Sean Kollak

Twick.it is the original

When we started Twick.it – we had a vision: to create a collaborative encyclopaedia such as Wikipedia which would be as easy to use and straight to the point as Twitter. This is how we found the name: Twitter + Wikipedia = Twick.it. Of course we researched thoroughly that no similar tool existed in the internet. It was very important for us to create something new and not copy an American model. And that’s the way it is: Twick.it was the first encyclopaedia that applied the principle of preciseness – the strict limitation to the magic 140 characters. Naturally we did not expect to stay the only ones with this idea. For a few months we have been watching a little start-up in Berlin named Wikwik.it which we would like to introduce to you.

Two names – one concept?

Isn’t it funny how similar the names Twick.it and Wikwik.it are? Both glossaries have an Italian domain and limit the explanations to 140 characters. What’s more: Just like Wikwik.it we started of with the slogan “Straight to the point” before we decided to drop it for the claim “The explain engine” which is easier to remember for a newbie. It’s really curious. If the guys of Wikwik.it weren’t so cute one could easily believe that they have shamelessly copied our whole concept. But wait: if they had copied us they would have also applied more of our functions.

Differences between the micro-encyclopaedias

I don’t want to judge the design – that’s personal taste. There are basic similarities such as a huge search slot and the possibility to create and explain topics. This is very the likeness ends. Wikwik.it offers no semantic tagging; users have to set tags manually. You also have to select a language. Finally an automatic link to Wikipedia is created with every new explanation. These features lead to a series of problems:

1. Lost: When searching you never know in which language version you are.
2. Frustrated: The automatic Wikipedia link often leads into nowhere land.
3. Isolated: It is not possible to set hyperlinks. A solution such as our Tool Tip is not available either.
4. Mistaken: Apparently the search does not differentiate between tags and search keywords. The manual tagging means more work for the user and offers an open window for vandalism.

Overall my user experience of Wikwik.it was very frustrating. But the worst is yet to come.

Return of the edit wariors

The provocative title of this post is “Wikwik.it – Wikipedia in Short“. But this pinpoints their basic mistake: They have only copied the Wikipedia principle in short – including all the weaknesses. Just as in Wikipedia the users have to find a compromise on one version. Only one version is displayed in the search – and this undoubtedly leads to Edit war. If I don’t like an explanation I can restore an older version with one click. As every Wikipedian knows this will not improve the explanations. In the end the administrator with the longest breath will succeed.

The chicken egg problem

Wikwik.it is still in a closed beta phase. But you can already register to test the service. Ironically the guys at Wikwik.it encounter the same problem as we do. They need to motivate users to generate content – at the same time they need content to improve relevance and motivation for users. Therefore I would like to ask all Twick.it users: Register at Wikwik.it and test it.

Have I gone mad to promote our direct competitor? No. We would hate to lose you as user – but your feedback and opinions are most important for us and the further development of Twick.it. In the end only one service will succeed: and that will be decided by you.

How do you rate the miniature Wikipedia? What are the advantages or disadvantages of Twick.it in comparison to Wikwik.it? Which name do you prefer? Which function of Wikwik.it would you like to see integrated in the explain engine? You can use our support system for feedback or post a comment. Every opinion counts and will be considered.

Tags: 140 characters, concept, encyclopaedia, Twitter, Wikipedia