Comments on: The Failure of Citizendium http://ukwebfocus.com/2011/12/20/the-failure-of-citizendium/ UK Web Focus: an independent Web consultant Fri, 07 Oct 2016 20:42:59 +0000 hourly 1 By: Y Grec http://ukwebfocus.com/2011/12/20/the-failure-of-citizendium/#comment-1854 Fri, 05 Oct 2012 02:33:08 +0000 http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/?p=8786#comment-1854 People can successfully challenge the fanboys (open Request for Comment, post on WikiProject talk pages), but it’s true that one has to understand how Wikipedia works before doing so and some unscrupulous editors take advantage of the inexperience of others.

]]>
By: Alma J http://ukwebfocus.com/2011/12/20/the-failure-of-citizendium/#comment-1853 Fri, 18 May 2012 07:14:35 +0000 http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/?p=8786#comment-1853 “Larry Sanger said
31 December 2011 at 8:09 am
Are you still talking to yourself there, David Gerard?”

Sanger is no longer associated with the Citizendium project. But for him the penny still hasn’t dropped. Snippy personal remarks at this remove reflect poorly on his judgement and do nothing at all for the project.

Whether it will survive is anyone’s guess, but given its lofty tone and endless gabfest behind the scenes, it’s frankly risible that after 4 years in public release, there are still only a mere 16,000 articles. And of those, less than 1% have ever been been given the very editorial approval that remains the project’s sole reason for being.

1%. On that metric alone, the project is an abject failure. Still, they have just enough bucks to stagger on for the time being. Meanwhile, another internal gabfest looms, as they head towards yet another round of elections.

]]>
By: Larry Sanger http://ukwebfocus.com/2011/12/20/the-failure-of-citizendium/#comment-1852 Sat, 31 Dec 2011 08:09:22 +0000 http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/?p=8786#comment-1852 Are you still talking to yourself there, David Gerard?

]]>
By: David Gerard http://ukwebfocus.com/2011/12/20/the-failure-of-citizendium/#comment-1851 Wed, 28 Dec 2011 09:49:33 +0000 http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/?p=8786#comment-1851 The decline and fade of Citizendium is detailed, with numbers, at RationalWiki.

]]>
By: David Gerard http://ukwebfocus.com/2011/12/20/the-failure-of-citizendium/#comment-1850 Wed, 28 Dec 2011 09:47:30 +0000 http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/?p=8786#comment-1850 “Boycott SOPA” – what’s your evidence for Sanger’s support of SOPA? All I can find is one, obviously ironic, tweet. Citizendium is not hosted on GoDaddy, it’s hosted on Steadfast Networks. The DNS is registered to GoDaddy.

]]>
By: Ian Gardner (@iangardnergb) http://ukwebfocus.com/2011/12/20/the-failure-of-citizendium/#comment-1849 Tue, 27 Dec 2011 14:46:41 +0000 http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/?p=8786#comment-1849 I also signed up for Citizendium – personally I didn’t engage as I got so many emails from them I ended up deleting/ignoring them rather than engaging with the project. When I changed email addresses I left those going into my old account. No doubt they would have followed (or perhaps are following) a more social approach if the project was launched now. As tends to be the case with projects which ‘fail’, communication was certainly one contributing factor.

]]>
By: Boycott SOPA http://ukwebfocus.com/2011/12/20/the-failure-of-citizendium/#comment-1848 Tue, 27 Dec 2011 09:26:21 +0000 http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/?p=8786#comment-1848 It’s interesting to note that while Wikipedia is opposed to SOPA. It’s wiki rival Citizendium supports it. Founder Larry Sanger welcomes it as a way to shut down Wikipedia. Citizendium incidentally is hosted on GoDaddy, which is one of the few hosters which also supports SOPA. If you believe in a free uncensored internet, don’t support Citizendium.

]]>
By: Christian Liem http://ukwebfocus.com/2011/12/20/the-failure-of-citizendium/#comment-1847 Wed, 21 Dec 2011 23:32:19 +0000 http://ukwebfocus.wordpress.com/?p=8786#comment-1847 It’s hard for Citizendium to be seen as having failed when the project just never really took off. It spluttered on take-off for the first few months and has been on a deathly decline since. When Wikipedia can import any Citizendium article it so chooses and not vice-versa, I really don’t see the point of Citizendium existing. The whole situation is sad, because Wikipedia itself isnt very good. It’s full of creepy one-eyed fanboys who bully others to their POV, and chase off people who challenge them using spi and arbcom.

]]>
http://ukwebfocus.com/2011/12/20/the-failure-of-citizendium/feed/
ukwebfocus.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2016-44
11189
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:DOIQ3L34KAJRMS6T4POZDJMEF6DH7HMA
<urn:uuid:8db69c9b-9ea9-4731-9a5a-8429be840626>
2016-10-24T05:10:26Z
185.119.173.237
sha1:ZK3FB3NGIZAZ5OKQXU5GO2OPO2AXSF37
<urn:uuid:307395c3-06c5-4b79-9b78-13ece355fc81>
http://ukwebfocus.com/2011/12/20/the-failure-of-citizendium/feed/
length
response
<urn:uuid:bc19014e-057f-458e-986d-7017f3c0e739>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-171-6-4.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2016-44
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for October 2016
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf