On 12/15/05, Anthere <anthere9(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
What I would love to see is a study in a few
weeks/months to show the
evolution of these 50 articles in the days following the Nature
article... and the delay which was necessary to track the various errors.
I would also welcome on the WMF site a paper summarizing both the
findings of Nature AND the consequences of the article (both in the
press... and directly on Wikipedia articles or on Wikipedians state of
mind).
That is a good idea. Perhaps a significant group could collaborate on
an analytical paper, with input from the authors of the Nature study,
third-party academics using EB and WP, WP contributors, and changes to
the WP articles... and submit such a beast to a peer-reviewed journal
for publication.
SJ