Talk:Citizendium and Wikipedia

From Textop Wiki

This page was written, in no large part, because of a whiff of smugness that permeates the air. Many assume it is a given that changes to editorial policy are magic beans that will make this site a top-drawer reference, and Wikipedia an afterthought.

This project will benefit most if such assumptions are shelved.

The editorial model proposed here certainly has the potential to produce a better product than Wikipedia. But the proof of the pudding is in the eating; not by examining the recipe. While a good recipe (and good ingredients) are important; this project will fail if it lacks competent chefs. I think most of the folks here on this meta-wiki know this; but it needs to be written down.

The goal should be to be the best; nothing less.

--EngineerScotty 15:21, 22 September 2006 (PDT)

Uh, why was a whole bunch of stuff deleted?

along with an edit summary which was puzzling at best, misleading at worst? I refer to this edit in particular, which contained the edit summary "Textop is not a cite (sic) for advertising your company". I'm curious as to which company it was suggested I am advertising.

Also, I certainly hope that deletion of material that you disagree with--you've deleted three different sets of legitimate contributions on the subject without really any discussion--isn't going to be an editing style which is encouraged here.

--EngineerScotty 19:34, 24 September 2006 (PDT)

JA: Frankly, I will nominate this page for MFD just as soon as we institute the appropriate protocols. Just kidding, but not entirely. The relationship between Citizendium and Wikipedia is summed up in the phrase that Citizendium is a progressive fork of Wikipedia, and that's pretty much all that is necessary to say about the matter at this point. The rest of your comments were platitudes and speculations as you see things from your special POV and not really pertinent to the ongoing work here. Jon Awbrey 06:34, 25 September 2006 (PDT)