Jim, you're right. I normally find the number given initially to be exaggerated, but a reasonably useful guide when comparing one to the other.

Five minutes ago, I leafed through both of my searches to the end, and found the actual relation of correct:wrong to be 48:64 resp. 91:126. Still deplorable, given that the error would be so easy to correct for anyone.

My point is that if we cannot trust any single source, we cannot trust the majority either.