Search results
People also ask
Is Wikipedia more accurate than Britannica?
Is Wikipedia more biased than Britannica?
Is Wikipedia a good Encyclopedia?
Is it a mistake to compare Wikipedia to Britannica?
They found that in general, Wikipedia articles were more biased—with 73 percent of them containing code words, compared to just 34 percent in Britannica. In almost all cases, Wikipedia...
Opinions on accuracy were almost equal between the two encyclopedias (6 favoring Britannica, 7 favoring Wikipedia, 5 stating they were equal), and eleven of the eighteen (61%) found Wikipedia somewhat or substantially more complete, compared to seven of the eighteen (39%) for Britannica.
Wikipedia slants more often than Britannica to the left of the political spectrum. As with other reference works, most faculty instruct students not to cite Wikipedia. But some go further, advising students not to consult Wikipedia as a background source.
- David C. Murray
- 2015
- The Wisdom of The Crowd
- More Studies on Wikipedia’s Accuracy
- The Bottom Line
Both the blessing and the curse of Wikipedia is that everyone can editit — that means that a massive amount of articles can be written and managed thanks to the countless work hours put in by thousands of people — but it also means that inaccurate information can easily sneak in articles because thousands of people edit it. However, Wikipedia is no...
Another studyfrom 2005, this time published in Nature, compared the accuracy of a small number of articles (42) on scientific topics compared to Wikipedia and Encyclopaedia Britannica (which is traditionally considered more accurate). The articles were compared by anonymous academic reviewers, just like in scientific papers. Wikipedia had 4 errors ...
Ultimately, for a collaborative project, Wikipedia has found a remarkably efficient model. Your professors may hate it, but it’s a good source of information for most things — actually, it’s a great source of information for most things. Sure, the failures of Wikipedia are spectacular: like that time a 17-year-old student added an invented nickname...
- Founding Editor
Jan 24, 2011 · In 2005, the peer-reviewed journal Nature asked scientists to compare Wikipedia's scientific articles to those in Encyclopaedia Britannica—"the most scholarly of encyclopedias," according...
Jan 14, 2021 · According to research conducted over the years — including a scientific study published by the journal Nature in 2005 and a report commissioned by the site's Wikimedia Foundation in 2012 —...
Feb 17, 2020 · It revealed that, for articles on science, at least, the two resources were nearly comparable: Britannica averaged three minor mistakes per entry, while Wikipedia averaged four. (Britannica ...
