※ [本文轉錄自 Anthro 看板]
作者: finavir (爆肝中...囧) 看板: Anthro
標題: [文化] 維基 vs. 大英百科 vs.《自然》
時間: Mon Jan 8 08:01:12 2007
之前曾經提到維基百科的幾個弱點。Joshua Barker教授的這篇文章
和相關回應，雖然簡短，但蠻有趣。
原文和回應刊載於：
Metropolis 347: City Cultures/Urban Anthropology
http://metropolis347.blogspot.com/
多倫多大學人類學系ANT347: Metropolis課部落格
Friday, March 24, 2006
Wikipedia vs Encylopaedia vs Nature
posted by Barker
I mentioned in passing yesterday that Nature had published a
paper comparing the accuracy of Wikipedia to Enyclopaedia
Britannica. This was a few months ago so I was surprised to
see that today the BBC is reporting that EB is fighting (pdf)
back by accusing Nature of doing a shoddy study. Nature then
provides a response (pdf). This controversy transcends urban
anthropology. Essentially we are watching 19th century
encylopedism fight it out with 20th century science and 21st
century socialware. Stay tuned to this one as it could have
far-reaching consequences for how truth is arbited in our society.
BBC's report:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4840340.stm
EB's fighting back:
http://corporate.britannica.com/britannica_nature_response.pdf
Nature's response:
http://www.nature.com/press_releases/Britannica_response.pdf
＊ Joshua Barker為多倫多大學人類學系助理教授。
學生的回應和Barker教授的回覆：
http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=19648738&postID=114321074910875653
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 74.98.239.53
※ 編輯: finavir 來自: 74.98.239.53 (01/08 08:06)
※ 編輯: finavir 來自: 74.98.239.53 (01/08 08:07)
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 61.229.108.64