1. Home
  2. >>
  3. Latest
  4. >>
  5. Veropedia, the Wikipedia without errors

Veropedia, the Wikipedia without errors



Veropedia, the Wikipedia without errors


Is anyone still not convinced that Wikipedia is more reliable than the prestigious Encyclopedia Britannica? The solution to improve its authority does not lie in algorithmic tricks or in schisms that leave room only for academic experts, as happened for that Citizendium by Larry Sanger. It is quite identifiable, Slashdot points out, in a project like Veropedia, that it fits upstream of the free encyclopedia . A project that in a certain sense distorts the pillars on which Wikipedia stands.

Veropedia, thanks to the low labor of long-time Wikipedians, aims to skim the free encyclopedia , to extract the best contributions placed among the edits, to fix the definitions in non-editable articles, free from any request for citation, from any copyrighted image, from links that direct to empty web pages. Articles that before being republished on Veropedia are reviewed by unspecified experts, who should suggest to the Wikipedian editors the introduction of changes and refinements, contributing to improve Wikipedia itself .

Another difference from the free encyclopedia is the nature for profit by Veropedia: the recycled articles from Wikipedia and VerOficati are flanked by contextual advertisements, the proceeds of which will be used to finance the project, and even, one of the participants explains, could be reinvested in donations to Wikipedia itself.

No reference by the founders to the possibility that the independence of Veropedia articles can be undermined by the will of investors, no reference to the fact that Veropedia not only positions itself as a tool offered to learners netizens, but actually sells their attention to advertisers, upsetting the values ​​on which the encyclopedia is based free.

We are only at the beginning, Veropedia has less than three thousand entries in English: a trifle compared to the two million articles of en.Wikipedia. But Nicholas Carr did not hesitate to comment, disheartened, regarding this layering of the free encyclopedia. It would not be a truly integrated and collaborative effort, whatever the contributors say: Wikipedia sows while Veropedia is concerned simply with reaping the best fruits and reselling them on the market.

Gaia Bottà