We are experienced former Wikipedia editors who created this site in the belief that it was time for a new approach to building an online encyclopedia than that which Wikipedia has to offer.

Wikipedia isn’t designed to provide reliable information on any topic, but rather to focus on all major viewpoints while summarising any minor ones, a policy known as undue weight.

slider-2-a-500x135
slider-2-b-500x135
slider-2-c-500x135
previous arrow
next arrow

The downside of such an approach is that it can lead to the propagation of false beliefs based on incomplete information. Contrary to what some may believe, Wikipedia has no mechanism for checking on or maintaining the accuracy of the information it contains, allowing falsehoods, hoaxes and libels to exist on the site for years. This situation is compounded by a lack of accountability for anything published. There is also the unanswered question of whether the wiki model of collaboration is an appropriate one for developing a reliable online encyclopedia, rather than quickly starting one.

More than ten per cent of our content has no equivalent on Wikipedia, and of the rest, much of which we wrote ourselves before Wikipedia’s inevitable gray goo engulfed it, it has all been improved in terms of accuracy, sourcing and general readability.

What we are not


Engole is not a Wikipedia mirror. We do not, and never will, include articles on the biographies of living persons. So you won’t find any article on Nigella Lawson if you’re searching for a list of “english cooks”, but you will find articles on Elizabeth Raffald, Martha Bradley and Mary Eales. It’s worth noting that of Wikipedia’s 6.8 million articles, 37 per cent are just make-work “List of …” pages, which we have no need of, owing to our use of a superior search engine.

We do not have the hubris to claim that we will ever be a repository of all human knowledge, an impossible goal. Our aim is to be the best, not the biggest, providing the best information available on those topics that we do cover, fully supported by good quality references to source material that provides the reader with opportunities for further research. And unlike Wikipedia we use a consistent, centralised citation system, and continuously monitor for link rot, so any broken links are quickly updated.

We don’t aim to provide the definitive online page on any subject, although we may sometimes do so, but instead to offer the best online summaries of those subjects that we do cover, backed up by reliable sources.

Please feel free to contact usGet in touch! with any comments.