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
Related:
Posted December 14, 2005 by Casey
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) - nude kids fotos (50) - kidssexs (49) - 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) - porno foto com (22) - kids nude fotos (22) - nude kids com (22) - children nude foto (21) - nude wikipedia (19) - kid nude foto (18) - nudes kids (18) - nude kids photos (16) - fotos de kids nude (16) - Nude children FOTO (16) - maissonbisson (16) - wikipedia (15) - all (15) - kids porno foto (15) - nude kid foto (14) - FOTO NUDE CHILDREN (13) - fotos kids nude (13) - wikipedia is bad (13) - nude kids blog (13) - nature porno (12) - porno nature (12) - foto kids nude (10) - kid nudes (10) - fotos nude kids (9) - kids nudi (9) - kid sexs (9) - nude foto kids (9) - porno 1900 (8) - nude kids.com (8) - Why wikipedia is bad (8) - fotos nude (8) - nude kids foto com (8) - porno de (8) - nude kids gallery (7) - nude kid photo (7) - children nude (7) - kids fotos nude (7) - nature sex com (7) - nude kids in nature (7) - gulf sexphoto (7) - nude arab kids com (6) - www.nature sex.com (6) - nude nature foto (6) - porno kid (6) - children foto nude (6) - kids foto (6) - nude fotos kids (6) - Nude fotos of kids (6) - nude foto com (6) - nude children in nature (6) - kids nudi photo (6) - wikipedia nude (6) - Nude foto nature (6) - mss (5) - arabic nude (5) - nude kid fotos (5) - nude foto small kids (5) - nude foto of kids (5) - nature foto (5) - nude foto s children (5) - nude children gallery (5) - small kids nude (5) - nude child fotos (5) - nature nude kids (5) - kid nude fotos (5) - childrens nude (5) - nudes foto (4) - foto kids nudi (4) - nude kids fot (4) - nude kidz foto (4) - foto S sex (4) - child nude foto (4) - foto children nude (4) - kid is nude (4) - Kids nudity foto (4) - foto nude galery (4) - nude in nature (4) - porno foto nude kids (4) - Nudes in nature (4) - kids fotos porno (4) - porno kids foto (4) - sex nature (4) - porno dans la nature (4) - sexs natur (4) - fotos nude children (4) - nature sex.com (3) - wikipedia nudes (3) - children nud fotos (3) - nude kids galleries (3) - foto nude child (3) - foto kids porno (3) - foto porno kids (3) - kids foto sex (3) - foto cildren nude (3) - nonude kides (3) - fotos children nude (3) - nature nude child (3) - small nude foto (3) - free nude kids foto (3) - nature and wikipedia (3) - free nude foto of kids (3) - nature sex (3) - small nude kids (3) - kidz foto (3) - kids nude nature (3) - kids foto porno (3) - child fotos nude (3) - porno foto kids (3) - children nude fotos (3) - nude kids fotos de (3) - MA SSONB SSON (3) - nudi kids (3) - wikipedia porno (3) - naked kids fotos (3) - porno kids fotos (3) - child nud (3) - foto childrens nude (3) - www.nude kids.com (3) - funny foto com (2) - gallery nude kids (2) - kids-nude (2) - kids pornofoto (2) - nature video porno (2) - kids nature nude (2) - nude kids wikipedia (2) - blog spots fotos nuded kids (2) - kidz porno (2) - www. nude story in urdu-Wikipedia (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. [...]