Understanding Factbook

I stumbled upon the entry "John Mark" in Factbook. On the top it states: Author of the Gospel of Mark.

This assertation is contrary to most of the Commentaries on Mark which I consulted.

So the question: Which criteria is used in this or similar cases? Stating as a fact something which is still discussed under a historical perspective?
I'd appreciate transparency here.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

MJ. Smith

Stating as a fact something which is still discussed under a historical perspective?

Relax. There are many errors in Factbook. Report it as a data bug and it will get fixed. The basic data for Factbook was machine generated then machine merged ... with some serious errors in merging. From my perspective, they set their goals too high for the level of understanding of the data they actually had rather than building step-by-step based on a firm understanding of the data. But they have made some very positive progress and need our input on mis-merged records such as this.

Jimmy Parks

Thank you for pointing this out. We'll look at this and get it changed to something more appropriate.

xnman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1317006#Comment_1317006

I just recently started using Factbook. I didn't use it because I could not find confidence with the information it gave. I still am very cautious.

Here's where I'm at.... If Factbook cannot be trusted, then when I ask it something, I have to prove that the answers are Fact... It that's the case, why use Factbook?

The concept of Factbook seems logical... but Factbook has to give "bonifide" answers.

That's my 2 cents... [8-|]

Jimmy Parks

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1317113#Comment_1317113

I really appreciate this, and we don't dismiss this need for accuracy and trust. We are working hard to maintain and correct any problem that is reported of the several hundred thousand definitions for the concepts in factbook.
Our hope is that the other published content that is connected to the concept, which come from preferred dictionaries and encyclopedias allows users to see these mistakes as bugs that they can report and have fixed.

xnman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1317120#Comment_1317120

I really appreciate this, and we don't dismiss this need for accuracy and trust. We are working hard to maintain and correct any problem that is reported of the several hundred thousand definitions for the concepts in factbook.
Our hope is that the other published content that is connected to the concept, which come from preferred dictionaries and encyclopedias allows users to see these mistakes as bugs that they can report and have fixed.

Thank you!