Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Originally Posted by kavermei
Actually (and I'm not taking a position here myself) some research about this has been published in peer-reviewed journals. IIRC most publications found that "reputed" printed-on-paper encyclopedias contain just as much factual errors and omissions than Wikipedia.
Of course some threshold of notability would be included in such studies; articles with low notability tend to be poorer in Wikipedia.
Also it differs per language, a German once told me that de.wikipedia.org has is of far higher quality than en.wikipedia.org .
Well, this is really OT now, but Wikipedia also has more immunity to powerful forces trying to rewrite history (e.g. the tactics Turkey has used to try to deny the Armenian genocide). I know, I know, you're thinking "how can you defend Wikipedia, just read THIS piece-of-crap entry" but I'm just pointing out the good side
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts. Bertrand Russell