/2009 12:43:31 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
ragesoss+wikipedia at gmail.com writes:


> This is a wonderful idea!  It could even make sense to have Metapedia
> as a Wikimedia project...an explicitly curatorial project that
> attempts to sort different kinds of content and evaluate strengths and
> weaknesses.  It could also serve as a place to have general
> discussions about certain topics, without the necessity (as on
> Wikipedia talk pages, nominally) of focusing on content improvement;
> that's something that there's a need for, and something that causes
> specific projects to suffer because of the tendency of readers to try
> to start general discussions.>>
> -----------------

Chatopedia
Discussopedia
Jabberpedia

I've noticed a number of news outlets allowing posts at the bottom of 
articles.  You can't actually change the article itself yet, but why the heck 
not?  They could easily set-up moderated changes.  Better than some reporter 
slogging through 500 posts to find the one that complains about a spelling 
error.

I noticed somewhere that Google was giving preferential treatment to Knol 
articles on some content collector, but then later they stopped doing that.  
So apparently they felt that was a bit unfair.  There's no reason I can see 
why a Wiki project couldn't be setup to display a Wikipedia article, a few 
articles from Knol on the same subject, and allow a reader comments section 
as well.

Will Johnson




**************
Big savings on Dell XPS Laptops and Desktops! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1220433404x1201394533/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fad.doubl
eclick.net%2Fclk%3B214133109%3B36002181%3Bk)