The latest salvo in the Wikipedia-versus-the-world wars: the new edition of the Oxford University Press Dictionary of National Biography — ringing in at nearly $15,000 — is riddled with factual errors. If these errors had appeared in Wikipedia entries, its likely that they would have been fixed in short order — and once they were discovered by the outraged experts quoted in this Observer article, they certainly would be fixed. ¿Quien es mas macho?
'My view is that the quality of the Florence Nightingale entry is exceptionally poor,' said Alex Attewell, director of the Florence Nightingale Museum in London yesterday. 'There are two errors in the first paragraph, for a start. Many are mistakes that would be spotted by anyone with a basic knowledge, but I am more worried by the attitude of the entry. It diminishes Nightingale's intellectual legacy by claiming she rejected the germ theory of disease. In fact, after the Crimean War and after Pasteur's discoveries, she was very influential in improving ward hygiene, issues that are still key today.'
Similar errors have infuriated Jane Austen scholars. 'There are some 70 factual errors, wrong names, wrong dates, wrong family relationships, wrong dating of events, as well as omissions of useful information,' according to the distinguished Austen specialist and author Deidre Le Faye. 'The longer this entry remains uncorrected, the more readers will be misled by it.'
Other entries judged to have failed by informed readers include those for Sir John Malcolm, the 19th-century soldier and diplomat; Peter Monamy, the 18th-century artist; and Henry Winstanley, a 17th-century lighthouse engineer.
(Thanks, Chris!)
