[WikiEN-l] So much for books as reliable references!

[geni]

On 2/2/06, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
> Stan Shebs wrote:
>
> > Actually, it's sort of interesting that this is news. While it's
> > common practice to have peer review for scholarly books, the "peer"
> > part of the term should be a hint that it's not the publisher doing
> > the checking! My guess is that our reverence for the printed page
> > is such that we just assume no one would dare to print without
> > being certain of its correctness.
>
> In many fields the peer-review of even scholarly books is not all that
> high.  In the sciences, journal articles hold much more weight than
> books, because there's a perception that anybody can get a book published.
>
> -Mark

Do you do much organic synthersis? All those claims of 90% yield tend
to be treated slightly skepticaly.

--
geni