[Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia spanks Encarta, Brockhaus

Mon Oct 4 05:35:51 UTC 2004

--- Rowan Collins <rowan.collins at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hmm, something that strikes me looking at those results is that on
> several categories Wikipedia seems to do worse on the "easy" topics
> but better on the "hard" ones. I don't know if I'm just imagining it,
> and it could just be a coincidence, but that seems like an interesting
> finding (were there any graphs in the article? one could probably
> construct a graph that demonstrated patterns like that).

This is sadly true and I'm part of the problem since I love to write about
specific topics concerning geology yet have never added much to core
geology-related articles such as [[geology]] or [[mineralogy]]. This also seems
to be true for articles about specific species (we have many well-developed
ones) vs articles about core biology-related topics (not many well-developed
ones). 

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 