Re: Is there a genealogy Wiki anywhere?

On Wed, 7 May 2008 22:03:37 +0100, "Don Moody" <dpmoody@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:

>
>"Daniel Morgan" <daniel.f.morgan@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>news:b247a38a-e529-4848-a736-e5371a397142@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> In 2005, the journal Nature got 42 expert reviewers to compare 
>> science
>> articles in Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Britannica for accuracy.  To
>> quote from their original writeup, "the difference in accuracy was 
>> not
>> particularly great: the average science entry in Wikipedia contained
>> around four inaccuracies; Britannica, about three."
>>
>> Britannica disputed the Nature study.  Nature rebutted their 
>> rebuttal
>> and stood by their original findings.  See Editorial, Nature 440, 
>> 582
>> (30 March 2006)
>
>Emcyclo[edia Britannica has been known for decades not to be a 
>standard of accuracy. Yet again it is a product where commercial 
>considerations outweigh metioculous accuracy. A more meaningful 
>experiment would be to compare Wiki or EB or both on, say, chemistry 
>with, say, the Journal of the Royal Society of Chemistry. Or in any 
>subject compare them with the leading professional, refereed, journal 
>of record in that subject. That is the journal which places accuracy 
>before commercial considerations.

And many writers of articles in refereed journals have been found to be in
the
pay of commercial enterprises and playing the tune that the piper has paid
for. 


-- 
Steve Hayes
E-mail: hayesmstw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (see web page if it doesn't work)
Web: http://hayesfam.bravehost.com/famhist1.htm
     http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7783/