| |
|
15. desember 2005
|
|
Nature magazine has conducted an examination of science articles in both the Wikipedia and the Encyclopaedia Britannica.
Not a fair match, you say? On scientific accuracy, the results were surprisingly even:
In order to test its reliability, Nature conducted a peer review of scientific entries on Wikipedia and the well-established Encyclopedia Britannica.
The reviewers were asked to check for errors, but were not told about the source of the information.
"Only eight serious errors, such as misinterpretations of important concepts, were detected in the pairs of articles reviewed, four from each encyclopedia," reported Nature.
"But reviewers also found many factual errors, omissions or misleading statements: 162 and 123 in Wikipedia and Britannica, respectively."
But, as everybody who uses and likes the Wikipedia, and also the Britannica, which is still dominating some of my bookshelves (yes, books!), there is a huge difference in wiriting quality and organisation.
Nature said its reviewers found that Wikipedia entries were often poorly structured and confused.
Still, overall surprisingly good results for Wikipedia after what has been a few rough weeks.
PS: Yes, the BBC misspelled "encyclopædia." Missing a key on your keyboards, guys? You can just use ae, you know.
PS 2: You may remember that Bjørn Stærk stated some firm opinions on this very comparison some weeks ago.
4:48:34 PM 
|
|
 Again, it is a democratic election in Iraq, and this time it's the real, permanent legislative body that is elected. The purple fingers who represented the courage and free choice of Iraqis will again be seen all over the country, as voters turn out in numbers that put most western democracies to shame.
Dexter Filkins, the NYT:
Iraqi voters began streaming to the polls Thursday morning in nationwide elections as Iraqi leaders predicted that the vote would split almost evenly between secular and Islamist parties and usher in lengthy political maneuvering.
The elections, which are expected to draw as many as 10 million Iraqis to the polls, will be the last formal milestone in the American-backed political process that was devised to foster a democratic government.
The elections are being seen by Iraqi and American leaders as the definitive test of the Bush administration's assumption that a free vote is the best means for reconciling Iraq's vastly polarized ethnic and sectarian groups and defeating the Sunni Arab insurgency that is threatening to break the country apart.
The voting itself is expected to reveal a fissure of another sort, between a Shiite coalition of religious parties on one side and a mostly secular array of Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish parties on the other.
More or less like the US, then. If the secularists and their allies manage to get close to half the vote, that would be a quite decisive repudiation of any alleged Islamist agenda. And, it must be remembered, far from all religious parties are theocrats (this atheist is way past those days when he assumed all religious politicians favoured a return to the dark ages).
Ellen Knickmeyer and Jonathan Finer in the Washington Post:
Iraqi voters turned out in force countrywide Thursday to elect a parliament to remake their troubled nation, with Sunni-led Iraqi insurgent movements suspending attacks for a day so that Sunni Arabs could vote en masse for the first time.
The voting appeared to split along sectarian lines as expected, with many Sunni voters in the Sunni-dominated far west saying they were voting for Sunni candidates. Long lines were reported among Sunnis, most of whom boycotted elections earlier this year or were frightened away by threats.
There were no boycotts this time and some insurgents were providing security at some polling places. In Ramadi, for example, guerrillas of the Iraqi Islamic Army movement took up positions in some neighborhoods, promising to protect voters from any attacks by foreign fighters.
This time, Sunni clerics not only lifted a boycott call that had suppressed Sunni turnout in January's national elections but actively encouraged turnout.
The BBC:
Iraqis have voted in large numbers for their first full-term government since the US-led invasion in 2003.
Voting was extended by an hour in some areas because of the high turnout, Iraq's election commission said.
Around 15 million Iraqis are eligible to participate in this election. They elect a 275-seat assembly for a four-year term. Election is spread over 18 provinces. 230 seats are allocated according to proportional representation in the provinces, and 45 seats are given "to parties whose ethnic, religious or political support is spread over more than one province." One third of the candidates of all parties must be women.
4:34:02 PM
|
|
There may have been humans in the United Kingdom 700,000 years ago.
Ancient tools found in Britain show that humans lived in northern Europe 200,000 years earlier than previously thought, at a time when the climate was warm enough for lions, elephants and saber tooth tigers to also roam what is now England.
Scientists said Wednesday that 32 black flint artifacts, found in river sediments in Pakefield in eastern England, date back 700,000 years and represent the earliest unequivocal evidence of human presence north of the Alps.
And here I thought it had "never been warmer."
12:30:19 AM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2005 Jan Haugland.
Last update: 31.12.2005; 03:37:53.
|
|
|
