On Thursday 26 August 2004 12:16, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 11:46:32AM +0200, Peter Gervai
wrote:
Why, this
article is pretty fair. It states only the truth:
* Wikipedia is not reviewed by the academics
* Wikipedia does not guarantee validity or accuracy
Neither are paper encyclopedias, but somehow he didn't have any problems
with them. This article is pure biased bullshit.
I haven't read the article, but AFAIK at least some parts of paper
encyclopedias are reviewed. At the Brockhaus they claim that every article
was at least reviewed three times. O.k. I can's validate this information
neither can I proof that it was always reviewed by academics. Nevertheless
Brockhaus lists >1000 external authors (many of have a PhD or higher degree)
which helped with the new edition. The latter is at least some indication
that their claims are not completely without base.
In contrast to that we can not even say if a part of an article was read more
than once.
best regards,
Marco