Groupprops:Groupprops versus Citizendium
This is an article comparing the Groupprops wiki against:Citizendium
First, the similarities
Groupprops and the Citizendium do share a number of similarities. They are both wiki-based, and aim to provide better free online content. Both are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribute-Share Alike License, and both require logins to edit.
Differences in article structure
In Citizendium
Citizendium is a fairly new effort so it is hard to currently say how the structure of their mathematics article will stabilize, but a current look suggests the following aspects:
- Citizendium articles make heavy use of subpaging
- Citizendium articles adopt a didactic prose
- Citizendium articles generally tend to set the context for all visitors, with starting lines like In mathematics, ...
- The articles go through many stages of editing and approval by the [[cz::Category:Mathematics Workgroup|Citizendium Mathematics workgroup before being treated given the status of approved article on Citizendium
- Citizendium does not make use of categories at all to organize content, apart from the use of workgroups
In Groupprops
In Groupprops, articles are published instantly, often in an erroneous state, and there is no mechanics for article approval. This may change when Groupprops reaches alpha or beta status; currently we do not have the resources to approve or check articles thoroughly. Thus, there are more dangers of mistakes.
Groupprops adopts a far less didactic prose (Groupprops articles rarely ever have a general introduction), and sets less of the context, but, as of now, contains a whole lot more of information on group theory and topics in group theory. It is unclear whether the Citizendium will reach this quantity of content.
We also make significantly heavier use of categories.
Some illustrative examples
For instance, compare group (on groupprops) against group (on Citizendium).
Differences in organization
As mentioned above, Citizendium is strongly against using categories for organizing its articles. On the other hand, Groupprops makes extensive use of categories. Our use of categories is based on the what is paradigm rather than the more general relational paradigm of Wikipedia, which may be what Citizendium is trying to avoid.
Differences in editing
Citizendium has a large mathematics workgroup, and individual articles are usually edited based on discussion at the talk pages of the articles. Groupprops is currently used by very few people, and regularly edited by only one person, so there is little of a discussion element here.
Differences in policy
General-purpose versus specific-purpose
Citizendium aims to be the world's most trusted knowledge base. Groupprops certainly wants to be a trusted knowledge base, but in a far more limited realm: group theory and related areas, and it is aimed at a far smaller audience.
Neutrality policy
Citizendium has a neutrality policy that is reminiscent of Wikipedia's NPOV. Groupprops follows no neutrality policy and adheres to a specific point of view within mathematics, often without attributing these views to their adherents.