Chark Blog - Storm in a teacup

Friday, March 24, 2006

If you follow this link you will be able to read an exchange of broadsides between Encyclopaedia Britannica (EB)and our very own Nature. Nature published some material suggesting that in some areas of science Wikipedia entries can compete with those in the magisterial Encyclopaedia. I trust the guys in Nature totally and I am sure their assessment was both objective and correct but even if they were being unfair the last thing I'd do at EB would be to publicise the affair. This can only damage EB's reputation and that would be really unjust. Nowt so queer as folks.

As Timo says in his blog, judge for yourselves.

3/25/2006 8:14:39 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)

Encyclopaedia Britannica (EB) peaked at the 11th edition, which is used as standard reference by many antiquarian bookdealers : 14th and later editions have virtually no value to a secondhand bookdealer. EB have lived off past glories for too long : pity to see such old faithfuls shooting themselves in the foot - a real no-brainer from EB when they "attack" Nature.

Clive Keeble

Welcome

This is it. I am officially entering the blogosphere. This is not a Macmillan blog, but Macmillan will certainly feature heavily. The idea is that when we need to share anything from company strategy through news, to talk about new ideas or to help us learn from our successes and our mistakes, we can all blog about it here. This means no more email newsletters from me. Instead, you can read (and blog) all about it here. And don't forget to bookmark this page and to let colleagues know all about it.

The broader the audience the more effective this blog becomes.

And it becomes a lot more interesting if you join the conversation... so don't be shy.

Google Ads

Charchive

November 2009

Sun

Mon

Tue

Wed

Thu

Fri

Sat