Mathias Schindler wrote:

Here is the article list: http://www.nature.com/news/2005/051212/multimedia/438900a_m1.html

here is the full article: http://www.nature.com/news/2005/051212/full/438900a.html

Entry Encyclopaedia Britannica inaccuracies Wikipedia inaccuracies Acheulean industry 1 7 Agent Orange 2 2

[snip]

What would be really interesting would be to get a list of the inaccuracies themselves (not just the tallies of how many were found in each article).

Then see how long it takes for Wikipedians to get the same articles to pass peer review with No Errors in the entire sample.

If it was less than a month, that would vindicate the opennes of Wikipedia. Less than a week would be mind-blowing.

And no fair taunting the peer reviewers with {{sofixit}}, either :-)

Ed Poor