The Encyclopaedia Britannica is an authoritative source for cursory encyclopedic knowledge with pedigree and clout. Having begun in the 1700s in Edinburgh, Scotland(W), it is one of the many go-to sources for information usable by both collegiate students and elementary students alike. On the other hand, Wikipedia is the rowdy upstart. Having begun in 2001 “as a feature of Nupedia.com” (EB), it has since exploded in popularity and frequently tops the Google search page as the number one most useful source of information (solely based on Google’s algorithms). Yet, where once Wikipedia existed alone in online format, the EB has also moved online. So the question arises: how do they stack up against each other?

To settle the score between Wikipedia and the Encyclopaedia Britannica, I decided to compare the two on a topic about which I feel I know a fair amount: science fiction. After gaining access to the EB through my school’s subscription, I typed in the search query in the box at the top of the page (making sure to click the button to search the EB as opposed to Miriam Webster’s Dictionary) and hit Enter. I was directed to a rather bland looking page of white with blue boxes around the left margin and a picture of the Starship Enterprise. A rather small picture, actually, and when I move to click it, an enlarged sample springs across my page and allows me to move around on the zoomed in details. A nifty trick. And doubtless an image purchased with their monies earned through subscription fees. A brief one paragraph summary of science fiction is shown along with several handy buttons including “Save to Workspace,” “Cite Article,” and “Share this Article with your Readers.” The “Expand Your Research” box contains additional resources on the same subject. Also a nifty addition. But that appeared to be all there was. A four sentence summary supposedly encompassing the entirety of the science fiction genre! But lo and behold, in blue text in the blue-gray box are links to the rest of the article. Apparently each individual sub-section of the article has to be viewed independently on the screen and has to be cited differently every time. In other words, in this 24 page article, there are 24 different citations. Admittedly, they are conveniently displayed at the bottom of every page in MLA and APA formats, but I find the very idea to be cumbersome, especially when multiple samples from the same article are needed. Unless one wants to make the bibliography seem larger than it truly is.

Wikipedia operated as usual: Homepage, enter into the search box to the left (notice the suggestions), go to page. All of the information is listed on a single page with the hyperlinked table of contents near the top (after the summary), pertinent mentions with other Wikipedia pages are hyperlinked (something EB seems to have taken), and public domain photos. The primary focus seems to be the different genres on Wiki whereas the literary themes seems to be the focus of the EB entry. A noted difference between the two is the inclusion of all citations in the Wikipedia article and none to be found on the EB site (though it does have many references to additional reading).

In summation, I find Wikipedia to be easier to navigate and slightly more user-friendly. It also makes note of all citations so one may verify facts for oneself. One may have to take EB on blind faith in the breeding, but it does offer many opportunities for further reading and has a more scholarly focus to its articles. In the end, I find them different, but Wikipedia slightly easier to use due to having all of the article on a single page. This doesn’t mean it makes a better scholarly research article, merely easier to use. EB, though lacking citations for its article, does have the scholarly slant which Wikipedia seems to lack.

Encyclopædia Britannica. (2009). Retrieved September 8, 2009, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopaedia_Britannica
Science fiction. (2009). Retrieved September 8, 2009, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_fiction
science fiction. (2009). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved September 8, 2009, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online: http://search.eb.com.libaccess.sjlibrary.org/eb/article-9066289
Wikipedia. (2009). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved September 8, 2009, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online: http://search.eb.com.libaccess.sjlibrary.org/eb/article-9433599

Sînt atacat urât, virulent, batjocoritor, de un tip care nu ştie bine gramatica românească, dar totuşi ţine  blog pe blogosfera românească şi postează despre mine la adresa URL http://viataprinromania.wordpress.com/2009/09/02/istoria-cine-am-fost-de-unde-venim-o-scriem-o-stim-o-vom-stii-dar-de-ce-la-ce-e-buna/ .  O sa incep cu o gluma : “care este asemanarea dintre un sutien si istorie ?”  – R: ambele deformeaza realitate. Vad un om ce scrie pe blogul Roxanei Iordache […] si acest om scrie “blogideologic spune: duminică 30 august 2009 la 6:17:56 pm “Antonescu a avut o ocazie”+I-a fost oferită de Anglia şi America. Winston Churchill scrie acestea, în Memorii. Vechea frontieră a principatului moldovenesc pe rîul Bug era garantată prin Capitulaţiunea de la 1740, semnată de Imperiul Otoman şi de Franţa. Pacea de la Kuciuc Kainargi din 1774 anulează durabil Capitulaţiunea de la 1740, în favoarea Rusiei. În cel de al doilea război mondial, Anglia şi America revalidează pentru România Capitulaţiunea de la 1740. Ion Antonescu încearcă o consolidare a câştigului, dând acte de mutare în Transnistria unor evrei care nu au fost niciodată trimişi acolo. Eu am întâlnit în anul 2004 un asemenea evreu la Craiova, care îmi spunea că mulţi au fost în situaţia lui. Ei figurează probabil printre victimele Holocaustului. Despre ţigani, ce ştiu eu ? Mama, refugiată basarabeancă, m-a născut în casa unui ţigan, Ghiţă Serdaru, din Băileşti. Taică-meu, răzeş sorocean, era mobilizat în Transnistria. Partea proastă este că toată lumea dă vina pe români, fără să întrebe ce ştim noi. Iar dacă spui în toată onestitatea ce ştii, eşti acuzat imediat de negaţionism !”+

Întrebările mele către patronul blogului http://viataprinromania.wordpress.com/ :

1/ “ [Ocazia] I-a fost oferită de Anglia şi America. Winston Churchill scrie acestea, în Memorii.” ziceam eu. Ai fost să citeşti Memoriile lui Winston Churchill  şi să verifici dacă este adevărat ce am spus?  Dacă nu, de ce îmi ceri mie, “pui de leu” (Citeşte şi mai ales ascultă “Pui de lei”, de Ioan Neniţescu, poezia a fost pusă pe muzica compozitorului Ionel G. Brătianu), să nu citesc, şi să nu comentez ce am citit ?  Dacă tu eşti un personaj  caracterizat printr-o vădită lene intelectuală, de ce îmi ceri mie să dau dovadă de aceeaşi lene  intelectuală ?

2/ “Vechea frontieră a principatului moldovenesc pe rîul Bug era garantată prin Capitulaţiunea de la 1740, semnată de Imperiul Otoman şi de Franţa. Pacea de la Kuciuc Kainargi din 1774 anulează durabil Capitulaţiunea de la 1740, în favoarea Rusiei.”  ziceam eu. Mărinimos, patronul blogului viataprinromania.wordpress.com   comentează: „Si imi dau seama ca cel ce a scris asta stie ceva istorie … intrebarea este la ce este buna toata aceasta istorie?” . Să înţeleg că eu, ca român, nu am voie să scriu despre acea istorie, au voie numai străinii, să amintesc titlul cărţii lui Keith Hitchins:  „Românii 1774-1866”, traducerea originalului în limba engleză The Romanians, 1774–1866, New York: Clarendon Press, 1996. Pp. 337. ISBN 0-19-820591-0. $50.00 ? Keith Hitchins este un istoric american, profesor de istorie la University of Illinois (Urbana-Champaign), şi membru de onoare al Academiei Române (din 1991). Nu sînt eu primul ce afirmă că universitari americani cu mediatizate prezenţe în România sunt de fapt agenţi pro-Rusia. Unul dintre exemplele evidente este profesorul Vladimir Tismăneanu – Tismeneţki. Alt profesor american  care îndeplineşte condiţiile spre a fi citat în această categorie este  Keith Hitchins. Am citit cu atenţie, în original, Introducerea cărţii lui Keith Hitchins mai sus amintite. Se ştie ce semnificaţie are anul 1774 : semnarea păcii de la Kuciuc Kainargi. A fost un tratat prin care puterile occidentale, în primul rând Britania, au acordat Rusiei nişte drepturi imense, pe care aceasta nici măcar nu le ceruse. Dar, în acelaşi timp, pacea de la Kuciuc Kainargi şterge o capitulaţiune de mare valoare pentru noi. Vorbesc aici în mod expres despre Capitulaţiunea de la Constantinopol din anul 1740. Prin acea Capitulaţiune de la 1740, Franţa absolutistă garanta în mod expres frontiera răsăriteană a Bogdan-ului (principatul moldovenesc) pe rîul Bug. Or, dacă era un om de ştiinţă fără interese oculte, onestitatea intelectuală îl obliga, repet: îl obliga!, să amintească, măcar în Introducerea foarte sumară a cărţii „Românii 1774-1866”, Capitulaţiunea de la 1740 care a fost ştearsă prin tratatul internaţional de la 1774.  Keith Hitchins tace. De ce tace Keith Hitchins, care altminteri vorbeşte despre evenimente petrecute la începutul seculului XVIII ? Pur şi simplu pentru că obturarea memoriei despre  Capitulaţiunea de la 1740 convine Rusiei ! Anii 1740  şi 1774 aparţin secolului XVIII. Care în Occidentul Europei mai este numit  Epoca Luminilor. Pe noi, jugul  fanariot ne-a lovit cu suspendarea forţată a judecăţilor de valoare prudenţiale,  a hotărârilor  voievodale  în Limba Română,  timp de o sută de ani. Elanul cultural fanariot în Principate nu a respectat preceptul  „Primum non nocere”. După veacul  fanariot, de două ori  nenorocit pentru că era şi turcesc şi rusesc, –grecii jucau „la două capete„–, Limba Română rămâne slăbită, este  bolnavă  şi acum. Ideologii internaţionalişti  văd  lucrurile altfel. Să  cităm  numai din Encyclopaedia Britannica,  într-o  ediţie foarte recentă : „It is necessary, however, to credit the Phanariots  with a quite genuine devotion to the cause of learning and education, which they alone were able to provide inside the oppressed Christian ghetto. The advantages they obtained from the Porte (the Turkish government) for building schools and for developing Greek letters in the Romanian principalities of Moldavia and Walachia that were entrusted to their rule came to play a substantial role in the rebirth of Greece.” Deci regimul fanariot nu a lucrat pentru binele românilor, ci al grecilor, iar asta se afirmă laudativ  chiar în Britannica de-acum. În esenţă, este  acelaşi spirit imperialist  britanic ce a susţinut şi Eteria la 1821, o mişcare pro-rusească,  ţaristă,  al cărei  duh se putea caracteriza   prin termenul anti-România. Cu o continuitate seculară ce îl anima în cel de al doilea război mondial pe Winston Churchill, forţând nepăsător peste gâtul  nostru  jugul  comunist,   similar jugului  fanariot. În acea vreme  ce curge până la Tudor,  cum zicea Ion Brătianu:  „Grecismul năbuşi limba noastră, clasele avute abia mai îngânau limba părinţilor lor şi numele de Român devenise un nume de dispreţ; limba greacă comanda de pe Tron drepturile şi datoriile oamenilor, dascălii greci ocupau catedrele în şcoala domnească şi tot în limba greacă se ridicau imnurile la cer, pe când cea română abia se mai auzea pe lungul brazdei, în monologul plugarului ce mână boii”. După furtul de timp, un secol, Doamne!,  prin efracţie fanariotă, era necesară o gramatică generativă instituţionalizată, pentru a propaga  „în mase” litera  suprastructurii  primare.  Căci “gândul scris, gândul care se ridică din adâncimile sufletului şi explodează în lumina cuvintelor, e tăria spirituală cea mai mare a unui neam”,  cum nota cu  bună dreptate Nichifor Crainic (1889 – 1972).   ” Viaţa mea nu-mi aparţine decît cîteva minute aici, în faţa hârtiei. Dar aici trebuie să fiu lăsat în pace. “, mărturisea  Radu Petrescu înălţând cupa gândului într-un  Simpozion  abstract al  « Şcolii  de la Târgovişte ». Anafura abstractă din cuvinte are semnificaţia de ascensiune spirituală către înnoire. Calitatea vieţii  intelectualului român este definită de calitatea vinului împărtăşit la  marele Banchet al Ideilor, într- o înţelegere pe care mereu o cere credinţa noastră, înţelegere care totdeauna urmează credinţei adevărate.

Titus Filipas

এটি ৩৬ খন্ডের RAR ফাইলে আছে যার প্রত্যেকটি ৯৫.৩৭ MB করে।নিচের লিংকগুলোতে ক্লিক করে ডাউনলোড করুন।
SERIAL NUMBER: 1111111111111111

part-1
part-2
part-3
part-4
part-5
part-6
part-7
part-8
part-9
part-10
part-11
part-12
part-13
part-14
part-15
part-16
part-17
part-18
part-19
part-20
part-21
part-22
part-23
part-24
part-25
part-26
part-27
part-28
part-29
part-30
part-31
part-32
part-33
part-34
part-35
part-36

কৃতজ্ঞতাঃ লিন্কটি সামহোয়্যারইন ব্লগার তুষারপাত ভাইয়ার কাছ থেকে পাওয়া

Shooting the messenger is the world’s favourite hobby. So, the media is roundly berated by media consumers as the harbinger of bad news. Media personnel have been termed by critics as the “nattering nabobs of negativism“.

We suck the warm, positive air out of this wonderful world the rest of humankind inhabits. We separate the wheat from the chaff, and print the chaff. We lead if it bleeds. We make up, steal, distort, spin, sin. Etcetera.

Well….

Well, it turns out, the criticism is not just not new but a lousy cliche.

At a seminar on the “Significance of Spiritual Journalism”, held under the auspices of Viveka Prabha, the monthly magazine published by the Sri Ramakrishna Mission, Mysore, the president of the mission in Cuddapah, Swami Atmavidanandaji, showed just why.

Reports Star of Mysore:

“Scribes tend to underplay the truth and highlight the negative aspects of the news to gain popularity. That creates a false picture of any incident giving wrong information to the readers.

“Once Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa visited a friend’s house and he was asked to sit on a bench where there was a newspaper lying on it.

“Paramahamsa asked his disciple to remove the newspaper and clean that bench with holy Ganga water.

“Asked for the reason, Paramahamsa said that the newspaper carried only bad and negative news. Therefore, it was necessary to clean the bench and then only sit on it.”

After narrating the incident, Swami Atmavidanandaji, reports the paper, called upon the journalists to imbibe spiritualism in their approach and writings to come out with “true-to-life” news.

***

Now, how “true-to-life” could this anecdote be?

Ramakrishna Paramahamsa lived from 1836-1886. None of the pictures show him holding or reading a newspaper. How likely is it that in the home of a devotee at least 120 years ago, a friend would have subscribed to a newspaper? Even if he did, were newspapers already in the sordid business of distorting the truth and spreading negative news?

Were all Bengali and English newspapers indulging in scurrilous journalism back then? On every page, every day, everywhere? Or was there a specific story that day that the Swami was aware of? If it was the latter, wasn’t Paramahamsa guilty of branding all newspapers as bad and negative?

And what precisely is “bad”?

How did Paramahamsa know that the disciple had holy Ganga water at home to be produced at that very moment? How was he sure that its miraculous powers extended to wiping the sins committed by newspapers and journalists? Would it work only for all-seeing him, or for the disciple too?

And did he get the holy water and did it work?

Encyclopaedia Britannica reports that “it was about this time [1880s] that Calcutta newspapers and journal articles first referred to Ramakrishna as the Hindu saint or as the Paramahamsa.” Did Paramahamsa express his scepticism of these labels being given to him by “bad and negative” newspapers?

All these are silly, trivial questions, of course, but that is the essence of journalism, asking silly questions and putting “the truth” to the test. As the old saying goes: there is nothing called a silly question, only silly answers. And “Spiritual Journalism” by its very definition is an oxymoron; either it can be spiritual or it can be journalism. One is based on faith, the other on facts.

In other words, where specifically has this wondrous story of Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa on newspapers been recorded and reported? And by which journalist, writer, biographer?

Tell us another, O Spiritual One, and stick to the facts.

Or shift to journalism.

Förlåt om ämnet kanske börjar bli uttjatat men jag återkommer till frågan om uppslagsverks tillförlitlighet (se ett par av de senaste dagarnas inlägg). Anledningen är att jag i samband med surfande kring något helt annat (John Ruskins bok Unto This Last – som jag får återkomma till i annat sammanhang) råkade stöta på en historisk kritiker av en etablerad encyklopedi. Det handlar om Willard Huntington Wright (1888-1939) och hans uppgörelse  med Encyclopaedia Britannicas elfte upplaga  (en upplaga som förresten numera finns tillgänglig på nätet).

Wright är egentligen mest känd under sin författarpseudonym S. S. Van Dine och det var under det namnet som han 1917 gav ut boken Misinforming a Nation. Han var amerikan och det var inte minst i den egenskapen som han reagerade mot Britannicans snäva brittiska och koloniala perspektiv som han delvis såg som en förolämpning av både amerikansk och kontinentaleuropeisk kultur. Och han skrädde verkligen inte orden:

The distinguishing feature of the Encyclopedia Britannica is its petty national prejudice. This prejudice appears constantly and in many disguises through the Encyclopaedia’s pages. It manifests itself in the most wanton carelessness in dealing with historical facts; in glaring inadequacies when discussing the accomplishments of nations other than England; in a host of inexcusable omissions of great men who do not happen to be blessed with English nationality; in venom and denunciation of viewpoints which do not happen to coincide with “English ways of thinking”; and especially in neglect of American endeavor.

Furthermore, the Britannica shows unmistakable signs of haste or carelessness in preparation. Information is not always brought up to date. Common proper names are inexcusably misspelled. Old errors remain uncorrected. Inaccuracies abound. Important subjects are ignored. And only in the field of English activity does there seem to be even an attempt at completeness.

Wright är speciellt kritisk mot den brittiska encyklopedins behandling av den utländska litteraturen. Även mindre framstående brittiska författare får större utrymme och en mer respektfull behandling än den franska, tyska eller ryska litteraturens stora namn. Han är dessutom, förvånansvärt nog, upprörd över sättet att behandla samtidens främsta svenska poeter:

An even more absurdly inadequate treatment is accorded the poets of modern Sweden. Despite the fact that Swedish literature is little known to Americans, the poetry of that country ranks very high, higher (according to some eminent critics) than the poetry of France or Germany. But the Britannica makes no effort to disturb our ignorance; and so the great lyric poetry of Sweden since 1870 is barely touched upon. However, Mr. Emund Gosse, a copious contributor to the Encyclopaedia, has let the cat out of the bag. In one of his books he has pronounced Froding, Levertin and Heidenstam “three very great lyrical artists,” and has called Snoilsky a poet of “unquestioned force and fire.” Turning to the Britannica we find that Snoilsky is dismissed with half the space given Sydney Dobell and a third of the space given Patmore. Levertin receives only a third of a column; and Froding is denied any biography whatever. He is thrown in with a batch of minor writers under Sweden. Heidenstam, the new Nobel prize-winner, a poet who, according to Charles Wharton Stork, “stands head and shoulders above any now writing in England,” receives only eight lines in the general notice ! And Karlfeldt, another important lyrist, who is the Secretary of the Swedish Academy, is considered unworthy of even a word in the “supreme” Encyclopedia Britannica.

Så där fortsätter han med sin kritik på områden som konst och religion. Låt vara att han skjuter över målet ibland men han är ju varken den första eller den sista att ifrågasätta delar av den etablerade institution som Britannican historiskt sett varit (Wikipedias artikel om EB ger en lång rad exempel). Wright förefaller vara en väl insatt och beläst litterär granskare. Ändå var varken poesin eller den konventionella romanen hans främsta område som författare. Till eftervärlden har han framför allt gått som en av den amerikanska kriminalromanens pionjärer med sin fiktive deckarhjälte Philo Vance.

“Idag är Van Dine och Vance i stort sett bortglömda”, skriver svenska Wikipedia. Nja, inte helt ändå. Så här 70 år efter sin död kan väl Van Dine (alias Willard Huntington Wright) ändå få ett poshumt erkännande som en insiktsfull kritiker av kulturell enögdhet och anglosaxisk insularitet.

Most lodges and fraternal based on the idea of the brotherhood of man and mutual cooperation among their members around the world. The idea is to make the world a better place in which to live. 

That is certainly a noble idea, but this question remains: Is there any hope of them attaining their goal? The hard truth is, the state of this world cannot be changed by the efforts of any lodge, club, or organization of human origin. Only God can change it. 

The idea of improving the world by human means is a misplaced one. Only Christ Himself, when He returns, will change the world and make it a happy place in which to live (Isa. 11:1-9). 

In addition, such lodges and fraternities embrace people of many religions, whether or not they are obeying God and His Word. Yet, God’s people are commanded not to be yoked together with unbelievers in such “brotherhoods” (II Cor. 6:14). 

Further, most of these groups will admit that many of their practices, ceremonies, and symbols originated in paganism. For further background information, I suggest consulting the article ”Friendly Societies” in the eleventh edition of the “Encyclopaedia Britannica.” God’s Word, on the other hand, warns against adopting pagan ways of worship; please notice Deuteronomy 12:29-32, for example.

Nu finns Encyclopaedia Britannica, ett av världens största och främsta uppslagsverk, tillgängligt on-line via bibliotekets hemsida, gratis!!

Gå till bibliotekets hemsida, titta under rubriken Relaterad information, till höger, klicka på Encyclopaedia B….; ny sida och välj den av de tre varianterna som passar dig bäst.  Det finns en variant för barn mellan 5 och 11 år,  en för barn o ungdomar mellan 12 0ch 18 år och en variant för dem över 18 år.  OBS! på engelska.

Bibliotekets hemsida

Direkt till de olika varianterna

În acea vreme  ce curge până la Tudor,  cum zicea Ion Brătianu:  „Grecismul năbuşi limba noastră, clasele avute abia mai îngânau limba părinţilor lor şi numele de Român devenise un nume de dispreţ; limba greacă comanda de pe Tron drepturile şi datoriile oamenilor, dascălii greci ocupau catedrele în şcoala domnească şi tot în limba greacă se ridicau imnurile la cer, pe când cea română abia se mai auzea pe lungul brazdei, în monologul plugarului ce mână boii”.

Elanul cultural fanariot în Principate nu a respectat preceptul  „Primum non nocere”. După veacul  fanariot, de două ori  nenorocit pentru că era şi turcesc şi rusesc, –grecii jucau „la două capete„–, Limba Română rămâne slăbită, este  bolnavă  şi acum. Ideologii internaţionalişti  văd  lucrurile altfel. Să  cităm  numai din Encyclopaedia Britannica,  într-o  ediţie foarte recentă : „It is necessary, however, to credit the Phanariots  with a quite genuine devotion to the cause of learning and education, which they alone were able to provide inside the oppressed Christian ghetto. The advantages they obtained from the Porte (the Turkish government) for building schools and for developing Greek letters in the Romanian principalities of Moldavia and Walachia that were entrusted to their rule came to play a substantial role in the rebirth of Greece.” Deci regimul fanariot nu a lucrat pentru binele românilor, ci al grecilor, iar asta se afirmă laudativ  chiar în Britannica de-acum. În esenţă, este  acelaşi spirit imperialist  britanic ce a susţinut şi Eteria la 1821, o mişcare pro-rusească,  ţaristă,  al cărei  duh se putea caracteriza   prin termenul anti-România. Cu o continuitate seculară ce îl anima în cel de al doilea război mondial pe Winston Churchill, forţând nepăsător peste gâtul  nostru  jugul  comunist,   similar jugului  fanariot.

Titus Filipas

Ok, I’m sure this subject has been covered a thousand times before, but I find it fascinating that there are many information professionals who seem to break out in a cold sweat at the mere mention of the ‘W’ word.  There are a great many criticisms levelled at Wikipedia, particularly the fact that it allows anyone with an account to edit an entry and add misleading information.  Whilst this can be the case, in all honesty it is fairly rare and, given the number of people who check entries, once erroneous information is discovered it is quickly removed.  I use Wikipedia a fair amount when conducting research for another blog I run, and I find that as long as I stick to two fundamental rules, I won’t go far wrong:

1. Use Wikipedia only as a launchpad for research
2. Always check references.

Wikipedia can be a brilliant source, but it must be used carefully.  If you want a overview of a particular subject, Wikipedia is a good place to start.  It’s like dipping your toe in the ocean of information that is out there.  Take, for example, an entry on Georgian President, Mikheil Saakashvili.  The opening paragraph gives plenty of basic information about who he is and some basic information about how we came to power.  A good place for anyone want to look into this particular figure.  Further into the entry, there is a section entitled ‘2007 crisis’.  This part of the entry examines a series of anti-government demonstrations within the country.  However, the opening paragraph provides no references whatsoever.  It does, however, provide a link to a page on Wikipedia dedicated to the ‘2007 crisis’.   This is where a little more information can be retrieved.  On clicking the link, there is a more substantial article with more references and links to other information sources, this is where more substantial information can be obtained.  Upon checking the references, one can find numerous resources to further investigate, including the BBC and a report by Human Rights Watch.  It is once these sources are investigated, that one can understand the nature of the protests in Georgia.  Suddenly, Wikipedia has opened up a whole range of places where we can discover more information about this event.  As I said before, it is a useful launchpad to seek out more information.  Just a couple of clicks and there is a wealth of resources available to the reader to find out more about the subject matter.  Without using Wikipedia as a guide, it would be pretty time-consuming to find so many resources on this subject.

There is one other aspect of Wikipedia that puts it head and shoulders above the rest: currency.  With so many active users of the site, it can be updated countless times in one day.  Staying with the Georgian theme, the entry on the war in South Ossetia is a good example of this.  Between the 21st August and the time of writing, the entry on the 2008 South Ossetia War had been updated over 250 times.  Ok, so there may be a great many little tweaks here and there, and maybe a few removals of mischievous entries, but is there another resource that is updated with such regularity?  Try searching on the war in South Ossetia on the Encyclopaedia Britannica and I can guarantee it won’t be half as current as the entry on Wikipedia.  With such a wealth of information added at such frequency, Wikipedia is clearly a good place to start if you want to discover the latest developments.

Personally, I am a big fan of Wikipedia (as you may have noticed) and I think it is about time that information professionals put aside their doubts about Wikipedia and started using it as an information source.  As long as it is used carefully, I can see no reason why it cannot be a useful tool for the reference enquiry desk.  Quite frankly, it should be the starting point when dealing with any enquiry – as long as it is not the only resource that is consulted.

Nach nur wenigen Tagen fertig gelesen. Die 399 Seiten waren schnell geschafft.

Um was geht es eigentlich in diesem Buch?

Ein Redakteur von Esquire (eines dieser hippen (Männer?)-Magazine) nimmt sich die Encyclopaedia Britannica vor. Nicht als Nachschlagewerk, sonder von A-Z will er die durchlesen. Quasi, wie ein ganz normales Buch. Das sind dann 33.000 Seiten bzw. 44 Millionen Wörter.

Man erfährt in diesem Buch allerlei Interessantes und Unwichtiges über Einträge aus der Encyclopaedia Britannica . Das hört sich trockener an, als es ist. Dem Autor A.J. Jacobs ist es gelungen, diesen Stoff kurzweilig und lesenswert darzubieten.

Ganz sicher ist dieses Buch kein literarisches Meisterstück. Ich denke, den Anspruch hatte Jacobs auch nicht. Er wollt unterhalten und das ist ihm hervorragend gelungen.

Der rote Faden ist neben den Fakten, die selbstverständlich alphabetisch dargeboten werden, seine Familie und nähere Bekanntschaft sowie zum Teil skurrile Ereignisse, die sich alleine auf der Tatsache begründen, dass er die Encyclopaedia Britannica liest.

Wir erfahren einiges über seine Frau Julia (die das ganze Unterfangen ziemlich gelassen hin nimmt. ZB nimmt sie ihm jedes mal einen Dollar ab, wenn er sie mit unnötigen, frisch erworbenen, Faktenwissen nervt), seinen Vater, der wohl so eine Art Überflieger in allen möglichen Bereichen ist und einige mehr aus seiner Verwandschaft. Ich hoffe mal, dass die vielen skurrilen Typen nicht wirklich alle echte Charaktere sind.

Fazit: Hat Spass gemacht, kann man gut “nebenbei” lesen, da viele kleine Geschichten in sich abgeschlossen sind.

Wikis are not just new ways of producing interactive web sites: the underlying philosophy of wikis is beginning to have a pervasive effect on society. Blogger Andrew Sullivan has tied Barack Obama’s political success to his mastering of “Facebook politics.” Not only is Senator Obama effectively using MySpace, Twitter, Facebook and YouTube to disseminate his political message, but he’s embracing the openness and transparency that is inherent to wikis and the open-source software movement, leading some to call him the first “wiki-candidate.” Read the full story here.

Encyclopaedia Britannica, a long time critic of Wikipedia (and rightly so in some cases), has begun to test the wiki waters. EB is now allowing some people to make edits to web entries after a thorough registering and vetting process. This is recent news so we’ll see how this plays out, but to me this seems to be a purely cosmetic move. However, as long as EB, Citizendium and other pro-am wiki models gain readership it will only serve to improve on Wikipedia’s model. Read the full story here. EB has also just begun to allow bloggers and other web publishers to pull content from their site for free, which in my opinion, is a great move.

Many librarians, passionate about accuracy of information, deride Wikipedia for its openness and susceptibility to vandalism. You would think that government intelligence officials would be equally, if not more, passionate about accuracy, since they are generally dealing with more critical circumstances. Why, then, have they instituted a wikipedia-like information sharing system called Intellipedia, complete with Flickr-like image sharing and video sharing capabilities? The CIA’s Sean Dennehy notes, “We are dealing with puzzles and mysteries. Everyone in the community is working on something of vital national security importance. We want to get to the point in the intelligence community where everyone is contributing their knowledge to Intellipedia.” Read the entire story here.

What is becoming quite clear is that the Wiki-way is here for good. How can library folks contribute their knowledge? What do we have that is unique and would contribute to the world’s store of easily accessible knowledge? Our Special Collections and Digital Collections come to mind first. Any thoughts?

Zip it up and zip it out (still using this phrase until i get a better one.)

Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc., announced that two of its Web sites are winners of the 2008 Codie Awards from the Software and Information Industry Association.

Britannica Online School Edition was named Best Education Reference or Search Service, and the Britannica Blog took Best Corporate Blog honors at the association’s gala in San Francisco. A complete list of Codie Award winners is available at http://www.siia.net/codies/2008/winners.asp.

The Codie Awards are among the most coveted prizes in the software and digital-content industries, and Britannica’s latest victories cap a long series of Codies the company’s digital products have won since the 1990s.

“Naturally, we’re thrilled,” said Michael Ross, a senior vice president with Britannica and general manager of the company’s education division. “The Codies have enormous prestige. They’re highly competitive awards because industry leaders pick winners from hundreds of products. This year more than 1,100 excellent ones competed for the top spots.”

A comprehensive reference and learning resource for grades K-12, Britannica Online School Edition is designed for all ages, with content clustered in distinct sections for the primary, middle and upper grades. It provides students and teachers with an extensive combination of reference information and interactive learning tools. It features Encyclopaedia Britannica’s award-winning encyclopedias serving students of all ages; extensive multimedia; current periodicals; Britannica’s proprietary, editor-checked Internet guide; and a growing number of primary sources. A recent addition is the Britannica Learning Zone, a skills-based environment for children from preschool to Grade 2.

School Edition is meant to be as relevant in the classroom as it is in the library or media lab. Its contents are thoroughly aligned to all state standards and include hundreds of lesson plans and other learning materials.

The Britannica Blog is a place where writers and readers hold lively discussions on almost every topic from art to zoology. More than a hundred bloggers have contributed to the daily postings, including radio quiz show host Michael Feldman; Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Joseph Ellis; Nobel Prize winner Jody Williams; Holocaust scholar Michael Berenbaum; Internet experts Nicholas Carr and Clay Shirky; and sports commentator Frank Deford. The blog holds forums on special topics, such as the religion of the American Founders, Web 2.0, the cult of celebrity, the future of newspapers, and Iran.

Renowned American architect Peter Eisenman used the latest RISA convention to outline his newest controversy-in-the-making: a six-point plan that denounces the “state of passivity” we live in. This has to be a joke. Instead of doing some reading for class that I’m behind on, I’m putting together a piece on this for Britannica.

“O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know each other (not that you may despise each other). Verily the most honored of you in the sight of Allâh is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allâh has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).” (Qur’an 49: 13)

Prophet Muhammad (sas) said: “The whole mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over black nor a black has any superiority over white except by piety and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that Muslims constitute one brotherhood. Nothing shall be legitimate to a Muslim which belongs to a fellow Muslim unless it was given freely and willingly.

Do not, therefore, do injustice to yourselves. Remember, one day you will appear before Allâh and answer for your deeds. So beware, do not stray from the path of righteousness after I am gone. O People no Prophet or Messenger will come after me and no new Faith will be born. Reason well therefore, O People and understand words, which I convey to you.

I leave behind me two things, the Qur’ân and my example the Sunnah and if you follow these you will never go astray.” (Muslim)

Abu Dharr (r) narrated that Allâh’s Messenger Prophet Muhammad (sas) said to him, “You are not better than people with red or black skins unless you excel them in piety.” (Tirmidhi 5198 and Ahmad)

There is NO Racial Discrimination in Islam, Superiority is Based on Righteousness and Piety

Bloggers, webmasters, online journalists and anyone else who publishes regularly on the Internet can now get free subscriptions to Britannica Online.

Anyone interested in participating in Britannica’s new WebShare initiative can apply for a free subscription at http://signup.eb.com or get more information at http://britannicanet.com.

The free subscriptions are part of Britannica’s effort to increase awareness and use of its extensive information resources, which include articles written by many top scholars, some of them Nobel laureates.

“It’s good business for us and a benefit to people who publish on the Net,” said Britannica president Jorge Cauz. “The level of professionalism among Web publishers has really improved, and we want to recognize that by giving access to the people who are shaping the conversations about the issues of the day. Britannica belongs in the middle of those conversations.”

In addition to the free subscriptions, Web publishers can also bring the value of Britannica’s content to their own sites by linking to any articles they find relevant to the topics they’re writing about.

Access to much of the site, including full-text entries from the Encyclopaedia Britannica, normally requires a paid subscription. There’s an exception to that rule, however: When a Web site links to a Britannica article Web surfers who click on that link get the article in its entirety.

“This means that when you’re writing something for the Web, whether it’s about Tibet, the U.S. presidential election, global warming or the Peace of Westphalia, you can give your readers additional information about the topic just by pointing them to the appropriate Britannica articles,” said Cauz. “If an article normally requires a subscription to access it, your readers will get it anyway, even if they’re not subscribers.

“Bloggers, journalists, and Web sites link all the time, of course, but they may not realize they have the option of pointing to Britannica articles. So let me be clear: they do.”

Cauz said that Web publishers can link to as many Britannica articles as they like. The company also plans to provide special tools, such as widgets and clusters of topical articles related to current events that will make it easy for online publishers to find and use Britannica material on their sites.

The public is also invited to follow Britannica’s Twitter stream, a daily “tweet” featuring a link to a Britannica article pertinent to the news of the day. This feature, at http://twitter.com/EBWebshare, requires a free account.

Additional features designed to facilitate the use of Britannica content around the Web will be introduced in the months ahead.

Interested writers and publishers can go to http://britannicanet.com for more. The site has instructions, a registration form, currently available topic clusters, eligibility guidelines, and a Britannica-written blog to keep visitors up to date on the program and how it is being used. The social media version of this release is available at http://britannicanet.com/?page_id=34.

About Encyclopaedia Britannica

Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. is a leader in reference and education publishing whose products can be found in many media, from the Internet to cell phones to books. A pioneer in electronic publishing since the early 1980s, the company also still publishes the 32-volume Encyclopaedia Britannica, along with services such as Britannica Online School Edition and new printed products, which are available online at http://store.britannica.com. The company makes its headquarters in Chicago.

Malcolm X – Letter from Mecca

Character and Personality Building Course by Prophet Muhammad (s) – Topic 2.Racial and Caste Equality

Prophet Muhammad [peace be upon him – (S)] in

his last sermon from the Mount of Arafat [Makkah]

declared: “An Arab is no better than a non-Arab

and a non-Arab is no better than an Arab; A red

raced man is no better than a black, except in piety.

Mankind are Adam’s children and Adam was

created from dust”

Islam prohibits all kinds of distinctions on account

of race, caste, color, birth or language. The society

established by Prophet Muhammad (S) was unique

in this respect. It had Salman from Persia [Iran],

Bilal from Ethiopia, Suhaib from Rome, all living

together with honor and respect. Prophet

Muhammad (S) married his cousin, Zainab of the

noblest tribe of Quraish to Zaid bin Harith who was

purchased by his wife Khadija as slave.

Caliph Omar used to call Bilal who was originally a

slave as Sayyedna Bilal [Bilal My Lord] and used to

accommodate him to sit by his side whenever he

visited him during his Caliphate.

And We did not send you (O

Muhammad) except as a Mercy to

the

worlds(all the People in this world

and

in hereafter).

Holy Qur’an 21:107

Say (Muhammad): “If ye do love Allah, Follow me: Allah will love you and forgive you your sins: For Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.”Holy Quran 3:31

Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah.Holy Quran 33:21

“It is He who has sent His messenger (Muhammad) with the guidance and the Religion of truth(Islam), to prevail over all religions, even though the idolaters may detest.”

(Holy Quran 9:33)

“This day I have perfected for you

your religion, and completed my favor

upon you and have chosen Islam as

your way of life.” (Holy Qur’an 5:3)

Holy QuranSurah 68. The Pen, (theLetter) Nun

1. Nun. By the Pen and the (Record) which (men) write,-

2. Thou(Muhammad) art not, by the Grace of thy Lord,

mad or possessed.

3. Nay, verily for thee is a Reward unfailing:

4. And thou (Muhammad)(standest) on an exalted

standard of character.

5. Soon wilt thou see, and they will see,

6. Which of you is afflicted with madness.

7. Verily it is thy Lord that knoweth best, which (among

men) hath strayed from His Path: and He knoweth best

those who receive (true) Guidance.

8. So hearken not to those who deny (the Truth).

Create your own visitor map!

MALCOLM X: Islam Can Help Erase Racism in

America

Character and Personality Building Course by Prophet Muhammad (s) – Topic 2.Racial and Caste Equality

Prophet Muhammad [peace be upon him – (S)] in

his last sermon from the Mount of Arafat [Makkah]

declared: “An Arab is no better than a non-Arab

and a non-Arab is no better than an Arab; A red

raced man is no better than a black, except in piety.

Mankind are Adam’s children and Adam was

created from dust”

Islam prohibits all kinds of distinctions on account

of race, caste, color, birth or language. The society

established by Prophet Muhammad (S) was unique

in this respect. It had Salman from Persia [Iran],

Bilal from Ethiopia, Suhaib from Rome, all living

together with honor and respect. Prophet

Muhammad (S) married his cousin, Zainab of the

noblest tribe of Quraish to Zaid bin Harith who was

purchased by his wife Khadija as slave.

Caliph Omar used to call Bilal who was originally a

slave as Sayyedna Bilal [Bilal My Lord] and used to

accommodate him to sit by his side whenever he

visited him during his Caliphate.

And We did not send you (O

Muhammad) except as a Mercy to

the

worlds(all the People in this world

and

in hereafter).

Holy Qur’an 21:107

Say (Muhammad): “If ye do love Allah, Follow me: Allah will love you and forgive you your sins: For Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.”Holy Quran 3:31

Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah.Holy Quran 33:21

“It is He who has sent His messenger (Muhammad) with the guidance and the Religion of truth(Islam), to prevail over all religions, even though the idolaters may detest.”

(Holy Quran 9:33)

“This day I have perfected for you

your religion, and completed my favor

upon you and have chosen Islam as

your way of life.” (Holy Qur’an 5:3)

Holy QuranSurah 68. The Pen, (theLetter) Nun

1. Nun. By the Pen and the (Record) which (men) write,-

2. Thou(Muhammad) art not, by the Grace of thy Lord,

mad or possessed.

3. Nay, verily for thee is a Reward unfailing:

4. And thou (Muhammad)(standest) on an exalted

standard of character.

5. Soon wilt thou see, and they will see,

6. Which of you is afflicted with madness.

7. Verily it is thy Lord that knoweth best, which (among

men) hath strayed from His Path: and He knoweth best

those who receive (true) Guidance.

8. So hearken not to those who deny (the Truth).

Create your own visitor map!

Malcolm X: Islam is the Best Religion

Character and Personality Building Course by Prophet Muhammad (s) – Topic 2.Racial and Caste Equality

Prophet Muhammad [peace be upon him – (S)] in

his last sermon from the Mount of Arafat [Makkah]

declared: “An Arab is no better than a non-Arab

and a non-Arab is no better than an Arab; A red

raced man is no better than a black, except in piety.

Mankind are Adam’s children and Adam was

created from dust”

Islam prohibits all kinds of distinctions on account

of race, caste, color, birth or language. The society

established by Prophet Muhammad (S) was unique

in this respect. It had Salman from Persia [Iran],

Bilal from Ethiopia, Suhaib from Rome, all living

together with honor and respect. Prophet

Muhammad (S) married his cousin, Zainab of the

noblest tribe of Quraish to Zaid bin Harith who was

purchased by his wife Khadija as slave.

Caliph Omar used to call Bilal who was originally a

slave as Sayyedna Bilal [Bilal My Lord] and used to

accommodate him to sit by his side whenever he

visited him during his Caliphate.

And We did not send you (O

Muhammad) except as a Mercy to

the

worlds(all the People in this world

and

in hereafter).

Holy Qur’an 21:107

Say (Muhammad): “If ye do love Allah, Follow me: Allah will love you and forgive you your sins: For Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.”Holy Quran 3:31

Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah.Holy Quran 33:21

“It is He who has sent His messenger (Muhammad) with the guidance and the Religion of truth(Islam), to prevail over all religions, even though the idolaters may detest.”

(Holy Quran 9:33)

“This day I have perfected for you

your religion, and completed my favor

upon you and have chosen Islam as

your way of life.” (Holy Qur’an 5:3)

Holy QuranSurah 68. The Pen, (theLetter) Nun

1. Nun. By the Pen and the (Record) which (men) write,-

2. Thou(Muhammad) art not, by the Grace of thy Lord,

mad or possessed.

3. Nay, verily for thee is a Reward unfailing:

4. And thou (Muhammad)(standest) on an exalted

standard of character.

5. Soon wilt thou see, and they will see,

6. Which of you is afflicted with madness.

7. Verily it is thy Lord that knoweth best, which (among

men) hath strayed from His Path: and He knoweth best

those who receive (true) Guidance.

8. So hearken not to those who deny (the Truth).

Courtesy

Dr Syed Abdul Raheem

Sufi786

Author

The Only true Religion Debate

http://truereligiondebate.wordpress.com

Create your own visitor map!

Ein interessanter Aspekt von Online Kollaboration, den Tapscott/Williams (S.42) in ihrem Buch nur kurz ansprechen ist das Phänomen der kollektiven Intelligenz. Dabei wird angenommen, dass eine möglichst heterogene Gruppe zu intelligenteren Lösungen kommt, als zum Beispiel eine spezialisierte Expertengruppe. Eine Firma die kollektive Intelligenz zu nutzen versucht ist Marketocracy, wo Aktienhändler virtuelle Aktienportfolios unterhalten. Die Strategien der 100 besten Händler werden vom Investmentfonds von Marketocracy kopiert und konkret angewandt.

Der Investementfonds von Marketocracy schneidet laut Tapscott/Williams (S. 24) regemässig besser ab, als der S&P 500 Index . Eine andere Firma, die kollektive Intelligenz konsequent anwendet ist Amazon mit ihrem Ratingsystem, das erlaubt Bücher, Filme etc zu bewerten.

Laut dem Massachussets Institute of Technology MIT, welches das Phänomen der kollektiven Intelligenz untersucht, sind Faktoren wie Vielfältigkeit ,hierarchische neben nicht-hierarchischen Strukturen, modularisierte, dezentrale Aufgaben, ein dichtes Kommunikationsnetz, Anreizsysteme, gemeinsames Vokabular und gemeinsame Infrastruktur sowie gegenseitige Aufmerksamkeit und gegenseitiges Lernen für das Gelingen von kollektiver Intelligenz notwendig. Hemmend wirken dagegen persönliche Voreingenommenheit, enge Bandbreite in der Auswahl der Teilnehmer, mangelnde soziale Verbundenheit sowie kulturelle Grenzen.

Angewandte Forschung betreibt das MIT bezüglich kollektiver Intelligenz in den Bereichen innerorganisationale Zusammenarbeit, Klimawandel, Gesundheitswesen und kollektive Prognostik .

Das wohl bekannteste Produkt kollektiver Intelligenz ist die online Enzyklopädie Wikipedia, welche den Vergleich mit der Encyclopaedia Britannica bei einer Untersuchung der Fachzeitschrift Nature weitgehend standhielt. Auch mit der Onlineausgabe des Brockhaus kann sich Wikipedia messen.

Kritikpunkte der kollektiven Intelligenz sind der menschliche Herdentrieb oder das

Informational Cascading, welches aussagt, dass wir massenhaft geäusserten Ansicht eher zustimmen als wiedersprechen.

Ein weiterer Ansatz zur Nutzung der kollektiven Intelligenz besteht im gemeinschaftlichen Indexieren, auch bekannt als Social Tagging. Dabei entstehen die so genannten Folksonomien, die Taxonomien von unten, die Webinhalte klassifizieren.

Auch auf Seiten wie del.icio.us oder citeulike entstehen Folksonomien. Ob Melvil Dewey an einer Folksonmie Freude gehabt hätte, wage ich an dieser Stelle zu bezweifeln, ist das Erstellen einer Klassifikation wie das Beschlagworten von Information die Kernkompetenz der InformationswissenschaftlerInnen, und die möchte man sich nicht von Amateuren streitig machen lassen.

Library 2.0 Konzepte führen in dieser Hinsicht zu einem Paradigmenwechsel. Objektzentrierte soziale Netzwerke nehmen dabei eine immer wichtigere Rolle ein im Erschliessen von Informationen, die sich heute auch in Blogs etc. finden (Danowski und Heller 2006, S.4). Danowski und Heller schlagen deshalb vor dass “kontrollierte Taxonomien, wie sie traditionell in Dokumentations- und Bibliothekssystemen eingesetzt werden, und rein durch offene Benutzergemeinschaften gesteuerte Folksonomien, können miteinander ’sprechen’ und voneinander lernen” (ebd.).

Die New York Times macht den Unterschied im Textvolumen der Wikipedia im Vergleich zu traditionellen Enzyklopädien wie der Encyclopaedia Britannica oder dem Oxford English Dictionary in einer eindrucksvollen Grafik deutlich:

via: [ WIKIPEDIA VERSUS THE TRADITIONAL ENCYCLOPEDIAS at WHAT’S NEXT: INNOVATIONS IN NEWSPAPERS]

[Start Writing the Eulogies for Print Encyclopedias - New York Times]