>Mike slammed Wikipedia recently, but it appears to be top notch.
>
>From Cnet: "Wikipedia is about as good a source of accurate information as Britannica, the venerable standard-bearer of facts about the world around us, according to a study published this week in the journal Nature."
>
>
http://news.com.com/Study+Wikipedia+as+accurate+as+Britannica/2100-1038_3-5997332.htmlI found that interesting, too. But note that, since it is quite open to editing by different people, there is really no way to control that no insidious lies are spread. Perhaps in a few select topics, depending on the motivation of the individuals involved.
Despite this risk, I use the Wikipedia
a lot for researching all sorts of things.
Difference in opinions hath cost many millions of lives: for instance, whether flesh be bread, or bread be flesh; whether whistling be a vice or a virtue; whether it be better to kiss a post, or throw it into the fire... (from Gulliver's Travels)
