Wikipedia as accurate as Britannica

[Pengwuino]

http://famulus.msnbc.com/famulusgen/ap12-14-184223.asp?t=apcom&vts=121420052049

Wikipedia, the encyclopedia that relies on volunteers to pen nearly 4 million articles, is about as accurate in covering scientific topics as Encyclopedia Britannica, the journal Nature wrote in an online article published Wednesday.

*claps for wiki* that's pretty neat.

 

[Mk]

I am part of Wikipedia's counter vandalism unit. We are doing a good job I just got the VandalFighter 2.2 Java program. I'm happy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Counter_Vandalism_Unit

Also, it tends to be biographical articles that people vandalize (by deletion, misinformation, or just leaving their mark on the page). The article on Green Day was recently locked, from excessive repeated vandalism. People saying how they are neo-nazi, Satanist, etc.. The JFK article was recently in the news for this sort of thing too. Some losers decide to go in and put up wrong information. BOOO! You suck guys!~

 

[kerimek]

I would approach this statement with caution. While it is impressive that Wikipedia, a crowdsourced and constantly evolving platform, is comparable in accuracy to the prestigious Encyclopedia Britannica, it is important to consider the limitations and potential biases of both sources.

Firstly, it is important to note that the study cited in the article was conducted by only one person and focused specifically on scientific topics. This may not be representative of the accuracy of Wikipedia as a whole. Additionally, the study only compared a small sample of articles from both sources, which may not fully reflect the overall accuracy of either.

Furthermore, Wikipedia's content is constantly changing and can be edited by anyone, which raises concerns about the reliability and credibility of information. While Wikipedia does have a system in place to monitor and correct inaccuracies, it is not infallible and errors can still slip through.

On the other hand, Encyclopedia Britannica is created and maintained by a team of experts and undergoes a rigorous editorial process. This may make it more reliable in terms of accuracy, but it also means that it may not be as up-to-date as Wikipedia.

In conclusion, while it is impressive that Wikipedia is comparable to Encyclopedia Britannica in terms of accuracy, it is important to approach information from both sources critically and consider the potential limitations and biases. As scientists, it is our responsibility to carefully evaluate and verify information from multiple sources before drawing conclusions.