Journal Nature: Wikipedia Is Accurate

[Kadie]

Journal Nature: Wikipedia Is Accurate
By DAN GOODIN, AP Technology Writer
28 minutes ago



SAN FRANCISCO - 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.

The finding, based on a side-by-side comparison of articles covering a broad swath of the scientific spectrum, comes as Wikipedia faces criticism over the accuracy of some of its entries.

Two weeks ago prominent journalist John Seigenthaler Sr. revealed that a Wikipedia entry that ran for four months had incorrectly named him as a longtime suspect in the assassinations of president John F. Kennedy and his brother Robert.

Such errors appear to be the exception rather than the rule, Nature said in Wednesday's article, which the scientific journal said was the first to use peer review to compare Wikipedia to Britannica. Based on 42 articles reviewed by experts, the average scientific entry in Wikipedia contained four errors or omissions, while Britannica had three.

more...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051215/ap_on_bi_ge/wikipedia_accuracy_4

[WindRavenX]

1. Wiki is quite good for researching science

I've edited several entries. But they are fairly accurate.

I wouldn't trust anything political, though.

[bammertheblue]

2. Anything

they've ever had on literature or writers I've also found to be pretty good.