The fonts are so small!! Every page is information-dense, but at the expense of readability. Bright lights are a must.

Content - so many errors and biases:
In the USA section, says George W. Bush was "appointed " in 2001, while other presidents were "elected."

It accuses Franco of "fomenting" the Spanish Civil War. He invaded Spain and started the Civil War. He didn't "foment" anything.

Poland did not vote "in favor of communism" after WW2. It was a Soviet-style "election" no one their right mind would call free or fair.

In the Philippines, it says that a communist-led administration lasted from 1992-1998. Ramos was center-right and initiated economic reforms generating a powerhouse economy until the 1997 Asian meltdown. As reference, he was Duterte's mentor. He fought in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Korea and was literally accused of torturing communist separatists.

These are the ones I can remember easily.

Editing is poor. Every other page has a typo.

You'd be forgiven for thinking Cape Verde was doing OK economically:
Balance of Payments (Balance of Trade):-
$67 million.
After reading the article, a closer scan of the Vital Statistics shows the orphaned (-) sign on the previous line. Errors like missing line separators in Russia's Vital Statistics are common. The most common problem is that content was cut in editing by a computer with the sole aim of making the text fit the space leaving orphaned fragments. The caption to St Basil's is an example. It seems each entry has something wrong. These careless formatting errors throw into doubt the accuracy of the information. Is a 1 or 0 missing? Is it really Civil or common law?

I liked the picture of each country's currency. Many nations have beautiful currencies. May not be worth much, but they look nice.

So basically, I liked the pretty pictures, but the information can't be trusted. It's like a Wikipedia entry: generally ok, but look elsewhere for definitive information. ( )