Know It all by Stacy Schiff

1. The author's main point is to show the origin of Wikipedia from 2001's progress to current time. The author stressed the point that Wikipedia is not a reliable source because it can be edited by a 5 year old.

2. "The how-to entries represent territory that the encyclopedia has not claimed since the eighteenth century. You could cure a toothache or make snowshoes using the original Britannica, of 1768-71. (You could also imbibe a lot of prejudice and superstition. The entry on Women has just six words: "The female of man. See HOMO.") If you look up "coffee preparation" on Wikipedia, you will find you way, via the entry on Espresso, to a piece on types of espresso machines, which you will want to consult before buying."

The evidence Stacy Schiff has provided was very effective. If you typed "women" on Britannica and typing "coffee" preparation on Wikipedia we can see the big difference. Wikipedia provides so much more content than Britannica when searching for keywords.

3. The Wikipedia and Britannica website design is very different from each other. The Wikipedia design has a search word for the whole layout, but Britannica shows only one-fourth of the layout, while the rest of the page is covered with advertisement. Wikipedia is also easy to use because when you type in a keyword in the search bar, Wikipedia lists the matches from most relevant to irrelevant, but Britannica gives you a list of options to choose from. Britannica has had more buttons on the page and advertisement. Wikipedia has history and additional related topic to the search word, unlike Britannica, which only shows a brief definition of the word.