[Citizendium-l] Level forks and expert level articles

Fred Bauder fredbaud at ctelco.net
Wed Nov 8 18:51:06 EST 2006

This is excellent. An idea that has been soundly rejected at  
Wikipedia that offers a substantial improvement. I would provide for  
more than one expert article if people are willing to write them.

Fred Bauder

On Nov 8, 2006, at 2:40 PM, Thomas Morien Michael {STUDENT} wrote:

> I tried to send this from a Hotmail address but it bounced... this is
> my University email
> In response to good suggestions about having articles written at
> different levels, I thought it might be good to share an experience of
> writing articles for readers at different levels in parallel.  At the
> psychology wiki we have been writing 'general' community written
> articles, as well as expert written articles (by academic
> psychologists) in parallel.
> In general, there is a link at the top of each article informing the
> reader that there exists a 'general' article, and an 'expert' article
> on the same subject.  This is useful as it allows the reader to switch
> between the two levels as appropriate.
> For example see our prototype expert article:
> http://psychology.wikia.com/wiki/Tree_of_Knowledge_System/Expert_artic
> le_by_Gregg_Henriques
> In general I feel it would be a excellent idea to develop expert level
> articles in parallel to the general ones.  Reasons for this include:
> 1) It distinguishes the project further from WP which is VERY
> important.  Don't try to be another WP.
> 2) It utilizes the expertise of our contributors and allows them to
> write articles which would be quickly reverted to a lower level on WP.
> 3) The 'General' articles will allow non specialists to still
> understand a subject area, E.g. I would read expert psychology but
> general maths.  It would be a BAD mistake to try and write every
> article at an expert level as this would alienate the core readership
> because most of the material would be beyond most of us.
> Finally, from my experience with Wikia, I have found that large,
> generalised wikis (by subject) work better than small, specialist
> wikis, because a large number of contributors is required to keep the
> project afloat.  This is why WP is so successful in terms of numbers,
> because it is about Everything and Anyone is allowed to contribute.
> If you think the expertise of the Psychology Wiki would be a valuable
> addition to the CZ project, would you consider letting us merge with
> you to develop Expert written psychology articles in parallel with the
> general articles?  Joining up can help projects to survive and
> flourish where smaller wikis might fail due to lack of numbers.
> I would imagine that if you went down the expert article/parallel
> general article route, that many other academics would come aboard,
> especially because of the editorial controls that CZ is developing.
> Let me know what you think
> Tom Michael
> Psychology Wiki Administrator
> _______________________________________________
> Citizendium-l mailing list
> Citizendium-l at lists.purdue.edu
> https://lists.purdue.edu/mailman/listinfo/citizendium-l

More information about the Citizendium-l mailing list