International   

Wikipedia now gets an endorsement for accuracy

The widely accessed volunteer encyclopaedia is nearly as accurate as the Britannica, scientific journal says

SAN FRANCISCO: Wikipedia, the encyclopaedia that relies on volunteers to create nearly four million articles, is about as accurate in covering scientific topics as Encyclopaedia Britannica, the journal Nature wrote in an online article.

The finding, based on a side-by-side comparison of articles covering a broad swath of the scientific spectrum, comes even as Wikipedia faces criticism over the accuracy of some of its entries. Two weeks ago journalist John Seigenthaler, former publisher of the Tennessean newspaper and founding editorial director of USA Today, revealed that a Wikipedia entry that ran for four months had incorrectly named him as a long-time suspect in the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy and his brother Robert.

Peer review

Such errors appear to be the exception rather than the rule, Nature said in an article published on Wednesday. The scientific journal said it was the first to use peer review to compare Wikipedia to Britannica. Based on 42 articles reviewed by experts, the average scientific entry in Wikipedia contained four errors or omissions, while Britannica had three. Of eight "serious errors" the reviewers found — including misinterpretations of important concepts — four came from each source, the journal reported.

"We're very pleased with the results and we're hoping it will focus people's attention on the overall level of our work, which is pretty good," said Jimmy Wales, who founded Florida-based Wikipedia in 2001. He said the level of accuracy of his project varies by topic, with strong suits including pop culture and contemporary technology. That is because Wikipedia's stable of dedicated volunteers tend to have more collective expertise in such areas, he said.

Where it lags

The site tends to lag when it comes to topics touching on the humanities, such as the winner of the Nobel Prize for literature for a given year, Mr. Wales said.

Next month, Wikipedia plans to begin testing a new mechanism to review the accuracy of its articles. The group is working on ways to make its review process easier to use by people who have limited familiarity with computers and the Internet.

Encyclopaedia Britannica officials declined to comment on the findings because they had not seen the data.

Unlike Britannica, which charges for access to its content and pays a staff of experts to research and write its articles, Wikipedia gives away its content for free and allows anyone — amateur or professional, expert or novice — to submit and edit entries.

Wikipedia, which boasts 3.7 million articles in 200 languages, is the 37th most visited website (http://www.wikipedia.org) on the Internet, according to one assessment. On the Net, Nature is at http://www.nature.com and Encyclopaedia Britannica at http://www.britannica.com — AP

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Common stand likely on trade
Protests with a difference in Hong Kong
More delegates from developed nations
Sri Lanka's main parties agree to hold talks with the LTTE
Sunni participation boosts Iraqi election turnout
Pakistan army chopper fired at
Central Asian oil flows to China
Arroyo downplays coup attempt
Wikipedia now gets an endorsement for accuracy
Walkers all
Bush accepts blame for war
Nepalese soldiers gun down 13 villagers
Mobile phones turn travel guides

Copyright © 2005, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu