Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
Oh no, we are perfectly balanced, it's non-free 'pedias that contain too little about computer stuff, science, pop music and sci-fi/fantasy, and surprisingly lot about some boring and not very relevant topics.
:-)
The issue of balance among topics is indeed interesting. I think the wiki mechanism that anybody can add information is the perfect guarantee for relevance. But the balance will reflect the interests of those who *write*, not those who only *read*.
I digitized an old Swedish encyclopedia ("Nordisk familjebok", http://runeberg.org/nf/) and it is clear that the 1st edition (1876-1899) contains a lot more of ancient Greek and Roman mythology and history (stuff known by people who took Latin and Greek in school) and the 2nd edition (1904-1926) focuses more on inventions, technology and contemporary politics (stuff known to people who took French, German, and English in school).
I think you should be able to trace similar trends if you compare different editions of Encyclopaedia Britannica, Larousse, Brockhaus, or other encyclopediae. So it should be natural that Wikipedia reflects the interests of those living in the 21st century and who are familiar with computers.