Wikipedia study flawed, says Britannica
gerloff
|
Lunedì, 27 Marzo 2006
|
After the science journal Nature conducted a study comparing Wikipedia and the Encyclopedia Britannica, the flagship of dead-tree-based knowledge is up in arms. This is because the study found that Wikipedia was just as good as its time-honored printed ancestor.
As the BBC reports, a "scholarly slamming match" is in full swing. While Britannica finds the study "fatally flawed", Nature defends (.pdf) the investigation.
Isn't it nice that Encyclopedia Britannica is standing up selflessly to defend all of us from cheap, crappy online knowledge? I'll sell my worldly belongings and buy the latest edition right away.
Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article are permitted worldwide, without royalty, in any medium, provided this notice is preserved.
