CZ:We aren't Wikipedia: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Anthony DiPierro
(moving copyright sharing to talk page, I believe this was rejected)
(→‎See also: removing link to old missing blog post)
 
(96 intermediate revisions by 19 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{organization}}
{{TOC|right}}
'''How is the ''Citizendium'' similar to Wikipedia?''' In quite a few ways.  In enough ways that you might make you wonder why we've started another project.  Consider:
   


# We aim to create a giant free general encyclopedia.
Citizendium was originally founded by [[Larry Sanger]], one of Wikipedia's co-founders.  Citizendium has gone through multiple different management models since its inception in 2006, but it has always adhered to its real-names policy. Let's look at how it compares with Wikipedia as of 2023.
# We're managed by a nonprofit (the Citizendium Foundation, a project of the Tides Center).
# We use [[Special:Version|MediaWiki software]].
# We use wiki methods of strong collaboration.  We don't sign articles or even have lead authors; we strongly encourage everybody to "be bold" and mix it up.
# No credentials are needed to participate (as an author).
# We still rely on "soft security" to a great extent. We mostly trust people and solve what few behavioral problems we've seen as they arise.
# We are committed to a neutral, unbiased presentation of information.
# We have similar naming conventions, and some other similar conventions.
# Quite a few of our articles originally came from Wikipedia.
# The community and project has been organized by the same person who organized Wikipedia, [[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]].


Quite similar, it seems. But...
==How is Citizendium similar to Wikipedia?==
# Citizendium and Wikipedia both aim to create a giant free general encyclopedia.
# Citizendium and Wikipedia both use [[Special:Version|MediaWiki software]].
# Citizendium and Wikipedia both use wiki methods of collaboration and encourage everybody to work on articles in their area of interest and expertise.
# On both wikis, no particular qualifications are needed to contribute.
# Both wikis work on the basis of trust and rely on "soft security" to a great extent.
# Both wikis have similar naming conventions and other style guidelines in common. See [[CZ:Manual of Style]] for the differences.
# Both wikis are committed to an [[CZ:Objectivity_Guidance|objective, unbiased]] presentation of information (although there are some differences as described in the following section).


'''How do we differ?'''  Let us count the ways.
== How is Citizendium different from Wikipedia? ==
# Citizendium contributors use their '''real names''' and identities, must sign in, and are expected provide a publicly readable biography listing some of the life experience or training that they have.  This policy exists to prevent vandalism and help contributors negotiate over article content.  Citizendium goes to some lengths to verify contributor identities. Its user pages are for brief, helpful biographies and are not intended as vanity pages.  Contributors are not allowed to promote their own resumes or business endeavors via this wiki.
# Citizendium defines '''objectivity''' differently than Wikipedia.  The "neutrality policy" of Wikipedia, as applied nowadays by its leading editors, is that Wikipedia is based solely on "reliable" sources. If there's a consensus of those, then Wikipedia asserts that as unquestioned fact in its own voice, and other points of view, no matter how widely held, may not even be mentioned. This differs rather widely from Citizendium's concept, which is that if there are important points of view that "the scientific community" or some such rejects, Citizendium just says so.<ref>Unlike Wikipedia, Citizendium discourages the loaded language which dismisses certain people and ideas in the first sentence of an article by use of labeling them immediately as "pseudo-scientific" or "fads". For an example of differences in Wikipedia's "neutrality policy" and Citizendium's "objectivity policy", look at Citizendium's treatment of [[Graham Hancock]], as compared with [[Wikipedia:Graham Hancock|Wikipedia's article on him]] with its multiple uses of the label "pseudo-".  Citizendium would likely reject that first sentence as an example of loaded language which is far from objective.</ref>  Citizendium also '''uses sources differently''' from Wikipedia; in Citizendium, sources are something to help the reader rather than a required "proof" for every single assertion made within an article.
# Citizendium is a '''community whose shared principles are expressed in its [[CZ:Policies|policies]]'''.  Citizendium managers have a low tolerance for disruption. Its management team has some [[CZ:Moderator Group Blocking Procedures|firm rules]] that require [[CZ:Professionalism|professionalism]]. There are rules against personal attacks, self-promotion, and blatant violations of the objectivity guidelines, usually enforced first by warnings delivered privately if possible.  The Citizendium community settles policies by discussion and (where necessary) voting by the community.  The management team is supported behind the scenes by a private advisory group with long-term experience in wiki use and management.  Any Citizendium contributor interested in managing the wiki may request to join this group by messaging the managing editor.
# Citizendium encourages '''discussion of editorial options''' on article Talk pages and in the Forums. The real-names policy allows a contributor's opinions (as expressed on Talk pages or the Forum) to be evaluated by the community with some reference to their life experience and professional qualifications.  It helps us understand one another.  On Wikipedia, it is not uncommon for a contributor who wishes to control the content of an article quickly to archive the article's Talk page in order to hide the fact that someone has raised a point of contention requiring community debate.  On Citizendium, article Talk pages are not to be archived unless they become too long, and if defamatory content appears on them, management will simple remove the content from the page.
#  Citizendium has '''its own [[CZ:Content_Policy|content policy]]''' that differs from Wikipedia's idea of ''notability''.    Also, Citizendium articles are classified broadly into different '''[[CZ:Workgroups|Workgroups]]'''<ref>Workgroups are designated on the article's Metadata subpage template.  See [[CZ:Subpages|Subpages]] for more infromation.</ref> and normally, categories are not used on articles.  Works on Citizendium use the [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported (CC-by-sa)] license.
#  In terms of '''writing style''', Citizendium management prefers articles that are compelling introductory narratives, not mere collections of data. An excessive use of '''acronyms''' is discouraged on grounds that acronyms can render a topic unintelligible to non-experts.
# Attached to every article is a set of '''[[CZ:subpages|subpages]]''' of supplementary information.  These may include the standard tabs for related articles, bibliographies, and external articles, but also can be customized to include galleries, tables, timelines, tutorials, and signed introductory articles by experts. 
#  Citizendium takes '''avoidance of defamation''' seriously. This is why it has a [[CZ:Policy on Topic Informants|Policy on Topic Informants]] and a [[CZ:Topic Informant Workgroup|Topic Informant Workgroup]].
#  At Citizendium, '''all contributors are equal'''.  <ref>Formerly, Citizendium had experts in certain fields who were called Editors, and every Editor was also an Author; it also once had a [[CZ:Approval Process|method for producing citable articles]] that depended on the judgment of experts.  ''These features are not currently being used.''</ref>  A few of Citizendium's experienced contributors tend to help arbitrate editorial decisions via discussions on Talk pages or in the Forum.  Any contributor is welcome to weigh in with their ideas, opinions or helpful information.


# '''We have editors.'''  They are experts in their fields.  They work shoulder-to-shoulder with everybody else on the wiki, but have a few extra responsibilities that do not make the project any less of a "bazaar."
== See also ==
# '''And we respect them for their expertise.'''  We do not dismiss their expertise as the mere accumulation of meaningless "credentials."  We do not dismiss ordinary notions of expertise as only so much "credentialism" or "elitism."  In an encyclopedia project, respect for expertise is just good sense.
*[[CZ:Introduction to CZ for Wikipedians|Introduction to CZ for Wikipedians]]
# '''We have a method for approving articles.'''  While Wikipedia has a "featured article" system, we have expert-approved articles.  [[CZ:Approval_Process|Our approval system]] actually depends on the judgment of real-life experts&mdash;the very sort of people that ''Nature'' might consult to judge the accuracy of Wikipedia articles.
*[[CZ:How to convert Wikipedia articles to Citizendium articles|How to convert Wikipedia articles to Citizendium articles]]
# '''Our community and contributors are different.''' (If you haven't yet discovered this for yourself, we encourage you to [[Special:RequestAccount|get a contributor account]].
#* '''We have no vandalism.'''  Excluding accounts created during the short period in which we permitted self-registration, we have had zero vandalism&mdash;none.
#* '''We use our own names and identities.'''  Not only do we require people to sign in, we require them to use names that they attest are their own real names and to fill out a publicly readable biography.  We also go to some lengths (without making absolute guarantees) to verify identities&mdash;and to greater lengths for editors.
#* '''We expect professional behavior and have very low tolerance for disruption.'''  Our Constabulary has some [[CZ:Constabulary Blocking Procedures|pretty firm rules]] that require [[CZ:Professionalism|professionalism]].  This means that not only do we have rules against personal attacks, blatant violations of the neutrality policy, and so forth, ''we actually enforce them''.  We enforce our rules by warnings (in most cases) followed by permanent bans, which can be rescinded only through appeal or application for reinstatement.  We do not have "24 hour bans", which do nothing but annoy and antagonize.
#* '''Our Citizens are bound by a social contract.'''  Wikipedia is open to people who make great sport of flouting its basic principles.  By contrast, we are a community defined by shared principles: we require new recruits to agree to [[CZ:Fundamentals| our Statement of Fundamental Policies]].
#* '''Our user pages are biographies, not vanity pages.'''  Accordingly, we don't use "userboxes". 
#* '''We don't use zillions of acronyms.'''  The Chief Constable has made this a bannable offense.  We're not sure whether she's kidding or not.  Using a lot of acronyms for every small point of policy creates a sort of in-group that makes the community insular and unintelligible.
# '''Our community managers (called "constables" not "administrators") are different.'''
#* '''Our constables are not high school students.''' They are required to have a bachelor's degree and to be at least 25 years old.
#* '''Unlike Wikipedia administrators, constables do not make editorial decisions.'''  We have a "separation of powers."  Constables oversee ''behavior and adherence to basic policies''; editors oversee ''content''.
#* '''Unlike Wikipedia administrators, constables are held to a strict conflict of interest policy.'''  If they have engaged in a dispute or are otherwise at work on an article, they may not exercise their constable authority with respect to that article. Period.
# '''We are more than just an encyclopedia project.'''  Soon you will find attached to every article a set of "[[CZ:subpages|subpages]]," or pages of supplementary reference information.  These will include not only lists of related articles, bibliographies, and external articles, but also galleries, tables, timelines, tutorials, and even signed introductory articles by experts.
# '''Policy decisions are increasingly made by representatives and plebiscites, not "consensus."'''  The notion of consensus as a way to settle policy became impractical even in Wikipedia's first year.  The ''Citizendium'' community will settle policies by discussion and (where necessary) vote of the Editorial Council, the Constabulary, and many editor-led workgroups.
# '''The ''Citizendium'' editor-in-chief is a limited-term position; he is not "dictator for life."'''  [[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] declared, when he first announced the ''Citizendium'' in September 2006, that he would leave his position as editor-in-chief within two to three years, in order to set a positive precedent.
# '''Our license for our own work differs.'''  Works that originate on Citizendium use the [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported (CC-by-sa)] license.
# '''Our article policies differ.'''
#* '''Our aim is to craft compelling introductory narratives, not mere collections of data.'''  We are encouraging our contributors to create coherent, readable, extended narratives that actually do the job of introducing a topic to people who ''need'' an introduction to the topic.  We are actively discouraging articles that take the form of mere disconnected summaries of subtopics, or other "modular" collections of data that could easily be reshuffled and reorganized.  Such "articles" are dull and not likely to be read all the way through.
#* '''We use an older version of the neutrality policy.'''  Wikipedia has added all sorts of bells and whistles to its original neutrality policy.  We've gone back to one of the original versions.  And we don't use the neologisms "NPOV" and "POV"; we use the old-fashioned English words "neutral" and "biased."  And we actually take the neutrality policy seriously; for many Wikipedia articles, the policy seems to be on hold.
#* '''We take defamation seriously.''' We believe defamation is a horrible thing, and we have zero tolerance for people playing fast and loose with people's reputations in their biography articles. This is why we have a [[CZ:Policy on Topic Informants|Policy on Topic Informants]] and a [[CZ:Topic Informant Workgroup|Topic Informant Workgroup]].
#* '''We take a more sensible approach to citing sources.'''  The editors we have on board actually ''create'' the sort of sources that Wikipedia cites. We do cite sources, of course, but we have [[CZ:Article_Mechanics#Citations|a sensible approach]] to doing so. We cite sources because doing so helps ''the reader''.  We ''do not'' cite sources in order to settle internal disputes, or to "prove" a point to contributors. As seasoned researchers, we know that people can find sources for all sorts of ridiculous claims.
#* '''We talk about maintainability (or feasibility), not notability.''' We have replaced Wikipedia's conceptually problematic "notability" policy with a [[CZ:Maintainability|Maintainability]] policy.
#* '''We aren't going to use categories, probably.'''  There is an excellent chance that we will replace subject categories with an in-line system of "Subtopics" and "Related topics"; [http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,513.0.html see this Forums post.]  (So, authors, please do not create new categories.)
#* '''We don't overuse templates.'''  We place templates helpful to contributors on talk pages, not on the articles themselves.
#* '''We will never have nearly as many articles about porn stars and sexual fetishes.'''  We aim to be family-friendly.
# '''We don't have as many articles.'''  Yet.  Give us a little time.


We would not deny that Wikipedia is useful and on balance a good thing.  We merely think that humanity can do better.  And if we can do better, when it comes to education and the truth, we surely have an obligation to do better.
== Notes ==
<references>
</references>


See also our [[CZ:Introduction to CZ for Wikipedians|Introduction to CZ for Wikipedians]] as well as [[CZ:How to convert Wikipedia articles to Citizendium articles|How to convert Wikipedia articles to Citizendium articles]].
{{organization}}

Latest revision as of 09:09, 3 August 2024


Citizendium was originally founded by Larry Sanger, one of Wikipedia's co-founders. Citizendium has gone through multiple different management models since its inception in 2006, but it has always adhered to its real-names policy. Let's look at how it compares with Wikipedia as of 2023.

How is Citizendium similar to Wikipedia?

  1. Citizendium and Wikipedia both aim to create a giant free general encyclopedia.
  2. Citizendium and Wikipedia both use MediaWiki software.
  3. Citizendium and Wikipedia both use wiki methods of collaboration and encourage everybody to work on articles in their area of interest and expertise.
  4. On both wikis, no particular qualifications are needed to contribute.
  5. Both wikis work on the basis of trust and rely on "soft security" to a great extent.
  6. Both wikis have similar naming conventions and other style guidelines in common. See CZ:Manual of Style for the differences.
  7. Both wikis are committed to an objective, unbiased presentation of information (although there are some differences as described in the following section).

How is Citizendium different from Wikipedia?

  1. Citizendium contributors use their real names and identities, must sign in, and are expected provide a publicly readable biography listing some of the life experience or training that they have. This policy exists to prevent vandalism and help contributors negotiate over article content. Citizendium goes to some lengths to verify contributor identities. Its user pages are for brief, helpful biographies and are not intended as vanity pages. Contributors are not allowed to promote their own resumes or business endeavors via this wiki.
  2. Citizendium defines objectivity differently than Wikipedia. The "neutrality policy" of Wikipedia, as applied nowadays by its leading editors, is that Wikipedia is based solely on "reliable" sources. If there's a consensus of those, then Wikipedia asserts that as unquestioned fact in its own voice, and other points of view, no matter how widely held, may not even be mentioned. This differs rather widely from Citizendium's concept, which is that if there are important points of view that "the scientific community" or some such rejects, Citizendium just says so.[1] Citizendium also uses sources differently from Wikipedia; in Citizendium, sources are something to help the reader rather than a required "proof" for every single assertion made within an article.
  3. Citizendium is a community whose shared principles are expressed in its policies. Citizendium managers have a low tolerance for disruption. Its management team has some firm rules that require professionalism. There are rules against personal attacks, self-promotion, and blatant violations of the objectivity guidelines, usually enforced first by warnings delivered privately if possible. The Citizendium community settles policies by discussion and (where necessary) voting by the community. The management team is supported behind the scenes by a private advisory group with long-term experience in wiki use and management. Any Citizendium contributor interested in managing the wiki may request to join this group by messaging the managing editor.
  4. Citizendium encourages discussion of editorial options on article Talk pages and in the Forums. The real-names policy allows a contributor's opinions (as expressed on Talk pages or the Forum) to be evaluated by the community with some reference to their life experience and professional qualifications. It helps us understand one another. On Wikipedia, it is not uncommon for a contributor who wishes to control the content of an article quickly to archive the article's Talk page in order to hide the fact that someone has raised a point of contention requiring community debate. On Citizendium, article Talk pages are not to be archived unless they become too long, and if defamatory content appears on them, management will simple remove the content from the page.
  5. Citizendium has its own content policy that differs from Wikipedia's idea of notability. Also, Citizendium articles are classified broadly into different Workgroups[2] and normally, categories are not used on articles. Works on Citizendium use the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported (CC-by-sa) license.
  6. In terms of writing style, Citizendium management prefers articles that are compelling introductory narratives, not mere collections of data. An excessive use of acronyms is discouraged on grounds that acronyms can render a topic unintelligible to non-experts.
  7. Attached to every article is a set of subpages of supplementary information. These may include the standard tabs for related articles, bibliographies, and external articles, but also can be customized to include galleries, tables, timelines, tutorials, and signed introductory articles by experts.
  8. Citizendium takes avoidance of defamation seriously. This is why it has a Policy on Topic Informants and a Topic Informant Workgroup.
  9. At Citizendium, all contributors are equal. [3] A few of Citizendium's experienced contributors tend to help arbitrate editorial decisions via discussions on Talk pages or in the Forum. Any contributor is welcome to weigh in with their ideas, opinions or helpful information.

See also

Notes

  1. ↑ Unlike Wikipedia, Citizendium discourages the loaded language which dismisses certain people and ideas in the first sentence of an article by use of labeling them immediately as "pseudo-scientific" or "fads". For an example of differences in Wikipedia's "neutrality policy" and Citizendium's "objectivity policy", look at Citizendium's treatment of Graham Hancock, as compared with Wikipedia's article on him with its multiple uses of the label "pseudo-". Citizendium would likely reject that first sentence as an example of loaded language which is far from objective.
  2. ↑ Workgroups are designated on the article's Metadata subpage template. See Subpages for more infromation.
  3. ↑ Formerly, Citizendium had experts in certain fields who were called Editors, and every Editor was also an Author; it also once had a method for producing citable articles that depended on the judgment of experts. These features are not currently being used.


Citizendium Organization
CZ:Home | Workgroups | Personnel | Governance | Proposals | Recruitment | Contact | Donate | FAQ | Sitemap

|width=10% align=center style="background:#F5F5F5"|  |}

Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=CZ:We_aren%27t_Wikipedia&oldid=968727"