Encyc:Encyc complements Wikipedia

From Encyc
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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.


  1. The average reader at a 9th grade reading level
  2. The political activist, who recognizes bias in a Wikipedia article and wants to see if there is another perspective on the same issue
  3. The writer, who enjoys sharing information with others and research for its own sake
  4. The self-censor, who needs an encyclopedia with reduced sexual, violent, and profane content for situations where such content is inappropriate
  5. 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) Encyc is easy to get started writing with. Fewer templates and dependencies on outside data sources like Wikidata mean it is easier to start and maintain articles. 5) It is ok that some encyclopedias include adult content, but that may not be something every reader wants. 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 ever become as big as Wikipedia, but we don't have to. 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.

See also[edit]