[WikiEN-l] Re: BBC News Online Story.

Fri Dec 16 23:03:41 UTC 2005

At 09:47 -0600 15/12/05, <slimvirgin at gmail.com> wrote:
>On 12/15/05, Phil Boswell <phil.boswell at gmail.com> wrote:
>>  ... apparently the checkers weren't even told that what
>>  they were checking came from Wikipedia so as to avoid bias :-)
>
>I'm afraid it would have been obvious from the writing which articles
>were from Wikipedia. The EB is able to provide the facade of accuracy
>because the writing is so smooth, so you don't expect to find factual
>errors. In Wikipedia articles, you do, because the writing is often
>very poor, so the other problems tend to jump off the page.
>
>Sarah

An example of a publication that is not open to open edit "The  
Oxford Dictionary of National Biography".

http://www.oup.com/oxforddnb/info/order/print/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_Dictionary_of_National_Biography

Priced at 7,500 UK pounds, it may contain errors.

"...but in the months following publication there was occasional 
criticism of the dictionary in some British newspapers and 
periodicals for reported factual inaccuracies."

I regard this statement a rather tame....

-- 
Gordo (aka LoopZilla)
gordon.joly at pobox.com
http://pobox.com/~gordo/
http://www.loopzilla.org/