Another Wikipedia Evaluation
There are still people who think Wikipedia isn’t reliable, that people should be warned away from it. I think it is an utterly amazing example of collaboration, the creation of an external collective mind.
The Denver Post got 5 experts to evaluate articles in their areas of expertise.
The results? Four out of five agreed their relevant Wikipedia entries are accurate, informative, comprehensive and a great resource for students or the merely curious.
The fifth scholar called his chosen entry “not very good,” found some details to be inaccurate by omission, and said similar entries in more accepted encyclopedias like Encarta do their job better.
For more details, including the University of Colorado history professor William Wei’s negative comments, follow the link to the article.
Booth, Michael. “Grading Wikipedia.” Denver Post 30 Apr. 2007. 2 May 2007 .
Link courtesy of Steve Rubel at Micro Persuasion