Encyc:Encyc complements Wikipedia
Encyc complements Wikipedia
"good job, Wikipedia", Said Encyc.
having sorts of competition within the realm of information is good. it enables ... productive betterment.
We're always being asked, "Why bother with another encyclopedia, when Wikipedia is already so good," and "How can you ever expect to compete with Wikipedia?"
The short answer is: Wikipedia is good, but it's not equally good at everything. Any individual encyclopedia is going to have strengths and weaknesses. Encyc seeks to complement Wikipedia though excellence in the things Wikipedia is less good at.
- The intelligent high school student who needs a concise summary he can understand with a 10th grade reading level
- The political junkie, who recognizes bias in a Wikipedia article and wants to see if there is another take on the same issue
- The web entrepreneur, who wants free content for her site
- The writer, who enjoys sharing information with others and research for its own sake
- The self-censor, who needs an encyclopedia with reduced sexual, violent, and profane content for situations where such content is inappropriate
- The pop culture fan or the dedicated hobbyist, who would like to write an article about an obscure character or piece of gear, but doesn't want the content deleted and moved to a for-profit site like Wikia.
Wikipedia can sometimes let these people down. 1) through complex language, Wikipedia is inaccessible to anyone who cannot read at a very advanced level; 2) by being written by actual human beings, bias is inevitable, and it's important to have more than one project with independent communities and management to account for this; 3) Wikipedia's complex coding and use of sophisticated templates makes it hard to share content; 4) many people trying to write for Wikipedia are discouraged by other users who insist on every change being discussed first on the talk page; and 5) Wikipedia is full of foul language, images of sex acts, and pictures of the human body from every angle imaginable. 6) Deletionists move what they call "fancruft" to Wikia, deleting much of the content from Wikipedia, unless it is something that is popular among Wikipedia's predominant demographic of writers.
It wasn't always like this. In the beginning, Wikipedia was similar to how Encyc is now. There were lots of red links and short articles. Newcomers were welcome, and articles had distinct writing styles and offered fresh insights. Encyc seeks to recapture some of that magic.
We don't expect to become as big as Wikipedia overnight, but we don't have to. We are already offering articles that are superior to Wikipedia articles for certain purposes. We already have hundreds of readers turning to us for information every day.
Doesn't this make the web better? Isn't Encyc already a successful project, as it stands now? We hope you'll agree, and join us in helping to make information more easily available for everyone to share.