Slashdot Mirror
Encyclopedia of Life Launches First 30,000 Pages
An anonymous reader writes to let us know that the Encyclopedia of Life opened up to the public today with its first 30,000 pages in place — and, according to the AP, promptly crumbled even before being Slashdotted. (The site seems fine now.) We discussed this project last year when it was announced. The Telegraph has an overview of the launch, and reports that only 25 "exemplar" pages on the site are fully fleshed out to the extent scientists hope eventually to attain for all species; the other few tens of thousands are expanded placeholders. The project hopes to begin taking input from citizen-scientists late this year.
now that's going to take a long time to fill...
I can see it now, like in wikipedia... about 1/10 of the articles are stubs... they mark it as stubs and no one ever remembers to fill them. I would fill them, problem is, I only found the stubs because I was actually searching for that information... not because I had it.
Onda Technology Institute
Not the story - the project. What I mean is: how is this new project related to this one: http://tolweb.org/ if at all?
Am I the only one not seeing anything else except for the demo-stuff there from way back? Where are these fabled articles? Link, anyone?
.: Max Romantschuk
Only 30000?
There are Tens of millions of different species on earth - Flowering plants ALONE are numbering 250000!
there is another similar project called tree of life
Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
eol.org, all I can see in it is 'end of life'
These scientists couldn't find a web developer then, eh? Or should I take it to mean then that these scientists are trying to create uneducated disabled workers who won't be able to tell a $5 dollar note from a $20?
Good plan.
.... which should now be updated to be an overview of it's on-line demise due to slashdot!!!
So where can we download this data and what is the license?
The data from tolweb.org are downloadable under a Creative Commons license.
DNA is the ultimate spaghetti code.
- These characters were randomly selected.
Actually, the Wikipedia entry for "elephant" is a good example of the great work already done. Anyway.
This project sounds like a great idea -- and if nothing else it is ALWAYS good to have competition.
The "Encyclopedia of Life" went off-line even before it was slashdotted, this must be one of the signs for the end of the world!
My love of the "natural" sciences is not something I hide. My respect for E.O.Wilson is also something I do not hide. Wilson frequently mentions his wish for this project to become true, and I can understand his reasons for doing so. Wilson, I admit, is not without critics (but who of us are?). I only mention Wilson because this is a project he has often spoken of. Despite varying opinions on him, he DOES believe in biological information (and, yes, probably data) for the masses. Not to mention that he has a writing style to die for...
Anyway, back on topic. This project is grand in its scope and bold in its objectives. Whether it fails or succeeds is beside the point really... the project is a challenge to all of science and is quite like open-source software. The more shoulders (of giants) we can sit on, the better the end result will be.
Great project. Worthwhile project. I take my hat off to all involved. Thank-you.
Way to beat on that straw-man... Besides, if you bothered to read the article: "There are also tens of thousands of additional species pages not authenticated by scientists but still containing a wealth of information. Later this year the public will be able to contribute text, videos, images, and other information about a species and the best of it will be incorporated into the authenticated pages." By the way, it's spelled "elitist".
It's slow, only has demonstration pages and is extremely badly designed.
As somebody has already mentioned, images don't have alt tags, but also there are tables used for layout (with many empty rows/cols for no apparent reason) and there are image maps. The site uses an XHTML doctype, but isn't valid XHTML. There are missing slashes for closing single tags. The divs for the popups are contained outside the body tags, that's NOT ALLOWED!
That's all I see, what about anybody else?
How is that not elitist like the GP said? You need to get approval from "the group" before you can contribute.. It's still elitist and I fail to see the strawman.. Elitipedia.
It was on the news recently that they were shooting elephants because their population has grown from 8000 to 20.000 and they have become a nuisance.
Animal rights activists that shooting them is stupid as that supposedly makes them breed faster?
eol == end of life
:)
It seems they have the end of their project in sight
Max.
More flash crap.
"Oh good, the page has finished loading. Bollocks, there's still some flash left to load."
Will we ever be free of this crap?
It's made a sort of 'two-stage' internet - load the html, then load the flash baggage.
Max.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I don't like Linux. This doesn't make me a troll.
I took a look at the Rice demonstration page and Wikipedia is listed as one of two sources. Are they serious? Note: they also have some "expert references" !?!
WTF is a "citizen-scientist"? Isn't this encyclopedia on the internet? Then what country are these citizen-scientists citizens of? Aren't all scientists citizens of some country or another?
Do you mean amateur scientists? Some people refuse to call a spade a spade, referring to it as a "pointy shovel", but you're calling it a "bonk-digger".
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
From the AP "The most popular of the species for Web searches is the poisonous death cap mushroom, which may say something about people's homicidal intentions, joked Ausubel."
I think Mr. Ausubel underestimates the popularity of shroomz.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
The encyclopedia of life acronym EOL is also a term used by a retailers to refer to their products that have been sitting on the shelf to long as end of life :P. Just thought it was an odd coincidence.
503'ed
Yet you fail to answer my question!
How is the value of this type of data collection by authentication any better then Wikipedia? If the guy authenticating the material is of the "flat earth theory" then it's WORSE then Wikipedia because people will just assume it's correct knowledge since it has been "authenticated".
If you're going to response at least:
1) Read what I said
2) Answer my question instead of making me look like a fucking troll
There's your problem right there. An EOL (End Of Line) control character in the middle of the data stream interrupted the listing of the species after they had only gotten through the first 30,000 animals. Good thing their website wasn't named EOT.org or they would have been logged out of the Internet completely...
Need to be able to sort by most recently extinct. We're heading into a phase of human existance where extinction of other species as a result of human overpopulation and its secondary effects (global warming, habitat depletion) is going to be a bigger and bigger deal. An encyclopaedia of 1.8 million species needs to include when the critter is believed to have become extinct.
Roderic Page, who is involved in the Encyclopedia of Life "in an advisory capacity," has posted some fairly damning criticisms of the project in its current form. I have not spent much time poking around the site myself, but if what he says is true then it sounds like he's pretty right on. (Example: Some pages actually devote more on-screen space to contributor/sponsor logos than to content.) Here's hoping they're already taking steps to improve it.
Breakfast served all day!