Liar! Liar!

There was a much bally-hooed report in the Journal Nature not too long ago that purported to find that Wikipedia was really not that much less accurate than the Encyclopædia Britannica. Well, the folks at Britannica have fired back and said, in essence, that not only are they superior to Wikipedia but Nature‘s study was flawed and that when they asked Nature for the data so they could attempt to replicate it and correct the errors that Nature refused to share anything more than the excerpts and summaries that they published. Read for yourself here.