skip to main content

Wikipedia Quaking in Wiki-Boots?

Explore the evolving user-generated content craze and the rise of expert-driven alternatives like Citizendium. What’s next for online encyclopedias?

| 1 min read
Follow on GoogleGoogle News Preferred Source
Placeholder image

Newsletter

Sign up for our email newsletter for the latest science news

Sign Up

Wikipedia—the Internet encyclopedia that anyone can edit—has gone through an entire dramatic cycle on a truly Internet-era timescale; over the last not-quite-four years, it was born, pushed on the user-generated-content craze, became the 12th-most-popular site on the Web, and is now experiencing a vigorous backlash for having pages that are written by kooks and/or full of errors. ("The hive mind is for the most part stupid and boring," says Discover's own Jaron Lanier.)

Now, one of its co-founders is launching a competing online-o-pedia with a fundamental difference: its content will be written and guarded by editors, experts who would qualify based on "imperfect but effective" credentials like "degrees, professional society memberships, things like that." As someone who's seen plenty of Wikipedia writers' errors, belligerence, and most-of-all, flat-out bad writing, I think it sounds interesting. But we here at DiscoBlog think there's a lot to a name (clearly), and I'm more than a bit skeptical that anything called "Citizendium" is going anywhere—or perhaps I'm just bitter that my mouthparts hurt when I try to say it.

Stay Curious

JoinOur List

Sign up for our weekly science updates

View our Privacy Policy

SubscribeTo The Magazine

Save up to 40% off the cover price when you subscribe to Discover magazine.

Subscribe