Carcharoth wrote: > On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 10:14 PM, doc <[email protected]> wrote: > > <snip> > >> The idea of wikipedia anywhere near a school curriculum, except perhaps >> in a brief IT lesson, horrifies me. The idea of children using wikipedia >> to challenge the "official truth" of a qualified teacher with "but sir, >> it says on wikipedia", is laughable. > > Presumably, they would actually go: "but sir, I read the Wikipedia > article, and while checking the sources provided there, I did some > background reading and research, and the history presented in those > other sources is different to what you are teaching us". > > i.e. Hopefully this hypothetical kid would credit the source behind > Wikipedia, and credit Wikipedia only in-so-far as it provided an entry > point into reading about the topic. > > Carcharoth > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l >
Which is about as likely as them reading the endnotes and sources sections in the textbook the school is commending. The notion that using wikipedia properly makes people think any more (or less) than using any other media is flawed. At least the people publishing the dead tree have put their names and reputations to the work, and if it stinks of bias then they smell. The agenda of wikipedia's nameless editors are, in fact, far more hidden. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
