Google Launches Its Paid Wikipedia Rival

What's Darwinesque about a resurrection?
:P

My question precisely. Surely Lazarus would have been more obvious? I hadn't realised Darwin had been resurrected as well. Is he going to give a speech later?

See what he did there? lol. Gordon is a great writer - I wish more journalists had a sense of humor. Btw, I'm confused by the name. I thought Knol was 'a vantage point from which one might shoot a president... may be grassy'. Let's Wiki that while we're at it.

Ah, Wikipedia. The only place that someone can write anything, and have it accepted as fact. Winner.

"Ah, Wikipedia. The only place that someone can write anything, and have it accepted as fact. Winner."

I thought that applied more to Religion (The Bible etc), the mainstream 'News' and anything where getting people to unquestionably believe what you're saying is important (Scientology, politics etc). I think Wikipedia, whilst far from perfect is a great resource for general encyclopaedic information.

No encyclopaedia, especially something written (or rather edited or moderated) by the general public (and internal unaccountable wikipedia staff), is meant to be the sole source for any reliable research (in authoritative context or not). It's a starting point or quick reference to basic facts and as to accuracy, that would rather depend on the subject. Scientific information should tend to have better credibility than some bio on a public figure for instance so if you're just curious about a subject like astronomy or what chaos theory is about, then you're going to come away with a better knowledge of the subject than if you didn't read a wiki. It doesn't make you Einstein but at least you'll be better informed so as to appreciate the subject and further sources of info more. If you're serious about something, then you'll go away and read a book or some papers or even do some real world research yourself.

Oh THAT Darwin. Doh!