Miloš, I am inclined to agree with you. As someone who is not so far removed from his own adolescence, I can attest that I've always found "Children's writing" to be incredibly condescending and even demeaning. Perhaps I was not a typical child, but ever since about 7 years of age I really hated those books that talked down to children as if we were dumb. I have heard (and I am not an expert) from many people the idea that you will get what you give, meaning that if you treat an adolescent as if they were a criminal, they will often become a criminal; it seems to me that if we treat children as dumber versions of adult human beings, they will grow up to be just that. (again, I'm not an expert)
-m. On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Milos Rancic <mill...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 2:41 PM, Ziko van Dijk <zvand...@googlemail.com> > wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Recently there has been a controversy on Wikipedia in German about >> extra articles in simple language. Authors of its medical group wanted >> to create sub pages suitable for children, believing in an urgent >> need. [1] >> >> In the discussion, the question of creating a Wikipedia in simple >> German came up. >> >> As we know, to-day Wikimedia language committee policies prohibit a >> new Wikipedia in a language that already has a Wikipedia. The >> existence of a Wikipedia in simple English refers to the fact that it >> had been created before that policy of 2006. >> >> There are a number of ideas and initiatives to create online >> encyclopedias in "simple language", in and outside the Wikimedia >> world. Wouldn't it be suitable to reconsider and try to give those >> initiatives a place? Who else is more capable to create and support >> such encyclopedias than we are? > > Wait! > > Writing dumb articles because of thinking that children are dumb is > dumb. And not just dumb, but deeply ageist and discriminatory. > > Considering, for example, Piaget's [1] theory, timeline of cognitive > development is: > * The earliest usual learning of writing is around 5. > * At around 8 children are able to read without problems. > * At around 10 children cognitive system is almost the same as adult. > * Between 13 and 15, depending on climate, life conditions and > culture, and not counting extremes, cognitively there are no children > anymore, there are young adults. Cognitively, the only difference > between them and 10-20 years older humans is in experience and > knowledge. > > That means that the target for writing "simple" Wikipedia is for > children between 8 and 10. > > So, I would like to see scientific background *before* mentioning > "simple" or "junior" or whatever project: For which age should be, > let's say, Junior Wikipedia? For all minors? For primary school > minors? One article for those old 7 and 15 years? Considering Simple > English Wikipedia, this is purely pseudoscientific attempt. Wishful > thinking of creating family friendly project with dumb language. > > But, I am not trying to say that WikiMedia Junior won't be useful. > Yes, it will be very useful if it would be driven well. However, I am > deeply skeptical about crowd sourcing of such thing. It will finish as > Simple Wikipedia, which main purpose is having fun by reading random > articles on parties -- at the best. At the worst, it will finish like > Conservapedia with dumb language. Actually, with many dumb languages. > > If we really want to go this way, the only relevant approach is by > finding relevant pedagogues who would lead child contributors. Such > project has to be very well structured, with year or two of relevant > work before going online. However, I see this as very unrealistic at > this moment. > > [1] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Piaget > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l