Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 2006 :: September ::
Wikipedia
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 17.0758  Friday, 1 September 2006

From: 		Ike Rodman <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Thursday, 31 Aug 2006 10:19:59 -0700
Subject: SHK 17.0751 Chorus in R&J
Comment: 	Wikipedia, from SHK 17.0751 Chorus in R&J

Susan St. John mentioned, "I realize that wikipedia is not the most 
prestigious or reliable of
resources."

SHAKSPEReans wondering about the reliability of general reference works 
may find it interesting that an article in the journal _Nature_ 
concerning a comparison of science articles in Wikipedia and Britannica 
concluded, "among 42 entries tested, the difference in accuracy was not 
particularly great: the average science entry in Wikipedia contained 
around four inaccuracies; Britannica, about three" (Jim Giles et al., 
"Special Report: Internet encyclopaedias go head to head," Nature 438, 
900-901 (15 December 2005), 
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7070/full/438900a.html).

Britannica later disputed points made in the article, and _Nature_ 
responded point by point.

Ike Rodman

_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, 
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>

DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the 
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the 
editor assumes no responsibility for them.
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.