(Everything is funnier when you reference the Ultimate Showdown)
The Guardian technology blog links to EB’s response to the claims by that journal that EB was no more accurate than Wikipedia.
The 20-page EB response is an exercise in the most miffed sort of quibbling, especially the appendix where they address the reviewers point by point. Good on them for taking on Nature; good on Nature for starting the comparison in the first place. Can’t wait to see round three.
ETA 24 March: Nature’s response. Very terse and unapologetic. They say they provided EB with the requested information, which was a major point of criticism.