bit-tech.net

Encyclopaedia Brittanica goes wiki

Encyclopaedia Brittanica goes wiki

The famous Encyclopaedia Brittanica is to introduce wiki-style user editing functionality - but via a panel of editors employed by the company.

While Wikipedia might come under criticism for the quality and impartiality of some of its user-generated articles, it looks like the big boys have noted its success with interest – and the Encyclopaedia Britannica fancies a bit of that for itself.

In an interview with the Sydney Morning Herald – via CNet - Encyclopaedia Britannica's president, Jorge Cauz, let slip that the web-based edition of the popular information source would be introducing the ability for users to edit, amend, and add to existing entries.

The plan is for the Encyclopaedia to allow web users to register on the site and suggest corrections, additions, and even entirely new subjects for the site. Unlike Wikipedia – which is almost entirely anarchic, relying on users themselves to maintain the quality of entries – these changes will be reviewed by a team of editors working for the company, and anything which doesn't make the grade will be rejected outright.

Cauz has promised that the use of staff to review suggestions won't introduce unacceptable delays – while the system won't be as responsive as a wiki, he's claiming a turnaround time from edit to publish (or reject) of twenty minutes. How much traffic the system could cope with before that figure starts to creep – or rocket – up remains to be seen.

Interestingly, Cuaz has also said that changes made by users of the website are also likely to be integrated into the print edition over time, although the main purpose – aside from getting all hip and down with the Web 2.0 kids – is to improve the site's ranking in search engines.

Would you be tempted to edit the Encyclopaedia Britannica for free, or is the project destined to turn the encyclopaedia into nothing more than a Wikipedia rip-off? Share your thoughts over in the forums.

8 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
Spiny 23rd January 2009, 11:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2009/01/23/encyclopaedia-brittanica-goes-wiki/1

The Encyclopaedia Brittanica is to allow edits, amendments, and suggestions from web users - via a staff of professional editors, of course - in an attempt to best Wikipedia at its own game.

It's still not free though, so therefore useless.
asphinx 23rd January 2009, 11:37 Quote
I tried the Britannica online, searching/reading about two topics(Chaos Theory & Britney Spears) I was greeted with constant login screen explaining how this is a Britannica Online Premium Topic. And how I should get my FREE TRIAL to explore this complete topic. (this screen covered the entire article).

My suggestion to Britannica!
Remove this or I will personally NOT be using this service at all. I'd much rather read Wikipedia's impartial articles then be greeted by a nag screen every 5 seconds (Rough estimate based on one-Mississippi from closing of nag screen).
bowman 23rd January 2009, 12:35 Quote
Too little, too late. Noone cares any more.
DLoney 23rd January 2009, 21:56 Quote
I thought that the spelling was Encyclopaedia Britannica

not Encyclopaedia Brittanica.

:)
Gareth Halfacree 23rd January 2009, 22:04 Quote
Yeah, well... See... It... Hmm. Whoops.
Aragon Speed 24th January 2009, 07:27 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLoney
I thought that the spelling was Encyclopaedia Britannica

not Encyclopaedia Brittanica.

:)
Does it really matter? :|
Skiddywinks 25th January 2009, 03:20 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gareth Halfacree
Yeah, well... See... It... Hmm. Whoops.

Excellent reply!

As for the topic at hand, I really can't see myself giving a toss. It costs more, and has a massive amount to catch up on. Wikipedia did it first, for free, and has got a massive headstart.
boiled_elephant 25th January 2009, 03:55 Quote
I like the move towards membership dependency, but it really is too late to be jumping on that bandwagon. There's no point trying to compete over the internet: without a market, prices and clear benefits people just stick with what they know - and six billion of us already know wikipedia.

The only thing wrong with wikipedia is that you can edit it without being logged into an account, though, which is just ridiculous. And some professional editors wouldn't be a bad thing, as long as their influence is partial rather than total. So maybe Britannica's efforts will give wikipedia some helpful ideas, if nothing else.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums

More About...