On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 5:15 PM, stevertigo <[email protected]> wrote: > Charles Matthews <[email protected]> wrote:
<snip> >> But neutrality means, surely, that treatments >> that are really "introduction to X from the POV of Y" are out of place, >> or at least to be seriously deprecated. > > WWIN might be the actual place to say that 'Wikipedia is not a place > for introductory-level articles.' I don't think Charles was saying we shouldn't have introductory-level articles. I think he was saying that if we do have introductory-level articles, they need to not be skewed to a POV. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Make_technical_articles_accessible#.22Introduction_to....22_articles > It's a valid argument, even if it confronts our natural desire to > explain things, but is it another paradox? Does our encyclopedic > constraint put a severe limitation on the educational potential of our > articles? Does the "sum of all *information*" limitation represent an > obstacle to explanationism? Explantionism? I really hope that word doesn't catch on... :-) Carcharoth _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
