[Foundation-l] Closer look at Nature's results: Average article size for Wikipedia: 6.80 KB; Britannica: 2.60 KB. Number of errors per 2KB for Wikipedia: 1; Britannica: 6.5

[David Gerard]

Delphine Ménard wrote:

> But why, why why go into this competition thing? :(
> I believe Britannica and Wikipedia are pursuing the same goals, with
> different means. Although I find it excellent that we take Britannica
> as an example and as a goal, I believe we have much to learn from
> them, and they from us. Can't we work hand in hand to achieve that
> goal? Competition should be an incentive to get better, for them and
> for us, not because we want to be the best, not because of stupid
> numbers, but because we are looking to achieve this:


It's good to see that Brockhaus is trying to work out how to work with
the upstart newcomer (de:). If Britannica can do so, that will be
fantastic for both us and them.

(The Encyclopaedia Britannica is one of the greatest non-fiction books
of Anglophone culture, up there with the Oxford English Dictionary. I
really, really hope they can get the business side profitable once more!)


> Tell you what, what I hope is that in 2 years from now, Nature will do
> the same study, and find 0 mistake. Neither in Britannica, nor in
> Wikipedia.


That would be nice to see :-)


- d.