FYI, Britannica has responded to the Nature article, and it's pointed, relatively detailed/in-depth response: http://corporate.britannica.com/britannica_nature_response.pdf Ingbert Floyd PhD Student Graduate School of Library and Information Science University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign -- ========================================== Check out the unofficial GSLIS Wiki: http://www.gslis.org/ Tell me what you think, if you find it useful, or if you have any ideas for how to organize it better. And if you feel comfortable doing so, I heartily encourage you to contribute content! This GSLIS is the Graduate School of Library and Information Science at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign.
Dear Ingbert, Thank you for this really interesting statement! I am bemused by the tone and the accusations. As someone in marketing, I would have thought, that a company like britannica would rather choose a more "de-escalating" communication... I find really interesting, that the authors of this britannica-rejction of the nature-study many times point out, that they did not show certain information in an article, because it would distract the reader. This is exactly, where Wikipedia beats Britannica - and always will! Wikipedia can link furthergoing informations, such as arguable views of different scientists, when a Nobel prize was awarded and when it was handed over. But - I must also acknowkledge, that especially the English Wikipedia is very...unique in the way the information or the editing of it is used. I had the pleasure of reviewing the German and the English Wikipedia concerning "geodesy" - and the differences in accuracy, depth of information and presentation of different views inside the scientific community were...unexpectedly great. I thought about this for two weeks now, and after visiting the GOR, the German(or now General) Online Research Conference in Bielefeld this week, I made contact to different scholars and universities, which all focussed in their studies on Wikipedia. Unfortunately, none really answered my questions/concerns fully. => I am searching for a "sound" study, comparing the Wikipedias of this world regarding this issue - the accuracy of information and the way the Wikipedia is used by the different "cultures" to present views as informations (and here the problem begins - which culture is supposed to influence the English Wikipedia - the British, Australian or the American? for example). But it got obvious to me, that the German Wikipedia was far more accurate and precise about key facts and especially about the current debate on an issue in geodesy. Wikipedia is just in it's youth, britannica has been there for quite some time - so I personally opt for a mixture of both for the present. The future is Wikipedias, though - make no mistake by denying the power of letting individuals contribute to a knowledge-base, while every other individual can acutally check and better the content entered. And I would provokingly assume, that the quality of the content of a specific Wikipedia then reflects the abilities of the corresponding culture/society to distribute knowledge equally enough to ensure a basic understanding...and therefore useable distinction between views and objective informations (if there are any) ;) And of course, no German politician would ever consider misusing the German Wikipedia for at least doubtable informations - that would be her/his end - in other countries and cultures, this is seen as an "intelligent" useage of a medium, though. Wikipedia is really fascinating - in so many ways - it already changes the life of so many people. When the kids from friends visit us and question us about the unexpected (and kids do have a sense, which questions you would not expect) we sit together infront of Wikipedia and research it => and through links inside Wikipedia and to the corresponding institutions we gain valueable knowledge. I for one will see to it, that Wikipedia grows - at least the German one, that I can influence much better, as it is my mother-tounge. Sorry, if it went off-topic...but then...the language debate did too ;) Take care and give Wikipedia it's time... sam
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] Im Auftrag von Ingbert Floyd Gesendet: Samstag, 25. März 2006 22:05 An: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Betreff: [Air-l] Wikipedia vs. Nature article update
FYI, Britannica has responded to the Nature article, and it's pointed, relatively detailed/in-depth response:
http://corporate.britannica.com/britannica_nature_response.pdf
Ingbert Floyd PhD Student Graduate School of Library and Information Science University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign
--
========================================== Check out the unofficial GSLIS Wiki:
Tell me what you think, if you find it useful, or if you have any ideas for how to organize it better. And if you feel comfortable doing so, I heartily encourage you to contribute content!
This GSLIS is the Graduate School of Library and Information Science at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign. _______________________________________________ The air-l@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
Sam Liban wrote:
And of course, no German politician would ever consider misusing the German Wikipedia for at least doubtable informations - that would be her/his end - in other countries and cultures, this is seen as an "intelligent" useage of a medium, though.
I am not sure if you were joking here, but in fact there was a bit of a scandal in Germany when a politicians office was caught editing wikipedia to slam an opponent. I could find out the particulars if you are interested.
Here is Nature's response http://www.nature.com/press_releases/Britannica_response.pdf Its getting hot in here! Ingbert Floyd wrote:
FYI, Britannica has responded to the Nature article, and it's pointed, relatively detailed/in-depth response:
http://corporate.britannica.com/britannica_nature_response.pdf
Ingbert Floyd PhD Student Graduate School of Library and Information Science University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign
--
========================================== Check out the unofficial GSLIS Wiki:
Tell me what you think, if you find it useful, or if you have any ideas for how to organize it better. And if you feel comfortable doing so, I heartily encourage you to contribute content!
This GSLIS is the Graduate School of Library and Information Science at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign. _______________________________________________ The air-l@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
-- Karim R. Lakhani MIT Sloan | The Boston Consulting Group Mobile: +1 (617) 851-1224 http://spoudaiospaizen.net http://web.mit.edu/lakhani/www | http://opensource.mit.edu My *new* book: http://tinyurl.com/cjxj6
Any similar efforts in the U.S? Oh, regardless of the language, of course ... http://www.wai-not.org/default1.asp?Lan_ID=en Jarek
participants (5)
-
Ingbert Floyd -
J. J. -
Jimmy Wales -
Karim R. Lakhani -
Sam Liban