Better alternative to Wikipedia?

November 5, 2007 at 3:00 am 1 comment

Kim photoI came across Ezclopedia (alpha), a new knowledge sharing website that seems to be an alternative to Wikipedia. It’s described as: “an online, knowledge sharing website that provides a better alternative for qualified individuals to share their knowledge and provide free, reliable, trustworthy information and get the credit and revenue sharing they deserve for their sincere, knowledgeable efforts”.

And it seems to be organised around three key features:

  • collaboration will produce high quality articles: the author who starts off an article is called the Lead Author, whilst those who contribute are referred to as Co-Authors. The Lead Author can invite others to contribute and function as Co-Authors or people can apply to become Co-Authors. Either way, the Lead Author has complete control over who contributes or edits. If you don’t want a Co-Author, you can request a peer-review of an article or you can apply to be a peer-reviewer.
  • healthy competition will produce high quality articles: Ezclopedia allows different authors or groups of authors to write articles using the same title. Readers will be able to gain different perspectives of the topic and will ultimately have the power to rank an article higher than others on the same topic.
  • authors should receive the appreciation, recognition and reward they deserve (gasp!!): Ezclopedia is a for-profit organisation and they believe it is unethical to directly or indirectly use the content contributed by authors to earn profits without sharing said profits with authors.

Apparently, around 1 million people use Ezclopedia daily – make that 1 million + one now that I’ve stumbled onto the site. It seems to be concentrating on developing trustworthy content, peer-reviewed content, editing control and….credit and potential revenue sharing for contributors. Not sure why it’s called Ezclopedia, a bit of a clunky sounding name but hopefully it will give Wikipedia the sort of competition it needs.


Entry filed under: Ezclopedia, Knowledge sharing, Useful resources.

Online social networks: security issues When predictions go wild and a little crazy

1 Comment Add your own

  • 1. Ray  |  November 6, 2007 at 1:39 am


    Thanks for the link. It looks okay, though the topics seem to severely limited considering they supposedly get 1 million hits per day. The thing about open source wiki sites is that they will attract more users and readers by virtue of their accessibility. While Wikipedia may not have the best articles, they are usually good starting points for more in depth research (or to just find out what something actually is.) Plus, I’ve always liked the idea of “levelling” the distinction between writer, researcher and reader, with only your peers holding the writing accountable.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed

Search ThinkingShift

   Made in New Zealand
     Thinkingshift is?

Flickr Photos

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 Australia License.

ThinkingShift Book Club

Kimmar - Find me on

%d bloggers like this: