Proposal:Comparison with printed encyclopaedias

From Strategic Planning
Status (see valid statuses)

The status of this proposal is:
Request for Discussion / Sign-Ups

Every proposal should be tied to one of the strategic priorities below.

Edit this page to help identify the priorities related to this proposal!

  1. Achieve continued growth in readership
  2. Focus on quality content
  3. Increase Participation
  4. Stabilize and improve the infrastructure
  5. Encourage Innovation


Wikipedia should be recognized as the best encyclopaedia. Therefore we should have a comparison with other encyclopaedias.


Wikipedia should have a list with all articles listed in other encyclopaedias, such as the Britannica, the Brockhaus, and so on. These articles should be linked with the respective wikipedia articles and then be compared. I propose some kind of red-yellow-green system for that.

Update: See Proposal_talk:Comparison_with_printed_encyclopaedias#Some_more_thought_about_it


Well, that should be all our motivation: to be better than the others ;-)

Key Questions

  • Will we be able to list all the articles of the other encyclopaedias? This could be supported by bots.
  • Will we be able to cope with the amount of articles?[1] [2]
  • Should we let other encyclopaedias dictate the focus, on which we lay our interest?

Potential Costs

  • Man power and eventually some programming
  • The costs of buying other encyclopaedias


  1. Size comparison in
  2. Size comparison in

Side note

I am Mad_melone from the German wikipedia, but I thought an English version of the proposal would create more interest. And please excuse some poor English I showed above.

Update: I now also have an account here --Mad melone 12:52, 17 August 2009 (UTC)


Do you have a thought about this proposal? A suggestion? Discuss this proposal by going to Diskussionsseite.

Want to work on this proposal?

  1. .. Sign your name here!