Changes

==10. Wikipedia is unpredictable, inaccurate, and unmanageable.==

==10. Wikipedia is unpredictable, inaccurate, and unmanageable.==

Wikipedians have leaned on a so-called study by ''Nature'' magazine that supposedly proved Wikipedia's accuracy rivaled that of Encyclopedia Britannica.  The study was [http://news.cnet.com/Belatedly,-Britannica-lambastes-Wikipedia-findings/2100-1025_3-6053754.html faulty to the core]. 

Wikipedians have leaned on a so-called study by ''Nature'' magazine that supposedly proved Wikipedia's accuracy rivaled that of Encyclopedia Britannica.  Even though the study was [http://news.cnet.com/Belatedly,-Britannica-lambastes-Wikipedia-findings/2100-1025_3-6053754.html faulty to the core], it still showed if you look only at scientific topics, and if you ignore the structure and clarity of the writing, and if you treat all inaccuracies as equivalent, then you would still conclude that Wikipedia is [http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2006/02/community_and_h.php about 32% less accurate] than Encyclopedia Britannica.   

 

In other research, the 100 articles about the hundred United States Senators [[Wikipedia Vandalism Study|have been shown]] to render erroneous, if not libelous, information about 6.8% of the time.  The Wikipedia leadership have been promising for over two years that a systematic fix for this kind of garbage (called "flagged revisions") is always just around the corner.  It is time to [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=22057&hl= call the Wikipedia leadership on their obfuscation].

   

== Links on MyWikiBiz ==

== Links on MyWikiBiz ==