Slashdot Mirror


Wikipedia Corrects Encyclopedia Britannica

javipas writes "Despite all the controversy about Wikipedia's work model, no one can argue the potential of a project that has so effectively demonstrated the usefulness of the 'wisdom of crowds' concept. And that wisdom has detected a large number of mistakes in one of the most revered founts of human knowledge, the Encyclopedias Britannica. Among the wrong information collected on this page are the name at birth of Bill Clinton and the definition of the NP problems in mathematics."

9 of 381 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Errors by iminplaya · · Score: 5, Funny

    All of them.

    --
    What?
  2. Re:Willy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    his name is Robert Paulson

  3. Re:Britanicca is useless. by gardyloo · · Score: 5, Funny

    talk: I hate Britannica. It's at best a well spoken gentleman in a pub. It sounds right but I can't be sure. Fixed that for you.

          Fixed that for you.

  4. Re:Purposeful by gardyloo · · Score: 5, Funny

    How many of those errors were purposefully introduced? Encyclopedias and map makers do that all the time to see if others are plagerizing.

        I love irony.

  5. Re:Britanicca is useless. by smookumy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Thanks! I spell like I love: Poorly and with great haste.

  6. Re:A novelty but nothing more. by Frogbert · · Score: 5, Funny

    This page catalogs some mistakes and omissions in Encyclopædia Britannica (EB) and shows how they have been corrected in Wikipedia. Some errors have already been corrected in Britannica's online version. For many reasons, this page should not be taken too seriously as a comparison; it's just a little bit of fun. It does not mean one is better than the other. I'd say RTFA but for all I know when you looked at the page it could have said something completely different.
  7. Re:Score +5 (Troll) by greenrd · · Score: 5, Funny

    Too bad most of the administrators think they know more than you, simply because they read an article on the subject. The others are all to happy to demonstrate the Wikipedia caste system to you.

    [citation needed]

  8. Re:Score +5 (Troll) by sqldr · · Score: 5, Funny

    There are times when I feel the urge to write "citation needed" on every single article on conservapedia, eg. on the origins of kangaroos:

    "After the Flood, these kangaroos bred from the Ark passengers migrated to Australia." [citation needed]

    I mean, what the fuck?

    "There is debate whether this migration happened over land with lower sea levels during the post-flood ice age, or before the supercontinent of Pangea broke apart, or if they rafted on mats of vegetation torn up by the receding flood waters." [citation really fucking needed]

    Kangaroos crossing thousands of miles of ocean on rafts.. I'm not sure these guys are strictly adhering to their anti-pot-smoking policy.

    --
    I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
  9. Re:Britanicca is useless. by Spaseboy · · Score: 5, Funny

    How do you digg comments on here? I see all these scores but no way to digg people up or down.

    --
    "I don't want more choice, I just want nicer things!"
    -Jennifer Saunders as Edina Monsoon