Lan Barnes wrote:
You guys are all aware that high school history (and now science) texts
are subjected to political scrutiny and dumbed down to the lowest common
denominator, right? Actually, even lower.
Worse, they are subjected to California and Texas political scrutiny.
<sarcasm> Hooray for uniform state standards! </sarcasm>
This is why history becomes completely sanitized, and English reading
lists have nothing worth reading. Of course, infinite copyright doesn't
help the English reading list either.
My point is, it's absurd to think that Wikipedia is intrinsically less
accurate than the texts the schools teach to. Actually Wikipedia, not
having a financial dog in the fight, might be under less pressure.
Hmmm, that's an interesting argument. I always thought of Wikipedia as
an encyclopedia alternative rather than as a textbook alternative.
However, if Wikipedia *does* become entrenched as a source, I don't
think I agree. The same forces that operate on textbooks will spring
into play on Wikipedia and reduce it to the same lowest common
denominator. Possibly lower because the book has at least some
resistance because it does want to have some audience outside of Texas
or California and enough negative press can get it removed as a
certified textbook.
Your argument has certainly started me thinking, however.
-a
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
