Encyclopedia Britannica is finally giving in to user-generated crowd wisdom—to an extent but not without some harsh fightin’ words aimed toward Google and Wikipedia. 
The newsy news is that the online version of the 240-year-old encyclopedia will allow readers to modify article content and/or create their own articles. Any changes to Britannica articles will be submitted to paid editors for vetting, and could appear in the printed version, published every two years.
Testing has set a 20-minute turnaround for article updates on the site. This is not quite a surrender to the free-for-all anonymous editing of Wikipedia, the fourth-most visited website in the world with 2.7 million articles in 250 languages. 
Encyclopedia Britannica, says its president, Jorge Cauz, has standards. After noting the famous and well-documented pitfalls of Wikipedia and bemoaning the tendency of humans to be “non-discriminating” about information they find, Cauz took a barhouse-type swipe at Google’s favorable treatment of and “symbiotic” relationship with Wikipedia.
“If I were to be the CEO of Google or the founders of Google I would be very [displeased] that the best search engine in the world continues to provide as a first link, Wikipedia,” Cauz told the Sidney Morning Herald. “Is this the best they can do? Is this the best that [their] algorithm can do?”
It may be fair game to note at this point that obscure topics/persons like Salome Alexandra, otherwise known as Israel’s forgotten queen, or Droctulf, a sixth century warrior, are thus far phantoms in Britannica whereas Wikipedia produces entries about them. (Droctulf’s entry, sans reference to a Jorge Borges short story, though, is decidedly incomplete.)
Google did not return request for comment about what is the best they can do. Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales offered no publishable comment.
