|
|
|
Main Menu
|
|
Sections
Meta
Talkback
Downloads
Information
|
|
|
|
|
![[parent]](https://images.physicslibrary.org/images/uparrow.png) Viewing Message
|
|
|
| ``Re: Critical mass''
by bci1 on 2009-01-24 17:14:58 |
|
| Hi, Jussi:
As you know, the critical mass is determined not so much by the great number of users, but the number of consistently contributing users, as well as the quality of the contributions posted. Please consider the following, current data:
1.PM seems to have close to one hundred consistently contributing
users out of a population close to 23,000 members; it also close to 8,500 entries and over 14,500 concepts;
2. Wikipedia has close to 50 to 100 users in the Physics Project group, and also maybe over 500 contributors in the Mathematics Project group, but without the advantages of the Noosphere code (when id doesn't run into "unexpected errors"), also with substantial funds received;
3. PlanetPhysics has close to 500 users, but only 20 consistently contributing members at this point. However, it does have over 300 entries and over 500 concepts in 2009 in spite of the remaining problem with the search engine at PlanetPhysics. Because the Encyclopedia entry list is available for a quick search this is not however as serious a drawback as one might think. However, physics-
unlike `pure' mathematics- has numerous web archives available that are extremely well manned, maintained, and quite well `peer-reviewed', both in the US and Europe; not much unacceptable stuff gets into the physics archives, and if it does it is efficiently removed.
Hope you'd find these facts and my comments of interest in the context of your question about critical mass.
Best,
bci1 |
| | [ reply | up | top ] | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
