Daily Digest

[autographedcat]

According to an Associated Press article, the science journal Nature found that in a head-to-head comparison, the online encyclopedia Wikipedia was substantially as accurate as the Encyclopedia Britannica.

---

Will Shetterly (shetterly) links to a report in The Christian Century: The University of Geneva’s Rodolphe Kasser will soon be publishing a translation of the long-lost Gospel According to Judas Iscariot. The gospel, first mentioned as early as 180AD by Irenaeus of Lyon, will be an English translation of a fourth century Coptic language text discovered a few decades ago at Muhazafat Al Minya in Middle Egypt. I’ve always been facinated by apocryphal texts like the Gnostic Gospels, so this should be quite a lot of fun to read. More information about the text can be found here.

---

Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett offer up New Years Resolutions for Ariziphale and Crowley, characters from their novel Good Omens, which HarperCollins is apparently issuing a new hardcover edition of in 2006.

---

thespian points to one of the more bizarre things I’ve ever seen printed, A Ziggy Stardust comic book.

---

Someone on rec.arts.comics.strips points to this lovely essay by Mark Evanier detailing a chance encounter with Mel Torme in Los Angeles one Christmastime. It’s a lovely story.

---

earthmystic ponders the formulation of an anatomy of Love. Lots of stuff here I agree with.

---

New Scientist Space has a facinating article on thirteen things that don’t make sense, including the placebo effect, dark matter, and cold fusion.

Comments

[mdlbear]

More specifically -- and more interestingly -- the Nature study found that Wikipedia had somewhat more errors per article, but fewer errors per word.

[autographedcat.livejournal.com]

True, but the main point was that, at least in articles on Natural Science, there wasn't a substantial difference in the quality of accuracy between the two.

This isn't so much a championing of Wikipedia as a reminder that even the very best compendiums of knowledge are fallable, and that all information should be a) taken in context, and b) cross-checked with other sources.

[bardling.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the link to earthmystic's post. That was well worth reading and is pretty much a very welcome reminder for me of what was more or less my philosophy. Need to work back to that. :)

[davehogg.livejournal.com]

Have I ever mentioned that Neil Gaiman once talked on my cell phone?

[autographedcat.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty sure I even heard the message, if this is the time I'm thinking of. :)

[davehogg.livejournal.com]

*solemn nod* I suspect it is the same one.