Wikipedia matches Encyclopaedia Britannica for science, peer review finds

December 19, 2005

Brussels, 16 Dec 2005

A study by the journal Nature has found that the accuracy of scientific information contained in the free online resource Wikipedia is roughly the same as that of the Encyclopaedia Britannica.

Wikipedia is produced by volunteers who add entries and edit others, while the Encyclopaedia Britannica is produced under the leadership of an editorial board comprising Nobel laureates and Pulitzer Prize winners, leading scholars, writers, artists, public servants, and activists who are at the top of their fields.

Wikipedia was founded in 2001, and now plays host to more than 1.8 million articles in 200 languages. In contrast, the Encyclopaedia Britannica was founded in 1768. In the past, Wikipedia has been criticised for inaccuracies in its entries, but Nature's peer review did not support this criticism.

Eight serious errors, including misinterpretations of important scientific concepts, were detected in the articles compared - four from each encyclopaedia. In addition, many less serious errors, classed as factual errors, omissions and misleading statements, were found in each - 162 and 123 in Wikipedia and Britannica respectively.

In January, Wikipedia will begin testing a new mechanism for reviewing the accuracy of its articles.


Encyclopaedia Britannica

CORDIS RTD-NEWS/© European Communities, 2005
Item source Previous Item Back to Titles Print Item

Please login or register to read this article

Register to continue

Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary.

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments