[WikiEN-l] Academic study: Wikipedia cancer information accurate but hard to read

[WereSpielChequers]

Nice to know we are as accurate and more up-to-date than the competition.
I'd love to see further work done on the 2% of information where we
currently differ from the textbooks, hopefully most of that will just be
that the textbooks are out of date. But it would be good to have that
confirmed and any errors fixed.

As for "The study authors recommend that patients use the PDQ site first so
they are not inundated by complex information and hyperlinks". I'm not sure
how dumbed down things have to be for ninth graders - but if I'm right in
assuming that ninth graders is American English for early teens
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninth_grade then I'm surprised they think
hyperlinks might be beyond them. Is it just possible that someone in the
medical profession is being patronising to the public here?

WSC

On 16 September 2011 03:26, Tony Sidaway <tonysidaway at gmail.com> wrote:

> It appears that a study by a team at the Medical School at Thomas Jefferson
> University has found Wikipedia's cancer information to be very accurate and
> updated more frequently than other sources. Compared to professional
> sources
> such as PDQ, however, it's a bit of a trudge to read.
>
> http://www.doctorslounge.com/index.php/news/hd/23109
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>