On 30 August 2010 01:14, William Beutler <[email protected]> wrote:
> I do think alternative wiki projects that seek to fill "gaps" created by > Wikipedia's choice not to include some types of information stand the best > chance of success -- going head-to-head with this entrenched incumbent is > foolhardy, unless the Wikipedia community falls apart and the site falls > into total disrepair -- even then I think there is so much value here > already that it's far more likely Wikipedia would be resuscitated, than any > rival wiki encyclopedia taking the lead. I said a few years ago that in ten years (so 2015 or so), the only general encyclopedia would be Wikipedia or a fork of it. This was intended with trepidation, not triumphalism. There are various niches for other wikis. * Subject-specific and allowing original research. This is quite a common format. * Subject-specific and allowing opinion. (TV Tropes is a huge winner here.) * Just use MediaWiki as a CMS, not functionally a wiki at all. (Wikileaks.) Having a lax notability policy is a common divergence, but others are possible. * Multiple articles on a topic - Wikinfo, arguably Knol. Gives some writers what they want, not a hit with the public. * Credentials required. Dangerous - CZ tried this and was infested with cranks and pseudoscience. Cranks may not have expertise, but they sure know about pieces of paper. What have I missed? - d. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
