In response to the twenty page note put out yesterday by Encyclopedia Britannica regarding issues it had with scientific journal Nature’s December comparison study of the former’s science journal entries versus those of Wikipedia, the publication has posted its own two page response in which it defends its position and says it will not retract its original findings.
The opening paragraph of the response, of which the rest can be read here in PDF format, reads â€œIn our issue of 15 December 2005 we published a news article that compared the Internet offerings of Encyclopaedia Britannica and Wikipedia on scientific topics (â€œInternet encyclopaedias go head to headâ€, Nature 438 (7070) p900-901). Encyclopaedia Britannica has now posted a lengthy response to this article on its website, accusing Nature of misrepresentation, sloppiness and indifference to scholarly standards, and calling on us to retract our article. We reject those accusations, and are confident our comparison was fair.â€
For the rest of our original story regarding this conflict, please read yesterday’s article Britannica Comes Out Swinging at Nature.
- Wikipedia is making it easier to explore the internet with page previews
- Everything you need to know about the performance dip on your iPhone
- Facebook’s new fake news tool is partially powered by Wikipedia
- Crock-Pot says device is safe after it was blamed for fake fire on ‘This is Us’
- Everything we know about ‘Star Wars: Episode VIII’