[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia as culturally assumed

[John Lee]

On Nov 25, 2007 11:12 PM, David Goodman <dgoodmanny at gmail.com> wrote:
> You apparently don't  think its important that the writers of a
> contemporary computer game  know something about some particular
> important philosopher, and expect at least some of the players to
> appreciate the reference.
>
> Other people may think it quite significant. Those interested in the
> philosopher are generally interested in his further reception, and can
> be expected to find it fascinating that he has made his way into that
> part of our culture. Those interested in the games culture will be
> interested to know what sort of figures are used as referents--whom
> the authors assume they are writing for. I as an educator find it very
> valuable  & heartening to know that at least in some superficial level
> there is a continuation of the intellectual tradition. As I don't have
> much direct familiarity with most computer games, I learn out most of
> what I do know about that aspect of things from Wikipedia.
>
> It's easy to denigrate the importance of the part of the world we're
> not interested in. It's been decades since I've seen a televised
> wrestling match, and I intend to never see one in the future, but if I
> ever do want to know about them, they'll be in WP. I never expect to
> be on the Kuala Lumpur Monorail, but I might want see a news or
> fiction reference someday to something that happened there, and want
> to know about the stations.

Context is key. I don't see much use in a trivia section in
[[Malaysia]] listing every film that's ever made a reference to it,
even though someone might conceivably find it useful. Most trivia can
find a useful home elsewhere. Information is not useful unless it is
placed in the proper context.

Johnleemk