This story passes on as gospel the grotesquely slanted article published in Nature that compared Wikipedia to the EB. The readers who compared articles in the two forums were not told that the EB "articles" they were reading were actually just summaries of the real articles. When confronted, the editors of Nature refused to demand corrections or acknowledge the obvious flaws in the paper. Whether from the personal agenda of the editors or instututional ass-covering, the controversy should make readers suspicious of any articles in Nature that might fall within the personal prejudices of the editors.