Hoi, Sorry Fred, I do not like your post. The quote has it wrong because research shows that it is factually wrong. Wikipedia has a better coverage at a superior quality to the encyclopaedia that went before. The only thing I can agree with is that it is available at a much lower cost; it is the cost of having access to the Internet.
As a consequence why should I read it ? Thanks, GerardM On 26 July 2013 13:48, Fred Bauder <fredb...@fairpoint.net> wrote: > "As with other inventions that produced an inferior product at a much > lower price, from the printing press to the steam-driven loom to > Wikipedia, what happens now is largely in the hands of the people > experimenting with the new tools, rather than defending themselves from > them." > > > http://chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2013/07/08/moocs-and-economic-reality/ > > Fred > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimediaemail@example.com Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>