On 12/14/05, Tony Sidaway f.crdfa@gmail.com wrote:
If the reporting is accurate, this is a very significant finding, considering the general perception that Wikipedia doesn't cover science well.
Is that really the general perception?I've always been of the belief that Wikipedia covers science very well, especially as the articles are often written by experts with very little edit warring. It's the political, social, historical and biographical articles that I have much less faith in. People who write about, say, [[Analytic combinatorics]] generally know what they're talking about, while the same can't necessarily be said about [[Communism]]...
Anyway, that sounds like an interesting study.
Sam
-- Asbestos http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Asbestos