Fresh from Nature: a peer reveiw comparison of Wikipedia’s science coverage against Encyclopaedia Britannica:
One of the extraordinary stories of the Internet age is that of Wikipedia, a free online encyclopaedia that anyone can edit. This radical and rapidly growing publication, which includes close to 4 million entries, is now a much-used resource. But it is also controversial: if anyone can edit entries, how do users know if Wikipedia is as accurate as established sources such as Encyclopaedia Britannica?
Several recent cases have highlighted the potential problems. One article was revealed as falsely suggesting that a former assistant to US Senator Robert Kennedy may have been involved in his assassination. And podcasting pioneer Adam Curry has been accused of editing the entry on podcasting to remove references to competitors’ work. Curry says he merely thought he was making the entry more accurate.
However, an expert-led investigation carried out by Nature — the first to use peer review to compare Wikipedia and Britannica’s coverage of science — suggests that such high-profile examples are the exception rather than the rule. (link added)
Go read the whole story.
nature, journal, peer review, quality, wikipedia, Encyclopaedia Britannica, encyclopedia, Britannica, head to head, compare, comparison, social software, wisdom of crowds, thewisdom of the crowds
Posted December 14, 2005 by Casey Bisson
Categories: Libraries & Networked Information. Tags: Britannica, compare, comparison, Encyclopaedia Britannica, encyclopedia, head to head, journal, nature, peer review, quality, social software, thewisdom of the crowds, wikipedia, wisdom of crowds.
1 Comment(s)
Comments RSS
TrackBack Identifier URI
Leave a comment
User contributed tags for this post:
nude kid (207) - nude foto (189) - nude kids foto (157) - kid nude (122) - kids nude foto (100) - nude kidz (99) - foto nude (92) - kids nude (80) - kidz nude (78) - nude fotos (67) - nude kids (60) - foto nude kids (52) - kidssexs (51) - nude kids fotos (50) - kids foto nude (35) - nude children (30) - kids sexs (29) - nude children fotos (27) - nature sexs (27) - kids-nudes (26) - nude kids photo (25) - kids fotos (24) - kids nude fotos (22) - nude kids com (22) - porno foto com (22) - children nude foto (21) - nude wikipedia (19) - kid nude foto (18) - nudes kids (18) - wikipedia (17) - kids porno foto (16) - maissonbisson (16) - Nude children FOTO (16) - nude kids photos (16) - fotos de kids nude (16) - all (15) - nude kid foto (14) - FOTO NUDE CHILDREN (13) - nude kids blog (13) - wikipedia is bad (13) - fotos kids nude (13) - porno nature (12) - nature porno (12) - kid nudes (10) - foto kids nude (10) - nude foto kids (9) - kid sexs (9) - fotos nude kids (9) - kids nudi (9) - porno 1900 (8) - porno de (8) - fotos nude (8) - Why wikipedia is bad (8) - nude kids foto com (8) - nude kids.com (8) - kids fotos nude (7) - nude kids gallery (7) - nature sex com (7) - children nude (7) - porno foto kids (7) - nude kids in nature (7) - gulf sexphoto (7) - nude kid photo (7) - porno kid (6) - nude arab kids com (6) - wikipedia nude (6) - nude children in nature (6) - children foto nude (6) - Nude fotos of kids (6) - kids nudi photo (6) - Nude foto nature (6) - nude fotos kids (6) - nude foto com (6) - kids foto (6) - www.nature sex.com (6) - nude nature foto (6) - nude foto of kids (5) - childrens nude (5) - nature foto (5) - arabic nude (5) - nude child fotos (5) - nude children gallery (5) - nude foto s children (5) - nature nude kids (5) - nude kid fotos (5) - mss (5) - nude foto small kids (5) - kid nude fotos (5) - small kids nude (5) - porno foto nude kids (4) - foto porno kids (4) - child nude foto (4) - kid is nude (4) - nude in nature (4) - nude small kids (4) - nature sex.com (4) - fotos nude children (4) - Nudes in nature (4) - foto S sex (4) - nude kids fot (4) - foto kids nudi (4) - porno kids foto (4) - foto nude galery (4) - foto children nude (4) - nude kidz foto (4) - nudes foto (4) - Kids nudity foto (4) - sex nature (4) - sexs natur (4) - porno dans la nature (4) - kids fotos porno (4) - nude kids galleries (3) - nature and wikipedia (3) - foto nude child (3) - nature nude child (3) - nonude kides (3) - kids nude nature (3) - free nude foto of kids (3) - children nud fotos (3) - fotos children nude (3) - small nude foto (3) - kids foto sex (3) - naked kids fotos (3) - free nude kids foto (3) - kids foto porno (3) - porno kids fotos (3) - foto childrens nude (3) - MA SSONB SSON (3) - nudi kids (3) - nude Kids"wikipedia (3) - child fotos nude (3) - children nude fotos (3) - nude kids fotos de (3) - small nude kids (3) - wikipedia porno (3) - kidz foto (3) - nature sex (3) - wikipedia nudes (3) - foto kids porno (3) - www.nude kids.com (3) - child nud (3) - foto cildren nude (3) - www. nude story in urdu-Wikipedia (2) - nude kids wikipedia (2) - kids pornofoto (2) - kids-nude (2) - kids nature nude (2) - kids pornó galery (2) - kidz porno (2) - funny foto com (2) -
[...] The argument about Wikipedia versus Britannica continues to rage in libraryland. The questions are about authority and the likelihood of outright deception, of course, and a recent round brought up the limitations of peer review as exemplified in the 1989 cold fusion controversy, where two scientists claimed to have achieved a nuclear fusion reaction at room temperature. Randy Souther, from the University of San Francisco, asked us to look more carefully: FYI, cold fusion in 1989 was a media fiasco, but not a fraud. The research is still controversial, but continues today with publications in more than 50 peer-reviewed journals. But you would never realize this by reading Britannica’s one-paragraph article, which is stuck in 1989; Wikipedia’s gives a reasonable overview, and is up-to-date. [...]