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 (159) - kid nude (122) - kids nude foto (100) - nude kidz (100) - foto nude (92) - kids nude (80) - kidz nude (78) - nude fotos (67) - nude kids (60) - kidssexs (52) - foto nude kids (52) - nude kids fotos (51) - 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) - wikipedia (19) - nude wikipedia (19) - nudes kids (18) - kid nude foto (18) - kids porno foto (18) - fotos de kids nude (16) - Nude children FOTO (16) - maissonbisson (16) - nude kids photos (16) - all (15) - nude kid foto (14) - fotos kids nude (13) - FOTO NUDE CHILDREN (13) - nature porno (13) - nude kids blog (13) - wikipedia is bad (13) - porno nature (12) - foto kids nude (10) - kid nudes (10) - nude foto kids (9) - fotos nude kids (9) - kids nudi (9) - kid sexs (9) - nude kids.com (8) - fotos nude (8) - Why wikipedia is bad (8) - porno 1900 (8) - nude kids foto com (8) - porno de (8) - nature sex com (7) - kids fotos nude (7) - nude kids gallery (7) - nude kids in nature (7) - nude kid photo (7) - porno foto kids (7) - children nude (7) - gulf sexphoto (7) - kids foto (6) - nude arab kids com (6) - nude foto com (6) - porno kid (6) - www.nature sex.com (6) - Nude foto nature (6) - nude nature foto (6) - Nude fotos of kids (6) - children foto nude (6) - nude fotos kids (6) - nude children in nature (6) - kids nudi photo (6) - wikipedia nude (6) - nude children gallery (5) - small kids nude (5) - child nude foto (5) - nature nude kids (5) - nature foto (5) - childrens nude (5) - nude foto small kids (5) - kid nude fotos (5) - nude kid fotos (5) - nude child fotos (5) - nude foto s children (5) - nude foto of kids (5) - mss (5) - arabic nude (5) - fotos nude children (4) - sex nature (4) - foto S sex (4) - Nudes in nature (4) - foto porno kids (4) - nude kids fot (4) - kids fotos porno (4) - sexs natur (4) - nude in nature (4) - foto kids nudi (4) - kid is nude (4) - nude small kids (4) - porno foto nude kids (4) - nature sex.com (4) - foto children nude (4) - nudes foto (4) - Kids nudity foto (4) - foto nude galery (4) - nude kidz foto (4) - porno kids foto (4) - porno dans la nature (4) - foto nude child (3) - nonude kides (3) - children nude fotos (3) - fotos children nude (3) - nude kids galleries (3) - naked kids fotos (3) - children nud fotos (3) - foto kids porno (3) - child fotos nude (3) - foto cildren nude (3) - porno kids fotos (3) - nature and wikipedia (3) - kids nude nature (3) - www.nude-kids.com (3) - nature nude child (3) - small nude foto (3) - foto childrens nude (3) - child nud (3) - free nude foto of kids (3) - nude kids fotos de (3) - nudi kids (3) - kidz foto (3) - nature sex (3) - wikipedia nudes (3) - nude Kids"wikipedia (3) - kids foto sex (3) - free nude kids foto (3) - kids foto porno (3) - www.nude kids.com (3) - wikipedia porno (3) - small nude kids (3) - MA SSONB SSON (3) - Encyclopaedia Britannica (2) - social software (2) - kid foto (2) - child nude fotos (2) - porno foto (2) - kid nude nature (2) - nude kids foto show (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. [...]