Re: [WikiEN-l] Flagged protection and patrolled revisions

These are great questions, and we're actually having a big meeting about the project this afternoon, so I'll be sure to raise them to make sure we all have the same notion. That said, a few of quick responses from my perspective: On 05/03/2010 08:15 AM, Carcharoth wrote: > Since it does seem ve

Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia trumps Britannica

On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Keith Old wrote: > Folks, > > According to John Graham-Cumming, Wikipedia is a better resource for > researchers than Britannica. > > http://newstilt.com/notthatkindofdoctor/news/wikipedia-trumps-britannia > >

Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia trumps Britannica

> What I discovered was that Wikipedia trumps Britanncia all the time because > its articles are in more depth and provide better references. And the site > design means that Wikipedia is easily navigable and focuses on the content, > whereas Britannica’s site assaults the eyes with distractions.

Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia trumps Britannica

Keith Old wrote: > Folks, > > According to John Graham-Cumming, Wikipedia is a better resource for > researchers than Britannica. > > http://newstilt.com/notthatkindofdoctor/news/wikipedia-trumps-britannia > > > Initially, I’d find myself double-checking facts on Wikipedia by looking in > Brita

[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia trumps Britannica

Folks, According to John Graham-Cumming, Wikipedia is a better resource for researchers than Britannica. http://newstilt.com/notthatkindofdoctor/news/wikipedia-trumps-britannia While writing The Geek Atlas I used both Encyc