The Wikipedia Revolution

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: eilute
If the online encyclopedia is not already the biggest non-search engine site on the Internet, it likely will be. Currently Wikipedia has over one million articles, is adding 1,700 articles each day, and is doubling in size once every ten months. In comparison, Encylopedia Britanica has 120,000 articles and boosts only 25% improvement in accuracy over Wikipedia.

No. Wikipedia is not in the news. However, it is my belief that Wikipedia is (or will be) among the largest WWW juggernauts, and that this is newsworthy.

Can I ask what source provided the 25% number, and upon what criteria it was based?

They pulled random topics and compared the entries in wikipedia and Britanica and count the number of factual errors. They also found that wikipedias entries are longer then britanica so the more errors is to be expected.

sorry but thats very unscientific and very inaccurate.
Wikipedia is a huge over blown joke...
There is no monitoring for content at all...
Thus that 25% figure probably should be more like 85% inaccurate!!

 

[smashp]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: eilute
If the online encyclopedia is not already the biggest non-search engine site on the Internet, it likely will be. Currently Wikipedia has over one million articles, is adding 1,700 articles each day, and is doubling in size once every ten months. In comparison, Encylopedia Britanica has 120,000 articles and boosts only 25% improvement in accuracy over Wikipedia.

No. Wikipedia is not in the news. However, it is my belief that Wikipedia is (or will be) among the largest WWW juggernauts, and that this is newsworthy.

Can I ask what source provided the 25% number, and upon what criteria it was based?

They pulled random topics and compared the entries in wikipedia and Britanica and count the number of factual errors. They also found that wikipedias entries are longer then britanica so the more errors is to be expected.

sorry but thats very unscientific and very inaccurate.
Wikipedia is a huge over blown joke...
There is no monitoring for content at all...
Thus that 25% figure probably should be more like 85% inaccurate!!

only anti-intellectual and visionless people afraid of education would be afraid of wiki

its too enlightened for them Mr Farina

 

[HombrePequeno]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: eilute
If the online encyclopedia is not already the biggest non-search engine site on the Internet, it likely will be. Currently Wikipedia has over one million articles, is adding 1,700 articles each day, and is doubling in size once every ten months. In comparison, Encylopedia Britanica has 120,000 articles and boosts only 25% improvement in accuracy over Wikipedia.

No. Wikipedia is not in the news. However, it is my belief that Wikipedia is (or will be) among the largest WWW juggernauts, and that this is newsworthy.

Can I ask what source provided the 25% number, and upon what criteria it was based?

They pulled random topics and compared the entries in wikipedia and Britanica and count the number of factual errors. They also found that wikipedias entries are longer then britanica so the more errors is to be expected.

sorry but thats very unscientific and very inaccurate.
Wikipedia is a huge over blown joke...
There is no monitoring for content at all...
Thus that 25% figure probably should be more like 85% inaccurate!!

The members monitor the content. If there is contested content in an article it tells you right at the top.

 

[JEDIYoda]

The members monitor the content. If there is contested content in an article it tells you right at the top.

True but not true. Depending on the members point of view anything goes....
You may believe that everything is monitored but thats not true at all!!

 

[JDrake]

Originally posted by: techs
About 3 months ago I put Wiki in Favorites. Second from the top.

LOL.. Seinfeld reference?
I love Wikipedia, it's my #1 reference site (over Google, even)

 

[Pastore]

As long as you don't think you can do any scholarly research through it, yes Wikipedia is an excellent source of information.

 

[Staples]

Ever wonder who the hell is actually writing all these articles?

And I will never say Britanica is 25% more acurate than Wikipedia because Wikipedia is always changing. And the fact that it has more articles does not mean a whole lot because there are articles on phrases and hell, even people not famous like me.