Scholarpedia

Wikipedia is useful for finding quick information, answering trivia questions, and for getting up to speed on things you think you should know.  But whether Wikipedia ought to be used for an academic citation is another story. 
One scholar, Eugene M. Izhikevich (author of Dynamical Systems in Neuroscience), has decided to harness the concept of Wikipedia into a format that is more likely to please academics:  he has founded Scholarpedia, a peer-reviewed version of Wikipedia.  Each article in Scholarpedia has a "curator", usually a leading researcher or scholar in that field.  The initial version of an article is submitted for a peer review process, and each successive version is permanently saved for purposes of citation.  While (in the spirit of a Wiki) anyone can propose changes to an article, the curator is responsible for approving these changes. 
Scholarpedia's current content focuses on Computational Neuroscience, Dynamical Systems and Computational Intelligence, but it plans to move in other directions if all goes well. 
An exciting aspect of Scholarpedia is that some articles are written and curated by the very people who discovered the concept - as in the case of Lotfi Zadeh, who has written about Fuzzy Logic, or Mandlebrot, who is slated to write the article on Mandelbrot sets.   And who can argue with that kind of citation?

Comments

[Juanrga]

A similar approach is taken in the new Encyclopedia Knowledge

http://juanrga.com/en/knowledge.html

Among other differences peer-review is not anonymous (this policy eliminates arbitrariness and abuse becoming from anonymity) and the topics are presented from an unified perspective rather than as a collection of disconnected items.