[LINK] Wikipedia Critic Finds Copied Passages

[andrew clarke]

On Tue, Nov 07, 2006 at 07:51:01AM +1100, Richard Chirgwin wrote:

> >>>"They present it as an encyclopedia," Brandt said Friday. "They go  
> >>>around claiming it's almost as good as Britannica. They are trying  
> >>>to be mainstream respectable."

> >I never got that impression about Wikipedia, but either way, what is
> >more important is that its users (both editors and readers) understand
> >its limitations.

> That, however, is the problem. The word "encyclopedia" is right there on 
> the front page... not every user is going to know that the debate exists.

I was particularly really referring to the "almost as good as
Britannica", because I'd not heard that ever mentioned before.  It just
sounds like something a mainstream journalist would come up with so they
could relate Wikipedia to their readers with something they might
already know.

People need to get their head around what they consider an encyclopedia.
I don't think Wikipedia can ever be perfect, but I get the impression
that most editors generally want to do the right thing.