rlange - 3:02 pm on Sep 22, 2011 (gmt 0)
While Google's algorithm is rather impressive, I'm highly skeptical that it can objectively judge the completeness or correctness of a site's information about any given subject.
Going with the "frog habitats on Jupiter" theme, Google's algorithm is not an expert in planetary science. It can't determine if that section about frog habitats on your website about Jupiter makes your site a more complete and reliable source of information on Jupiter than other sites about Jupiter, or if it's just pure fantasy.
The only way it can make even a rough judgement along those lines is if it compared the information on your site with information it's gathered from other sites, and... whoops... see the problem?
Unique information isn't necessarily valuable information, and valuable information can not possibly stay unique (as in "existing in a single place"). That is, in my opinion, a major problem with one of the suggestions Google had made to avoid getting eaten by the Panda update.