Wikipedia

[ciphergoth]

What do you think of Wikipedia?

If you were in charge of a project to create something like Wikipedia, but better, what would you create?

Comments

[pavlos.livejournal.com]

I would want it hosted outside of the United States for the same sort of reasons that you'd want a version of GPS not controlled by the US or an operating system not controlled by Microsoft. In this case some form of de-centralised hosting may be feasible, but would put extra strain on the means used to synchronise and arbitrate content.

I'd like some sort of arbitration (as in editorial control) of the content. I think in a previous post you mentioned a trust metric, and someone also mentioned a recent change metric, and I like those ideas. However I'm not necesarily after a scheme that decides the authoritative content. For example it may be preferable to expose several versions of an article on, say Cuba: An authoritative factual one, a critical one, a sympathetic one, a generic travel guide, an opinionated travel guide by a foodie/culture/music person, another opinionated travel guide by a sun & sex person, etc.

I'd like to get rid, or at least demote, the piles of trivial content about computers, game characters, and parts of current affairs. I'm not sure how, but the best I can quickly think of is some form of systematic categorisation, so that as a user you can exclude them.

One thing I wouldn't change is the Wiki. It rocks, or at least it rocks harder than any obvious competitors. I'm no expert in this, it's just the one Wiki in comon use that seems free of smileys, sloppy formatting, etc.