Only eight serious errors, such as misinterpretations of important concepts, were detected in the pairs of articles reviewed, four from each encyclopaedia. But reviewers also found many factual errors, omissions or misleading statements: 162 and 123 in Wikipedia and Britannica, respectively. —Internet encyclopaedias go head to head (News @ Nature.com)
Wikipedia stood up fairly well against Encyclopedia Britannica, in a review by Nature science writers.
Update: Wikipedia’s articles were, on average, longer than EB’s. So it’s possible to spin these findings such that the news is Wikipedia has fewer errors per byte than Encyclopedia Britannica.
Similar:
Scrape, Scrape, Spam Blog, Have You Scraped My Site?
http://youtu.be/GFk8hEQ-jNI Below is ...
Books
I was 'raped' in VR - the effects can 'mirror' real sex assaults
This is offensive, deeply troubling, and...
Culture
The Rise of "Synthespians"
"Mr. Serkis is the human actor behind th...
Art
When a Textbook Plagiarizes Your Student's Work
In a few days I'll be gearing up to teac...
Academia
A Simple Plot for a Literature Review
There are two things you need any time y...
Academia
Create Joy with Content Management System Hexcodes for Canvas LMS
I spent about 30 seconds eyeballing the ...
Academia


