Britannica Goes After Wikipedia and Google

kzieli writes "Britannica is going to allow viewers to edit articles, with changes to be reviewed by editors within 20 minutes. There is also a bit of a rant against Google for ranking Wikipedia above Britannica on most search terms."

Comments

Just checked Britannica.com - I wouldn't use it!

[IBBoard]

I just checked Britannica.com and I can see another reason why people avoid it - it's terrible for access, where as Wikipedia is a nice and simple browsable site, much closer to a reference book with cross-reference links.

You hit the front page of Brittanica.com and you get two Flash movies (which I don't see because I use Gnash and have it set to pause on load and not play) and the side panel animates itself open. I decide to try and browse and I can't because the Flash is rendered above the "browse" pop-up layer. I do a search and there's no obvious search button, you just have to hit the Enter key and assume it'll work. Rather than giving you results or the page you want it gave me a quick "light box" animation before popping up another layer. Once I do get to the article it takes ages to load because of the adverts and a slow caching site (ironically) and then it proceeds to plaster its "pay for premium" advert over what I was just about to read! When you close the "pay for premium" layer it won't even go away - apparently details about "encyclopedia" are a premium topic and so it keeps popping back every few seconds!

With an interface like that there's no wonder people prefer Wikipedia given that it's "accurate enough" for most people's needs.

So if I change their page on Cold Dark Matter

[VShael]

they're going to have an expert review it in 20 minutes?

What about a change to some obscure British scifi novel, like The Last Legionary? (By Douglas Hill)

This is never gonna work.

(* I have made changes to both of those pages in wikipedia, and though obscure topics, it wasn't long before further changes were made clarifying my own poorly written points.)

Re:Linkage creates the ranks

[elrous0]

It's also the fact that Wikipedia just has so much more content and depth, especially on specific topics (Britannica just has articles on the big and obvious stuff). The sheer volume of information on Wikipedia makes Britannica look like a Kindergartner's encyclopedia. Just this morning, on an earlier topic on plutonium, someone on /. pointed to a fascinating Wikipedia entry on "Cherenkov Radiation" (in response to someone saying that radiation didn't actually make things glow in real life). Later I went and typed in "Cherenkov Radiation" in Britannica just to compare and got...well nothing. Britannica has an article on "radiation" in general, but nothing nearly as specific as this.