image: Lord Lindsey Buckingham-Palace more screens most popular most commented Niko Bellic and Grand Theft Auto IV are great, but is that enough anymore? Game On by Gary Hodges Mario Kart Wii: Still Lapping It Up by Chris Ward Jenna Jameson: Virtual Sex Machine Click Me by Bonnie Ruberg Gran Turismo 5: Prologue Game On by Gary Hodges Baroque: Reward-Free Zone Game On by Gary Hodges NYPD Inaction Over a Missing Black Woman Found Dead Sparks a Historic Racial-Bias Lawsuit by Sean Gardiner Why Can't I Leave My Boyfriend Tied Up While I Go the Movies? Savage Love by Dan Savage Speed Racer by J. Hoberman The NYPD's Secret Crusade Against Marijuana Furthers a Racist Agenda by Nat Hentoff Mass Arrests at Sean Bell Protest NYPD Inaction Over a Missing Black Woman Found Dead Sparks a Historic Racial-Bias Lawsuit (9) Sean Gardiner Former Scientologist Actor Wants his Confessional Files Back (8) Tony Ortega Dirty Blonde: Brooklyn, a Place to Impress Strangers (4) Dirty Blonde: Annie Fischer Runnin' Scared: Deep South of Houston: Is a Soul-Food Restaurant Too Black for Soho? (3) Runnin' Scared: Chloe A. Hilliard David Mamet: Why I Am No Longer a 'Brain-Dead Liberal' (3) David Mamet

The good news, in this case, was also the bad news. Where Wikipedia fans celebrated the findings as proof of the surprisingly high-quality work an amorphous mob of author-editors can produce, others brooded over the revelation that the "gold standard" of encyclopedias is in fact, as one information scientist put it, an "18-carat standard" and not a 24. But the focus on relative quality missed the more relevant point of comparison. Of the 42 Wikipedia and Britannica articles Nature sent to outside experts for review, the only ones that could be corrected—immediately—by those same experts were Wikipedia's. Whether those corrections were actually made the report doesn't say, but the implication is clear: Maintaining the gold standard of reference works is everybody's responsibility now. And if the experts of the world ever want that standard to rise higher than Britannica's, they'll have to stop griping that Wikipedia is broken, get off their individual and institutional asses, and fix it.