SL is not Wikipedia

It is useful to draw comparisons between Sensei’s Library and Wikipedia ( ) — particularly to point up the significant differences. Both sites are wikis; both are relatively open communities in which anyone can contribute without needing to register first; however, there are important differences in their aims and approaches.

Visitors to Sensei’s Library sometimes try to apply Wikipedia rules and concepts here, with mixed results. Here are some of the characteristics and conventions of Wikipedia that do not necessarily apply Sensei’s Library:

Comparison of Wikipedia with Sensei’s Library
Aspect	Wikipedia approach	Sensei’s Library approach
Intent	To be an encyclopedia.	To be a library.
Characteristics	Wikipedia aims to be objective, reliable and consistent.	Sensei’s Library plays a dual role as a collection of articles of various sorts and a community centre; it is more diverse than Wikipedia.
Regulation	Wikipedia operates according to strict guidelines.	We are less strict than Wikipedia; we do not have a clear and comprehensive statement of what is allowed here (but the links at the bottom of this page contain some ideas).
Point of view	Neutral point of view Wikipedia and its editors themselves does not express an opinion of their own, though they may report opinions stated by others.	Here, many contributions reflect somebody’s personal opinion, and this is welcomed, though it is recommended that opinions are clearly marked as such. There are many aspects of how to play go on which even professionals disagree; it is difficult to find “objective truth” for this subject. Apart from the technical side of go playing, Sensei’s Library also contains opinions on many other topics.
Verifiability	Verifiability At Wikipedia, all contributions should in principle be justified by reference to publications elsewhere.	Given the current small size of the English-language go literature, this policy is not feasible at Sensei’s Library. Many pages consist of someone’s best guess, or a consensus amongst Sensei’s Library contributors.
Originality	No original research Wikipedia, like many printed encyclopedias, largely summarises work published elsewhere.	“Original research” may seem like too grand a name for some of the discussions here, but there is a lot of material that can not be found elsewhere.
Notablity	Notability Wikipedia requires every article to be notable enough to be included. Minor player or tournament can't be described as an independent article.	No notability requirement; for example, every professional player can have an article on SL. ^[1]
Language	Wikipedia has one version per one language. Different versions have different set of rules and communities.	Multilingual. Though the vast majority of contents are in English, you may write in any language or even mix languages in a page. This is more suitable to such an international and inter-lingual game as Go/Го/囲碁/围棋/圍棋/바둑/หมากล้อม/Cờ vây.

The page Wiki Wiki Web states:

In addition to being quick, Sensei’s Library also aspires to Zen ideals generally labelled wabi-sabi. Zen finds beauty in the imperfect and ephemeral. When it comes down to it, that’s all you need.

Sensei’s Library certainly is imperfect in many respects (and this has provoked a lot of discussion — see the links below), but trying to “fix” those imperfections by means of strict rules would cause a fundamental change in the nature of the site.

[1] Specifically, professionals must be at least 4p to be listed on English Wikipedia, if they're not considered to have any other notable characteristics (although the vast majority of 4p+ pros have no English articles). However, many Korean professionals have articles on Korean Wikipedia, including those below 4p. The official position of [ext] WikiProject Go (English) is that "that level is the best estimate of a rank equivalent to a Chess Grandmaster."

[edit]

SL is not Wikipedia

See also