User:Peter Schmitt/Position

General remarks
Relying on a single source for information would be dangerous. There must not be a monopoly for an online encyclopedia. It is crucial that there is competition.
 * The Citizendium has the potential to be a competitor of WP.

But: CZ may not try to directly compete with WP. WP was the first, it is the biggest, it is the best known. It has the most contributors (and the most users, too). The chances to beat WP in Google hits is minimal. Even after a very successful campaign to recruit new Citizens,
 * CZ will not be a match for WP measured by resources.

Thus CZ has to try to gain reputation (evolve a brand) and to establish itself as a site where to go directly, bypassing search engines. For this purpose, CZ must not imitate WP, but has to be recognizably different from its competitors. Consequently, To hope for a fast growth -- as fast as that of WP -- is likely to be an illusion.
 * CZ has to (mainly) strive for quality, not for quantity.

Upcoming tasks
There is much to do. All policies have to be reviewed. Many suggestions and problems have been discussed in the forum and on talk pages. All of them have to be considered, many of them deserve to be realized. But: There is TOO much to do! We shall not be able to handle everything at once. Thus, Else there is the danger that nothing will be accomplished.
 * when starting now to (re)form CZ it is important to choose priorities carefully and to be patient.

In order to reach its ambitious goals, CZ will need the cooperation of all Citizens. While it is the responsibility of the officials (EC,MC,ME, and Ombudsman, who will have to closely cooperate) to guarantee the reliability of all content and that the fundamental principles are observed, they will need the support of all Citizens.
 * All officials will have to work in close contact with all interested Citizens.

We are lucky to finally have a Charter on that CZ can be built. However,
 * the Charter needs some revisions.

Content
For a statement on content issues see the statement for EC candidature.

For me the guiding principles are:

While there are, of course, more important and less important topics, it is up to the authors what they choose to contribute as long as it is correct and reliable material presented in an adequate form. (Naturally, CZ is far away from the goal to include "everything" and will be so for a long time.)
 * CZ is an encyclopedia for the whole body of knowledge. (I am an inclusionist.)

Guidelines are necessary in order to provide a coherent structure and to guarantee that CZ remains usable. However, and allow differences in style and the approach used.
 * guidelines should also be simple and kept to a minimum

The term "neutrality" is controversial, it is loaded with meaning such as the WP interpretation. but must not shy away from a firm standpoint if justified by "expert judgement". (This, however, may not lead to totally exclude non-mainstream opinions.) As for the much disputed problem of pseudoscience and "fringe": Whether one likes them or not, these topics exist and are part of what is discussed in the public. Therefore, there is a place for them on CZ and they may (and finally should) be covered, but -- of course! -- in an adequate form (and to an adequate extent). Nonsense has to be called "nonsense", unproven claims have to be labelled as "unproven", and unlikely or speculative theories have to be presented as such.
 * I prefer to say that CZ has to be honest and fair,

Major tasks for the EC will be


 * to find a practicable method of quality control in general, as well as
 * to reorganize, in particular, the approval process and the handling of approved articles
 * to develop a system of classification for articles (subject classification),
 * to organize cooperation of Citizens (workgroups)