Critics of Everipedia have covered a wide variety of topics and themes about the nature of Everipedia.

From the comments made on social media networks to the articles written about the website, Everipedia has collected some of the main criticisms and responded to them all on this page.

Disclaimer: This page solely attempts to clarify any criticisms or concerns people may have about Everipedia's platform.

This page will not discuss criticisms made to other wiki platforms like Wikipedia. ( There is already a page for that.)

Wikis have an distinct advantage from other knowledge projects and institutions, because scholars are both consumers and providers of valuable information.

For years, people have relied on Wikipedia for this information.

Their founders (and community) envisioned "a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge."

^[3] This was a huge mission, and in return they have become a huge success.

People have contributed great amounts of scholarly work to the site, and the vast majority of Internet users consider it one of the most valuable websites on the Internet.

While everyone has gained immense amounts of knowledge from this wonderful non-profit and one of the most important websites on the web today, we at Everipedia believe there is still more we can do to enhance the future of knowledge.

In essence, we want to do to Wikipedia what Wikipedia did to Britannica.

In a world where knowledge is growing at an exponential rate, there is one thing that was not mentioned in Wikipedia's vision that we believe is necessary for the future of the Internet: people.

Despite everyone with Internet access using Wikipedia on a daily basis, a very small percentage of people actually know anyone who actively contributes information to it.

While it has become a household name, the site is still one-sided in terms of the ratio of users who read the site versus the ratio of users who add information to it.

We considered this disparity an opportunity to create an even more decentralized and democratized project, where everyone could participate in a more modernized, easy-to-use platform with incentives for everyone in our community to improve the base Britannica and Wikipedia helped build.

First and foremost, we believe there is nothing inherently wrong with being a for-profit company.

What matters is whether your motives for making that profit are justified.

At Everipedia, we are experimenting with different for-profit models to help sustain the platform more effectively.

Wikipedia has a model that works for them: they ask for donations every year to maintain the website.

Secondly, it would be intellectually dishonest for Everipedia (or any other company for that matter) to say it is a neutral source of information.

Having said that, we do want to emphasize that this platform and community values input regardless of political input.

We aim to be as objective as we can based on the information retrieved by our community.

Everipedia's stance is that content created by all companies have biases, just like people.

To maintain our integrity, we want to have the ability to recognize and correct those biases in an open forum.

Everipedia's features help the community learn and rapidly improve the content on its platform.

Not only does it have a Discussion section on every wiki, but it also has a Discussion section for everylinkadded to that particular wiki.

With every added link, the the community can edit the caption, upvote/downvote, and comment on its accuracy.

Everipedia is a decentralized platform with the intention to be as objective as possible.

We welcome anyone who is interested in learning more information, questioning that information, and understanding the multiple perspectives of that information.

Acknowledging that today's society is skeptical and critical of the content they consume (as it should be), we openly suggest that you participate within the platform to find out first-hand how inclusive the platform is.

This has not been discussed at the mainstream level, but there is currently a black market of paid Wikipedia editors on the Internet.

Wikipedia has been transparent about this and considers it conflict-of-interest editing to 1) create pages for hundreds (sometimes) thousands of dollars, and 2) create pages who aren't "notable" enough on their platform.

From Everipedia's understanding of Wikipedia's rules and regulations, this is mainly out of concern that the page's contents will be "too promotional."

Consequently, this has fueled a booming underground world of Wikipedia editors for hire.

They maintain good standing and use their expertise to build pages for people and/or their startups to gain more recognition.

^[5]

While this has been profusely condemned on Wikipedia, Everipedia takes a different stance on this.

In their efforts to create a more inclusive platform, Everipedia does not agree with the notion of ' Notability Guidelines.

' They believe any rules of that sort should not exist, as it creates more subjectivity about who or what deserves a page.

If a business has not had a lot of press coverage yet, Everipedia's platform can be used to create a publicly-editable information source about it.

If a person not in Wikipedia wants their own in-depth biography, Everipedia's platform can be used for that.

One of the core values of the wiki site is that everyone deserves a platform.

In fact, one might argue that some people and businesses deservemorerecognition, as they are not as well-known.

In addition, if someone does not have the time to write a page, or feels weird about creating a bio about themselves, there is Everipedia+. With this service, a well-trusted editor within our community interviews people with questions about their personal life and/or their business. In return, they pay a fee for the work done, with the editor receiving commission from Everipedia.

We do not see this service any less ethical than someone writing a press release for a company or person, or hiring a publicist to get more press coverage.

Some may disagree, but we believe it coincides well with being an inclusive platform.

Since Everipedia+ articles are editable in a wiki platform, just like any other article, a broad range of views on a growing business or public figure can still be represented.

At one point, Everipedia did generate revenue through advertising.

Several people have noted this on social media and forum posts, particularly (but not limited to Wikipedia editors).

^[6]

It is true that Everipedia once ran ads on the site.

^[7] While we can understand people's frustrations, we believe there are a few misconceptions about what Everipedia is about.

In lieu of the traditional methods of generating revenue, we are currently in the early stages of developing new methods that we believe will improve the user experience.

One prime example of this is our verification package, Everipedia+, where we create wikis for people actively looking to have their wiki created.

In return, they get a blue checkmark (similar to Facebook, Instagram, etc.) and page maintenance.

To prevent the page from being vandalized, only trusted editors and staff will be able to edit the page.

To provide context, in April 2017, Everipedia officially started experimenting with a concept called Everipedia News .

This section of the site was dedicated to pages where our community aggregated information about trending current events.

The goal was to create a section of the site where people could read and edit "evidence-based journalism, cited and fact-checked by editors in real-time."

^[9]

At the time, Everipedia's community believed that, since the site is a wiki and all our pages are dynamic, Everipedia could segment the tabloid news articles by aggregating the information and turning them into useful, in-depth pages for the long run.

Part of Everipedia's vision as a wiki is to deregulate and decentralize content.

There are only two rules on Everipedia:

Because anyone can make a page about anything, one of the challenges we continue to face is similar to ones that other decentralized platforms have: fact-checking, vandalism, doxxing, spamming, etc.

While Everipedia's community members understand why Everipedia has received this label, it does not fit at all with Everipedia's overall vision nor do we believe it represents Everipedia well.

Everipedia has always been a wiki platform / tech company first, and an online community second.

After experimenting with Everipedia News, people began perceiving Everipedia as neither one and started perceiving us as something with which we heavily disagreed: a media company.

We do not describe ourselves as a "media company," as we do not publish information that has not been published already.

In the past, certain Everipedia pages with inaccurate content have been spread and have received a lot of traction online.

^[10] On a positive note, because everyone has access to Everipedia's Recent Activity feed, all the false information was changed within 10 minutes.

While these mistakes should never happen and should be reverted as fast as possible, Everipedia is run by a community of editors who are dedicated to reviewing content on the site.

They can also participate in discussions for individual citations:

Also, there are technological conditions in place to minimize the negative impact of the inaccuracies:

One of the most frequent critical remarks made about Everipedia is that it does not cite Wikipedia as a source.

Everipedia is published under the Creative Commons (CC-BY-SA) license, just like Wikipedia.

In fact, Wikipedia actually encourages people to share Wikipedia's content, as long as they follow the Creative Commons' terms and conditions: ^[2]

Each Wikipedia article Everipedia has imported to its website, a link to its original source is included.

Along with that, reemphasizing what has been mentioned above, according to Everipedia's Terms & Conditions, all content is copyrighted under Creative Commons, as well.

Note: If you are a Wikipedia editor and have created and/or significantly edited a Wikipedia page and want credit for it on Everipedia, send an email by clicking theContact Usbutton in the footer.

After doing so, Everipedia will:

Everipedia is currently working on developing a platform where these IQ points will be transferred into crypto assets.

This means that Wikipedia editors - and anyone else who participates within Everipedia's ecosystem - will actually get compensated for their work.

No one from the Everipedia team has been banned from Wikipedia.

Everipedia's staff welcomes constructive criticism with open arms.

If there there is anything we have missed, leave a comment on this page and we will try to incorporate it within the page.