On Jan 25, 2008 9:47 AM, bharat shetty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That led me to googling and I came upon this > http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Main_Page - which promises to be a better > Wikipedia, by offering reliable content that can be trusted upon. Any > insights, enlightening comments around, o' venerable silk-listers ?
While I agree that Wikipedia articles have inaccuracies and many could do with some good copy editing and pruning, I have my own doubts about whether a "peer reviewed" encyclopedia is any better when it comes to accuracy. I came across the Encyclopedia of Food and Culture[1] a couple of years ago at SciFoo camp. I glanced at a few of the articles in it and it looked promising. I then turned to the articles on Indian cuisine and it full of inaccuracies. For example, an idly is described as deep fried lentil dough balls (clearly a bonda or vada). There were at least a couple of dozen such mistakes. What I found annoying with the mistakes was the fact that (a) I could not quickly correct them and (b) The article was supposedly written by an expert in the field. A frequent snarky remark about open source and content is "you get what you pay for". If all I can get for $420 per volume is articles with glaring inaccuracies, I would rather settle for wikipedia, warts and all. Thaths [1] http://www.amazon.com/Encyclopedia-Culture-Scribner-Library-Daily/dp/0684805685/ -- Bart: We were just planning the father-son river rafting trip. Homer: Hehe. You don't have a son. Sudhakar Chandra Slacker Without Borders
