|Keep up to date with what is going on at the alternate Wikipedia, Citizendium, with our rolling reports of the happenings there. We report, you decide which entries are worthy of thumbs up and down! If you are contributing for the first time please read the instruction manual. For older entries, have a look at the archives.
What is going on?
Place new items at the top.
What is going on?
|6||Well, the Approvals Committee remembered they exist. Nearly two weeks after the deadline their own proposal for their creation set up for them, they actually bothered to vote on last month's articles. At time of posting, they still haven't closed the voting or moved on yet. But does it even matter? They're a rubber stamp run by people who clearly don't care. We can point out their stupidity, but the site's basically dead, just mysteriously well funded.|
|12||Citizendium has more doubled their number of active users! They're now at 13, up from 6 a few weeks ago. Could Larry's "explosion of growth" finally be here?|
|12||No edits on March 3, only two edits on March 7, and only one edit so far for March 8. Also, only five users have made an edit in the past 7 days, all but one of which were by Peter, Richard, Hayford, and John.|
|22||In an unromantic turn of events, there were no edits on Valentine's Day. A few days later, John Stephenson fully protected three Approvals Committee-related pages indefinitely because "all Committee members are sysops".|
|22||On the other hand, their "In the News" bar hasn't seemed to have been updated in almost a year.|
|22||There were no edits on February 11, and only two for February 12. The good news is that the other days of February were quite active. The bad news is that with all but six edits (courtesy of Anthony and Gareth Leng) in the last week being made by just three editors (Peter, Hayford, and Martin), it remains to be seen if the "glory" days will ever return. Maybe the Approval system wasn't so bad of an idea after all: at least it gives them an excuse to make at least a few edits a day.
|22||Well, let's see if the CZ Approvals Committee is a rubber stamp. They're evaluating the currently-approved Jane Addams article, which is quite a bit less in-depth compared to the Wikipedia version, and contains lots of dense, difficult phrasing, poor organization, and facts thrown together.
|22||Wikipedia is often accused of a perceived bias towards popular culture but the latest addition to Citizendium beats that. Any student wanting to research full moons will surely be disappointed.|
|12||They're going forwards with the approval committee idea! ...After two weeks of nothing happening, because why try to be timely? And on which subject, they plan to do an article every two weeks. Will Citizendium see a burst of activity, breathing new life into it? [Spoiler: No.]|
|12||While perhaps understandable, there were no edits for the three days from 24 to 26 December.|
|32||Seven years since the last edit, the remnants of Citizendium change the introduction to "Fire". What did the expert-guided, real-named Citizendians of old have as their introduction, holy writ written by the God-King Larry Sanger himself?
- Fire is very hot and bright, and it consumes what it burns. This much we learn in childhood. Flames seem to be weird, mysterious things, constantly moving, and so, like water (which, interestingly, can put out a fire), campfires or fireplace flames are fascinating to watch. But the flames of a fire are simply a hot, glowing gas, and not, contrary to a common belief, plasma.
|12||Looks like Citizendium might be getting its first new editor in years as John Stephenson nominates Hayford Peirce. Looks like they might be able to get two editors for Anthony's 3-member Approval Committee Proposal.|
|22||Citizendium has a new user for the first time since July! Abigail Wilcox was approved on 6 December but hasn't made any contributions yet. |
|12||They have six active users, only one of which is an editor, but... they're moving forwards with Anthony's proposal! Even though they have no idea how to pass a proposal. Even though citable articles are "supposed to be unchangeable (and immovable) for ever" and they have no real idea what to do if an error's found. Even though no-one in their right minds would cite fucking Citizendium. By the way, you know how Wikipedia handles citations? You're encouraged to link to the current version you're looking at. The wiki software is designed to make this easy.|
|22||Can YOU solve the mystery of why they can't see changes before 21 August? If you do, they'll be able to implement Anthony's stupidly bureaucratic proposal for changing the charter, er... not-charter.
By the way. that proposal has been sitting undiscussed since January, until Anthony remembered it existed this week. So expect any further discussion of it to be in mid-2018, or the heat death of the universe.|
|12||There were no edits on 19-20 November, or 24 November. And they were doing so well for a while there. (Though much worse than this before that.)|
Activity seems to have picked up again this month, with an average of about six edits per day! However, over the last seven days, all edits but one (courtesy of Martin Wyatt) have been by just three users: Phil Hermanns, Peter Jackson, and Hayford Peirce (the latter with just two edits), with Jackson being the only editor on October 22 and 24. Will the time come when we'll have a week with only a single editor?
Also, it must be hard to have a running site when all of your Moderators/Constables are inactive.
Citizendium site has been unreachable for the last 24 hours (4-5 October 2017).
ETA: It's back online.
|22||The last few days have seen a flurry of activity, averaging about 5 edits per day!|
|22||No edits 20, 21, or 22 September, for another three-and-a-half day editing hiatus. We're waiting on four, CZ! You can do it! In fact... just never edit again.|
|32||There were no edits on July 22, and 23, and the rest of the past 10 days were mainly devoted to editing articles on English history and the English language. Whatever happened to being a new "compendium of knowledge"? Might as well turn Citizendium into a Wiki about the United Kingdom.|
|22||No edits on July 3, 4, 8, 9, and 11, and only one edit each for July 1, 2, 6, 7, and 10. The only edit to an actual article so far this month, rather fittingly, was to their article on Death. I've seen Wikipedia WikiProjects more active than the whole site.|
|22||Maybe we should just post about the days they do edit now? No edits on the 19th or 20th again. Apparently, this is how Citizendium dies.|
|32||...And they do it again. No edits on June 11 or 12, nor 15 or 16. We shall see if there's an edit on the 17th. ETA: No edits on the 17th either, making this the first three-day stretch. ETA 2: Two words (sort of...) and a bracket were added on the 18th, which is... slightly better than the nothing of previous days. |
|22|| They seem to have been making some effort to cover the recent British election - indeed, it's one of the very few articles that aren't dictionary-based that have been edited at all in the last year or so. Given the disorganised mess they ended up with, that's rather sad. Thank goodness for gentle expert guidance, eh?|
|22|| Only three total edits in the five days from June 4th-8th, with none on the 6th or 7th. For whatever reason, the website is loading at a glacial pace, probably further discouraging any editing (or reading) from taking place at all.|
|22|| It used to be that we mentioned when there was only one edit in a day. Later, there started to be occasional days with no edits. However, in the last week, there were no edits whatsoever on 27 May, 29 May, or 2 June.img And the remaining days only have two editors that do anything. Pity they finally got their finances together just in time to die from lack of interest..|
|22||Is it even worth mentioning that 27 May had no edits whatsoever? It's not like the edits being made on other days are particularly significant or interesting or anything. About the only article of any significance getting any sort of updates is 2017 United Kingdom general election, which doesn't even rise to the level of a school essay.|
|32||The talk page for Citizendium's article on Holocaust denialimg is currently dedicated to desperate attempts to claim Holocaust denier David Irving wasn't really a Holocaust denier, because he admits some small number of Jews may have been killed. But it's alright, there's "no such thing as a reliable source" so no evidence could possibly prove he is.
Meanwhile, the articleimg is more focused on criticising people for calling him a Holocaust denier than discussing his horrible racist views.|
|22||Citizendium raked in $587.56 in December! However, according to their statistics page, at time of writing they have 10 "active" users, a.k.a. those who have edited anything in the last month. Someone has deep pockets for their hobby.|
|32||Should whatever-they've-decided-to-call-their-admins have the power to block vandals and spammers without going through a lengthy bureaucratic process beforehand? They're considering the possibility, but... bureaucracy does give them an erection, so...img ETA: Apparently, if they do block a user incorrectly, there may be no actual way to appeal, as they never bothered to set up an e-mail or process for that purpose. Because the functional parts of a bureaucracy aren't the ones they're worried about over there.|
|22||Now that they've given up the charter, how to handle motions? Anthony suggests a simple and easy method:img "Any member can propose a motion and two weeks can be allowed for discussion and possible editing. A one-week call can be put forward to find out how many members would be willing to vote on that motion. If 2/3 of the members who were active in the six months prior to one month before the motion was submitted indicated their willingness to vote on the motion, BallotBin can count the votes of that group. The motion passes if 2/3 of the voters vote yes if and only if 2/3 of the members who agreed to vote did so. Otherwise the motion fails." Peter likes it, but suspects "RationalWiki would consider it excessively bureaucratic." Yep.|
|12||Now, in its death throes, Citizendium suddenly has an Official Manual of Style, replacing a provisional draft (because Ro Thorpe says it's official now). Fun fact: He doesn't know that MediaWiki doesn't care about capitalization of the first letter, so linking w:the Beatles is just as easy as linking without the definite article, or with a capitalised one.|
|22||Election results! No, not that election, although the Orange One got an additional line to his article. The Citizendium election, in which nine people voted to basically repeal the charter and replace it with a set of basic principles. What a waste of effort, that charter was. Oh, and they were supposed to pick a new Managing Editor but nobody ran.|
|22||Infobitt is dead. It died sometime after June 23 (which is the date of the last screenshot on the Wayback Machine). Based on tweets by a handful of people, it appears it died around August or September. The last top news story shown predicted "First Women President - Carly Fiorina".|
|22||If Donald Trump becomes the U.S. President and incites the nuclear war that ends us all, likely the only record of him on Citizendium will be a tiny stub article. As of right now, it is a single sentence, created by a single edit on June 8th, 2016 after he became the presumptive Republican nominee. Other "current event" articles remain almost as pathetic, except for a halfway-respectable summary of Brexit.|
July 2016 to ???
|22||The election over, Citizendium goes back to its regularly scheduled inactivity and slow death.|
|22||Election results! 11 participants. Voters approved a referendum requiring a fully independent Election Committee with at least two members, so they may not be able to hold elections much longer. "Constables" are now "Moderators". An attempt to recreate an Editor-in-Chief with broad powers to try to spur CZ's growth received a majority of votes, but failed to clear 2/3rds and thus was not approved. So, pretty much the status quo all around.|
|32||In a moment of lucidity, a proposal is finally made to close the project, without even holding an election about it. It is met with some resistance, and a vow to make the site mobile-friendly, which will of course fix all their problems. Stay tuned...|
|12|| Anthony Sebastian's obsession with the verified real names policy continues: In Referendum 5, he proposes an Editor-in-Chief that will have sweeping powers to improve the image of Citizendium! Literally the only restriction placed upon him? "[T]o not eliminate the verified real names policy, or to modify it to include anonymous or pseudonymous names."|
|12|| Here's a question: If Referendum 4 passes, increasing the number of people needed to hold an election, how long until the site discovers they lack enough people to have the election in the first place?|
|12|| Citizendium may never have articles on many important historical figures, works of art, and military campaigns. But thanks to the efforts of one very industrious new author, it will have everything you could possibly want to know about New Mexico state wrestling, sorted into handy tables.|
|32||Following in the footsteps of the very successful Citizendium, you too can have your web project improved for the bargain price of $2000 courtesy of Larry Sanger.|
February - March 2016
|22||Nothing of any interest happened since early December.|
|12||It's worth noting that Ro Thorpe, who is a very prolific contributor to Wikipedia, is almost single-handedly propping up Citizendium from an editing standpoint, by editing the catalogs of words that only Citizendium cares to keep. He has made 95 of the 157 edits from 10/05-11/04 and on many days is the only contributor.|
|12||Only four new accounts have been created since the start of 2015. Number of edits? Zero, zero, two, and four. The most recent account to actually start editing properly was over a year ago, and was blocked soon after over a "registration/account issue"img. Probably failed to mail Citizendium his driver's licence, passport, and credit card in time.<ref>Aside: Only talk page comment of this indef blocked user: "[...] You've made a friend on the Council."|
|12||There were no edits on October 17th, but the next day... Citizendium welcomed its first new author since April! Welcome to a dead wiki!|
|12|| If you were one of the 13 people who allegedly voted in Citizendium's June election, you can rest easy knowing that the bureaucracy still works, and your ballot was destroyed 90 days later.|
|12||No edits on September 5th, 16th, 18th... Starting to become a regular occurrence. In between two of those days, on September 17th, the new financial report showed the same exact (small) amount of donations as in the previous month.|
|12||New Citizendium project: "Wanted articles". Prediction: Just as useful as every other project.|
|12||No edits of any kind on August 5th, a first in Citizendium's history. Followed soon after by no edits on the 9th.|
|12||Infobitt has run out of money, and Larry asks for support to keep the project afloat. "I’ve let the programmers go, and I’m looking for a job myself."|
|12||After over two years of waiting, Pompeii has finally been approved! The first approval since August 2012.|
|12||The election results are in!img ...does anyone really care besides the thirteen people who voted (not that any total adds up to more than twelve...) About the only moral is that no referendum, no matter how bureaucratic and over the top, won't pass.|
|32||For the first time in Citizendium history, not a single female candidate has been considered for nomination by the June 6 deadline.|
|12||Referendum #2:img "In the past, people have actually talked about not using real names here! Let's stop this heresy by making sure debate is well and truly stifled! Thinking outside the box to fix the complete lack of interest in our site? Bah! It's HERESY! HERESY I SAY!" ETA: Managing Editor Anthony Sebastian appears after a two-week absenceimg to support the measure,img making his eleventh and twelth edits for the year in the process.|
|12||Latest Ed Poor "bitts" on Citizendium sister-site Infobitt include "President Obama blames our current malaise on everything except for his own failed policies." and "Tammy Bruce accuses liberals of deliberately creating an illiterate underclass who can't help but vote for the failed liberal policies that keep them down." Fair and balanced reporting, courtesy of Infobitt and the Washington Times.|
CZ council members' edits, July 2014 to March 2015.
Continuing the Ed Poor saga on Sanger's other site, Infobitt, here's one from today:
- Tea Party bigwig Judson Phillips said: Many conservatives are shocked to discover tolerance isn’t what the homosexual rights movement wants. It wants tyranny.
- There is no tolerance for religious beliefs from the homosexual movement nor the radical left (i.e., the Democratic Party). If you dare to stand up for your religious beliefs, you will be bankrupted.
- American Christianity and the Party of Treason are now on a collision course. Only one will survive.
- The Christians are tolerant while the Party of Treason, the name real Americans have for the Democrats, wants complete obedience to the leftist orthodoxy.
It's one of the top stories in the "Opinion" section. Source? Some mad tea partier.
|12||As Citizendium moves ever further towards ruin and irrelevance, Anthony Sebastian wants us to know that Citizendium is STILL being set up on the new server, and to "treat it as a beta for now".|
|12||Old, but well-hidden: Citizendium began to try to move to two servers, and were paying for both from September 2013... which makes this comment from Anthony Sebastianimg rather horrifying: "After a long delay, the Citizendium server migration is actively being worked on as of October 29, 2014. Barring too much difficulty, it is anticipated to be done within a week or three." - if it wasn't being worked on before, what the hell was happening?|
- Progress on allowing people to sign up for the site, at least theoretically avoiding an inevitable decline? Fuck all.
- Progress on configuring the site after the hosting update? Questionable.img
- Progress on not being a laughably awful encyclopedia? Bwahahahaha!
- Progress on shittily cataloguing differences between the U.K. and America? The most commonly edited pages of the last month appear to be British and American English and its talk page.
|12||Now that Citizendium's hosting costs have reduced to just over a quarter what they were, Citizendium should be doing pretty well, right? Wrong.img|
|12||Sanger is good at a sort of goalpost-moving, bait-and-switch article. For example, in his latest blogpost on Infobitt, he provides a passionate defense of citizen journalism, and then presents Infobitt as the answer (though what he's really done is write an argument for Wikinews). Frankly, posting things to your Facebook wall is probably better citizen journalism than Infobitt, which is just power point slides based on news articles. Plus, more people will see it...|
|12||The optimism of accepting new accounts again from the 15th has been replaced with "less optimismimg". Given how Citizendium works, "later" probably means 2016. Because what wiki needs contributors, right? Have we mentioned that there were two edits total, one to a talk page, by the same person, on the 19th and 20th?|
|12||For those who haven't created an account on Infobitt to gawk at the awful, here's one of the "bitts" - his term for a unit of news, or, "news", more accurately - that Sanger is trumpeting: . Note that it's A. rather strongly biased (let's put the Republican talking point riiight at the top...), B. disorganized, C. trivial make-news, D. has little connection to the underlying science, and especially note E. Sanger is an idiot.|
|12||Citizendium has been closed to new accounts since the upgrade. The new date to start accepting account requests is the 15th January; and even that is considered as "optimismimg". This is, by the way, the secondimg time it was pushed back.|
|12||A new record low for Citizendium. Only one editimg in a 24 hour period (31 December 2014), and it's not on a mainspace article either.|
|12||Infobitt now lets anyone set up an account. It's basically a headline and bullet point sentences about the event, the "bits" of the title. If you love Powerpoint slides, and would rather get everything as disjointed, unorganized facts on them, you'll love Infobitt.|
|12||Without Darren propping it up, Citizendium's finances look dire: In October, they took $79 out of $431.85 expenses, with only $1,194.04 left in the bank afterwards.|
|12||Serious effort has finally begun on the server migration, with the replacement of ancient mailing lists being, apparently, the biggest remaining obstacle. One ponders how those thousands of dollars spent paying for old servers (by someone looking for a job) could otherwise have been spent.|
|37||It looks as if Christine Bush has gathered up her toys and gone home.|
|12||After days of tension in the forums, a commentimg which questioned Citizendium policy has apparently hit a raw nerve|
|12||August 23rd will be the one-year anniversary of the approval of the plan to move to one server. Said plan is now entering its 12th month of being implemented. At least in July they avoided paying a $12 monthly bank surcharge for the first time since last October. (Darren Duncan has so far paid $3,199 in "special extra donation[s] to cover the cost of the old servers".)|
|12||To be fair to Christine Bush, though, the point she made before resigningimg - that she was asked to evaluate editors, and over a week later still didn't have permissions necessary to do that job - is both typical of Citizendium screwups and a good reason to give up on Citizendium.|
|12||It looks as if Meg Ireland has in effect told CZ "Screw you guys...I'm goin' home" after she failed to win election to a Council seat. And a tight contest at that, with a whopping 8 votes cast!|
|-12||Upvote for Christine Bush, downvote for Meg Ireland, neutralvote for goat.|
|12||Back in September, Citizendium started to move to cheaper hosting. This means there'd be a brief period where they'd be paying two hosting bills at once... or, if you're completely incompetent (as they are), over six months and counting.|
|12||Much of the very little activity on Citizendium is focused around the new Paranormal Subgroup. One of the contributors is Craig Weiler, saying "If I am convinced that we will not be running into a wall of irrational skepticism I will start notifying people of this alternative to the clusterf*ck that is Wikipedia and with more contributors, the subjects are likely to get more even handed treatment." Given Citizendium's history, skepticism seems unlikely.|
- ↑ Take this paragraph:
- Addams' construction of womanhood involved daughterhood, sexuality, wifehood, and motherhood. In both of her autobiographical volumes, [...] Addams's gender constructions parallel the Progressive-Era ideology she championed. In A New Conscience and an Ancient Evil (1912) she dissected the social pathology of sex slavery, prostitution and other sexual behaviors, among working class women in American industrial centers during 1890-1910. Addams's autobiographical persona manifests her ideology and supports her popularized public activist persona as the "Mother of Social Work," in the sense that she represents herself as a celibate matron, who served the suffering immigrant masses through Hull-House, as if they were her own children. Although not a mother herself, Addams became the "mother to the nation," identified with motherhood in the sense of protective care of her people.
- ↑ Not counting election and test accounts.
- ↑ In case it gets deleted: "As the Approved Articles system is clearly not working due to the lack of active Editors, the Council is asked to consider what can be done to remedy this situation, for instance, by abolishing the Approved Article status altogether, or by making the requirements for the appointment of Editors less stringent while still ensuring that they are reliable."
- ↑ If you click on it, you also get:
...But that's not what members just browsing the site see.
- Clinton wrote an article honoring Elizabeth Warren as one of the center-left magazine Time's "100 Most Influential People."
- Some liberal activists have protested Clinton's presidential candidacy and urged Warren to run. Warren has repeatedly denied that she will run and even disavowed one of the draft campaigns.
- Clinton has got advice from Warren "several times" in the last year, a source with knowledge of Clinton's plans told CNN in February, a sign of how important Warren's wing of the Democratic party is.