[Web4lib] Wikipedia vs Britannica

[Randy Souther]

FYI, cold fusion in 1989 was a media fiasco, but not a fraud. The  
research is still controversial, but continues today with  
publications in more than 50 peer-reviewed journals. But you would  
never realize this by reading Britannica's one-paragraph article,  
which is stuck in 1989; Wikipedia's gives a reasonable overview, and  
is up-to-date.

Randy Souther
Reference Technology Librarian
Gleeson Library | Geschke Center
University of San Francisco

southerr at usfca.edu
415-422-5388


On Jan 5, 2006, at 9:13 AM, Dan Lester wrote:


>
> And I don't hold the faked research against the journal as such, since
> I'm sure the article was reviewed by experts in the field before
> publication.  I'm sure you remember the cold fusion (as opposed to
> Cold Fusion) fraud a few years ago that also got through extensive
> review processes.