Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, has just launched Wikia Green, a project to build a community generated online resource that is home to the best information about green topics and issues. Based on the wiki platform, Wikia Green is an ever-evolving, community-focused repository of content that can be instantly molded or changed by anyone to reflect the most current topics of interest and latest information in the green arena.
“Today we are formally inviting anyone who is interested and knowledgeable about ecological issues to join us in creating something that we hope will become a valuable resource for society,” said Jimmy Wales, Co-founder and Chairman of the board, Wikia, Inc. “As the whole notion of ‘going green’ has exploded, so too has the volume of related information floating around out there on the Internet. It has come to a point where, for the average person looking for tips on how to lead a more sustainable lifestyle, it can be somewhat difficult to know where to start and Wikia Green is looking to be just that place.”
I invite you all to contribute. This is an important collective effort, that should help citizens, with finding the practical green information they need to make informed decisions.
La Marguerite 
Interesting in the light that I’ve argued myself in comments on this blog for the need of a “green wikipedia”, this site doesn’t do much to me.
It certainly doesn’t look like the next big thing.
Is there anyone excited about this?
On the other hand, being a wiki, the homepage and overall organization of the wiki could look radically different after more people have come on board. Then it may look more accessible, and more inviting to contribute.
It’s just a wiki. All it does is provide information.
I don’t think it’s lack of information which is the problem. It’s like Marguerite was saying a while back she wished there were carbon footprint information on products she buys. Well, sure, that could work well – after all, once they introduced dietary information on food products, the proportion of obese people dropped, right?
It’s the will to act which is lacking. Interested people can find stuff out without a dedicated wiki, or government brochure or whatever. They just have to be interested. And to be interested they have to have a reason – a motivation.
You hit it right on Kiashu. The extremely motivated people are already doing all that they can in their personal lives and won’t be deterred if it’s a little harder than it could be to find an information source. The question is what can be done to engage a the wide group of interested but not dedicated people. This group now exists in a substantial size — due to Al Gore, Katrina, or whatever — but often their engagement is limited to the more trivial like changing light bulbs. Some of them even drive their SUV to Whole Foods and then are all proud of themselves for choosing paper. There is an opportunity to be had there, the question is how.
I think the name is a bit generic to say the least. The thing with people who are / were on the ‘tip’ of environmental issues is they are on the ‘tip.’ the name (at this point) just sounds tired. Not sure what it could have been called but … (even wiki would be better than wikia). this is my opinion!
At Appropedia – http://www.appropedia.org – we’ve been working on a sustainability wiki for a couple of years, and are seeing results, in helping people be more sustainabile, through sharing their designs for biogas and greywater systems.
I see enormous potential, not only in consumer information, but in providing a place for people to collaborate on design and policy, develop useful how-tos, and do analysis so we know what actions really make a difference (e.g. think about food miles vs what mode of transport your food traveled by).
Meryn, I’m curious why you’ve argued the need for a “green wikipedia” – have you checked what’s out there already?
Josh, agree that the key is to engage that middle segment of relatively apathetic folks. The ones that do believe in climate change, and know something needs to be done, but have not yet. One strategy is to fore-go greening altogether and let it happen indirectly through other strategies. Taking advantage of economic crisis and personal pain at the pocketbook. And helping people adopt new, money saving solutions, that often happen to be green.
Chris, interesting that you bring up appropedia. Actually, Meryn is the one who introduced me to your site. Very, very well done.
Of course, the problem with all content oriented tools such as Wikipedia, and other wikis, is the difficulty in getting content. Using my own example, I find it interesting that I am a big provider of content for several blogging platforms including this one. I have not yet made the jump however to public wikis. Went on Green Wikia page, registered, etc. But have not yet put content in. For me it is a matter of time, and of what I am used to. Blogging is my favorite medium. I wonder if others are not like me?
Also, how much room is there for several public wikis such as Wikipedia, Wikia, Appropedia, etc . . . ? The issue of horizontality vs. verticality comes in. As with social networks, Facebook, yes, green social network, no. But Facebook with green overlay, maybe. In the case of Jim Wales ventures, I wonder if a better strategy would not be to stay within Wikipedia framework, which is where pretty much everybody goes already, and provide a substructure within it for the green inclined, where green pages can be gathered and the information within these pages could be organized according to end users need in green area.
Kyle,
Agree with you that the mainstream would not be interested in tool such as Wikia Green. As mentioned above, most people think of green as an afterthought, definitely a destination place for information. Hence, the importance of grabbing them where they are, and not expecting them to come to green site. Overlay strategy I have discussed before.
Chris,
I’ve done some research on green wikis some time ago, see http://delicious.com/meryn/green+wiki for some examples.
If you know any other resources, please share!
Of course I knew about Appropedia. The thing is, while Appropedioa is a wiki, it doesn’t come close to the frame that I have for a green Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not merely a wiki, it’s a reputable, respectable, popular destination. It’s a brand. It’s often your first stop, and often the only page you read after a google query. It’s authoritative. I think most people who use Wikipedia don’t even know what a wiki is.
Let’s look at some stats:
According to compete.com, Wikipedia has 50M-60M unique visitors per month. Wikia is doing 2M right now. Appropedia is at 20K. Treehugger, on the other hand, is moving around 700K. There are some huge differences in scale here.
I think Appropedia is certainly providing a great service to some, but right now, it doesn’t seem to me it’s evolving into something as important as one would expect from the sincerity of the situation we’re in. This could either indicate that it’s not possible to centralize this kind of information in a useful way, or that somehow the light hasn’t gone on for most of the potential beneficiaries of such a service.
For you, Appropedia may seem as something going right, and for some part it is. But I also see it as something going wrong. Where’s the *real* collective effort to get us to a sustainable society?
Again, it could be that we won’t see this collective effort expressed in the visitor stats for one big site. Maybe it will all happen on blogs, wikis, some marginalized networks on Ning, some Linkedin groups, and for all else phone and email, and endless inaccessible pdf reports by governments and consultancy companies. Somehow, I think we can do better than that.
I don’t claim to have the answers for this. I’m only sharing my observation.
Of course, my idea about the growth of Appropedia might be wrong. Maybe in about a year you’re a celebrity like Jimbo. I sure hope so. It would mean we would be a step closer to a sustainable world.
For Wikia Green, I hope the same. Maybe the Wikia name can help it gain more traction than Appropedia has right now. On the other hand, it would be a shame if there were two competing wikis in this space. It would hurt their combined effectiveness.
Have you been in contact with the creators of Wikia Green? Have you given thought about your positioning relatively to each other?
I want to stress that I very much respect the work your doing. My critique should be read in the light that I think our world just needs more. I know very well that as of today, practically nothing has come from me. I hope that my writing can help you improve on Appropedia, because you do have the best community right now, I think.
lamarguerite:
We have some ideas about getting content in a big way, but one of the big challenges is getting the word out. As Meryn noted, we aren’t celebrities like Jimbo. Appropedia is becoming well known and respected in the world of those seriously working on green and appropriate technology solutions, but it hasn’t been picked up by bloggers. (Starting our own blog will help – will let you know when that’s set up, very soon.)
Other challenges are technical – we have access to an enormous amount of information, that would increase the size of Appropedia many times over. But the challenge is converting that to wiki markup in a fast, clean way. Having a bunch more people working with us on technical development would help enormously.
“Went on Green Wikia page, registered, etc. But have not yet put content in. For me it is a matter of time, and of what I am used to. Blogging is my favorite medium. I wonder if others are not like me?”
Have you thought about using an open license? Then you could focus on blogging, knowing that your work has a longer lifespan if someone wants to put it in a wiki. (Dual licensing, CC-BY-SA and GFDL is the best option for now, until the compatibility issues are worked out.)
“Also, how much room is there for several public wikis such as Wikipedia, Wikia, Appropedia, etc . . . ? The issue of horizontality vs. verticality comes in.”
As for as they cover different kinds of material, it makes sense to have a different wiki. Otherwise it’s a fork, which is worth doing if there’s a good reason for it. And sometimes it’s hard to know if the fork was worth it until it’s played out.
“In the case of Jim Wales ventures, I wonder if a better strategy would not be to stay within Wikipedia framework, which is where pretty much everybody goes already, and provide a substructure within it for the green inclined, where green pages can be gathered and the information within these pages could be organized according to end users need in green area.”
I talked to Jimmy in 2007 about Appropedia and Wikimedia, and while he was very supportive of what we were doing, he explained that Wikimedia needs to be *absolutely* neutral, and even a pro-green stance doesn’t fit with that. I believe that’s the right stance.
It also makes sense to have a completely different site for such content (projects, tips, designs, howtos…) – people are already confused about what belongs in Wikipedia!
You mentioned social networks. Personally I prefer the networking I get on a site like Appropedia, over Facebook – even though MediaWiki still kind of sucks for networking, I’m connecting with people who are *doing real stuff*. And that’s awesome.
Thanks for your comments. Perhaps you’d like to blog on Appropedia?
Meryn:
“The thing is, while Appropedia is a wiki, it doesn’t come close to the frame that I have for a green Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not merely a wiki, it’s a reputable, respectable, popular destination. It’s a brand. It’s often your first stop, and often the only page you read after a google query. It’s authoritative. I think most people who use Wikipedia don’t even know what a wiki is.”
That’s the result of years of growth. If we’d applied this criteria to Wikipedia in 2003, it wouldn’t have looked so good. Appropedia has been growing in important ways, but perhaps our pageviews have plateaued lately. That can and will change, as we get the word out.
We’ve made very large increases in search ranking, especially on search terms in our subject area. Google “sustainability wiki” for example. And though it’s not widely known among the general public, it’s increasingly known among those most passionate about these things.
“There are some huge differences in scale here.”
Indeed, and it’s important to think about how we get there. Everything starts off small.
“I think Appropedia is certainly providing a great service to some, but right now, it doesn’t seem to me it’s evolving into something as important as one would expect from the sincerity of the situation we’re in. This could either indicate that it’s not possible to centralize this kind of information in a useful way, or that somehow the light hasn’t gone on for most of the potential beneficiaries of such a service.”
Definitely it’s that the light hasn’t gone on… or rather, it’s only partly on. People are using it and appreciating it, especially those that are doing stuff. (This is not a green consumer site so much as a site of solutions, big picture and small.) Getting smart, busy people to contribute to a wiki is a challenge.
A big step will be finding ways to convert content, as I mentioned above. This is moving slowly, but with some help from the technically-minded, we could have explosive growth in content in the coming months.
“For Wikia Green, I hope the same. Maybe the Wikia name can help it gain more traction than Appropedia has right now. On the other hand, it would be a shame if there were two competing wikis in this space. It would hurt their combined effectiveness.”
This is my concern also. However there is a somewhat different focus, so we’ll see how it works out.
“Have you been in contact with the creators of Wikia Green? Have you given thought about your positioning relatively to each other?”
We’ve had a number of talks. But in the end, although the community owns the site, we want the domain name, brand, and strategic decision-making to remain in the hands of a non-profit foundation, and didn’t find a way to get past that point of difference.
“I want to stress that I very much respect the work your doing. My critique should be read in the light that I think our world just needs more. I know very well that as of today, practically nothing has come from me. I hope that my writing can help you improve on Appropedia, because you do have the best community right now, I think.”
I figured you knew about Appropedia – I recognize you from Twitter. But I wanted to know your thinking, so thanks for your response. All such feedback is very welcome!
La Marguerite: I am a strong believer of both push and pull. Sure, there will not be close to 100% adoption of something until it is economically more attractive, there is a policy mandate, and/or both. But it’s important to realize how we get to such as position.
Take CFLs. When they first came out they were expensive and crappy. It was only eco-oriented people that bought them, and this provided the funds over years for CFL producers to improve the quality and reduce the cost. Now they are more economical, and in some cases being mandated through policy (by banning incandescents). Also important to note is that governments did not introduce that ban until there was an economically-competitive alternative.
Take hybrids. When they first came out they were not economically viable; people did not buy them for economic reasons. That is only happening today after years of improvements. The process continues: the Tesla Roadster does not cost so much because it is a sports car, it costs that much because that is the cost of such large battery capacity. But such early adopters are providing the funds for Tesla (and Tesla’s suppliers) to improve battery technology and reduce cost. One day it will be more economical.
If you look at what’s being discussed on Appropedia today, much of it is not yet economical if you consider your time, but it is important work that these early-adopters are doing; some of it will benefit us all some day. My point was that if we can find ways to bring more of the “concerned” people into more of these early-adopter activities, we can accelerate the point where it will become economically viable.
(Also, a lot of people are well off enough not to feel these price signals at all. People who bought SUVs a few years ago knew they would be paying more in gas than everyone else and didn’t care. Now that gas prices increased, some of them wish they chose otherwise, but certainly not all of them)
[…] Jimmy Wales Is Going All Green With Wikia Green « La Marguerite […]
Marguerite, I just want to say thanks for the post about Wikia Green, and thank you to everyone else for all the great discussion about the site. As this wiki is new and likely to evolve over time, all of the suggestions, ideas, pros, and cons are appreciated. If you have any other thoughts you’d like to share, would like to help shape the wiki to be better, or would like to collaborate in any way, please feel free to jump in on our discussion page about the green wiki: http://green.wikia.com/wiki/Green_Wiki_talk:Village_Pump
Mollyh, Wikia Green
Thanks all, for a great discussion. Keep up the good work, and also the dialogue 🙂
[…] to a collaborative platform. I started sharing some of my reasons in previous posts, here and here. In a […]
[…] 3. Contribute to a Green Wiki: We’ve written about Creative Citizen and Huddler Green Home, both of which offer wiki platforms where you can learn about green products and solutions as well as contributing to them. The latest player in this space is none other than Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales. Wikia Green is part of the for-profit network of “wiki communities on any topic people are passionate about.” We’re clearly passionate about green and green blogging. As of this writing, there are 714 articles, and it’s received coverage from top tech blogs Mashable and CNET, as well as the usual suspects: The Daily Green, EcoGeek, and La Marguerite. […]
[…] 3. Contribute to a Green Wiki: We’ve written about Creative Citizen and Huddler Green Home, both of which offer wiki platforms where you can learn about green products and solutions as well as contributing to them. The latest player in this space is none other than Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales. Wikia Green is part of the for-profit network of “wiki communities on any topic people are passionate about.” We’re clearly passionate about green and green blogging. As of this writing, there are 714 articles, and it’s received coverage from top tech blogs Mashable and CNET, as well as the usual suspects: The Daily Green, EcoGeek, and La Marguerite. […]
[…] 3. Contribute to a Green Wiki: We’ve written about Creative Citizen and Huddler Green Home, both of which offer wiki platforms where you can learn about green products and solutions as well as contributing to them. The latest player in this space is none other than Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales. Wikia Green is part of the for-profit network of “wiki communities on any topic people are passionate about.” We’re clearly passionate about green and green blogging. As of this writing, there are 714 articles, and it’s received coverage from top tech blogs Mashable and CNET, as well as the usual suspects: The Daily Green, EcoGeek, and La Marguerite. […]