Which is more reliable, Wikipedia or Britannica online? and why?

Quality of Information:There is a lot of argument as to whether Wikipedia is reliable or not. Please investigate this by comparing Wikipedia with Encyclopedia Britannica. Choose 4 different topics: * A historical topic * A geography topic * A science topic * A film industry topicAssess the quality of information from each source for each of your topics. Refer to the ICT theory section of the course on 'what makes good information?' What Characteristics does information have to have to be good information?Also, research other articles that have been written that compare Wikipedia withe Encyclopedia Britannica. What conclusions do you draw from both your research and the research findings that are available on the internet?1000words maxThis is the question set to me, i'm having trouble myself. Just wondering whether i could a few ideas set to me. hope thats OK. im not looking for an Essay, just a few pointers.thanks,Chris

Similar Asks:

  • Need information for a World Geography essay? - I need information on Laos. So far, I’ve found some pretty good information from Britannica, a book in my school library, [external link] … and [external link] …I need (and want) more info on Laos. Can anybody recommend me any sites that I can get more info off of?This is for an essay
  • 4. Where would you look to find an article on recent fashion trends? - Where would you look to find an article on recent fashion trends? A. Readers’ Guide B. Who’s Who C. Card catalog D. Encyclopedia 5. Once you acquire these
  • A few questions about plagiarism? - We just got our Macbeth essay assigned today. The sheet says that we cannot use any outside sources and should only go by our notes. This means that we can’t look up information on the internet. This is a problem for me because I always have to research my topic before I write the essay.
  • Which of the following statements is not true? - Which of the following statements is not true?A.The Internet should not be your first stop for primary sources you can use as the basis of your research essay.B.Used in conjunction with the library, the Internet is a valuable research tool.C.You don’t have to visit the library to do research if you have access to the
  • Laptop Choice: Vaio CR Series vs HP Pavillion Media Centre? - I’m interested in investing in a new laptop for uni and was wondering which of the two is better (quality wise) Aside from the usual essays/internet etc, I’m looking for one to watch movies and edit photos on (memory card reader is a must) as well as play computer games. Was wondering if anyone
  • I have a huge essay due this week its my senior paper and i cant think of a good conclusion please help me out? - My favorite teacher at Uni always said she hated conclusions. She said the idea of trying to sum up what you’ve spent pages analyzing in one paragraph does an injustice to the rest of your paper. However, she said, if you need one, try taking the ideas that you’ve reached, the ones you’ve spent so
  • Help me find a good online encyclopedia that talks about the causes of the crusades? - i wrote my essay already but i need some quotes to through in supporting my argument that the crusades were primarily motivated by religious factors. i know im working backwards but i need to finish this thing soo i can enjoy whats left of my summer. the only online encyclopedia that i found with info

6 Responses to “Which is more reliable, Wikipedia or Britannica online? and why?”

  1. prepotently says:

    if it’s historical and geography topic, don’t rely too much on wikipedia. if it’s all about science, both wiki and brittanica are pretty much reliable. brittanica is reliable in any topic anyway.

  2. decaspermous says:

    In my opinion, Wikipedia is a lot better, but is not the best of them all. From the two, the wiki has had much more information than Britannica. The articles outnumber it by way more. Wikipedia is also a better place to find “not official” things, such as histories of websites. Britannica does not have so much of that. Although Wiki has so many articles, it also has false information sometimes. For that reason, I always double check with another website, or Brit. Overall, Wikipedia is better.

  3. endopleuritic says:

    Wikipedia has more information, but Brittanica would be more accurate becuase no-one will be able to do anything if Wikipedia has unreliable info, but Brittanica would lose sales, and it has a reputation to keep up. Hope this helps!

  4. Rasselas says:

    wiki as always more reliable, cuz your mom has a better site on it. Let’s say I use Britania, your mom don’t even got a site on there :(

  5. g says:

    I think britannica online and wikipedia…both are good..but as we are talking about reliability then i guess Wikipedia.

  6. unforested says:

    The pitfall you must avoid is the assumption that Britannica is authoritative. It contains errors also, although they tend to be less dramatic than the errors in Wikipedia. Comparison must be made with accurate information. That can be generated from experts or you can attempt to research it. Notice that I define error as divergence from accurate information, not divergence from authoritative information. Wikipedia aspires not to truth, but to conformation with authoritative information. I’m not sure how your course defines good information. To take an example which was recently in the news, what was “good information” regarding the consequences of securitization of subprime mortages? Easy to tell now, but how about before? How does Britannica’s handling of the housing bubble, the subprime mortgage crisis, or the global financial crisis of 2008 compare with Wikipedia’s? When did Britannica first print information that sucuritization of subprime mortgages might result in a financial crisis?, or did? Unfair questions, I suppose…