Bill Konrad said:
Tony Sidaway wrote:
Bill Konrad said:
It's a bit of a broad exageration to claim ALL editors would have to bowlderize ALL of their edits.
No, it's absolutely true. Just one goes and vandalizes the article on the American Revolution, on one day, and you'll have school governors freaking out.
Huh? What does the ever-present problem with vandalism have to do with placing images potentially offensive to many behind a link instead of inline (or what you seem to characterize as "bowlderizing")?
Both of them are unacceptable for classroom materials. Getting the well behaved users to politely bowdlerize their contributions in order to fly under the school board radar would not solve the problem because the presence of badly behaved users and casual vandals will still produce an environment too unpredictable for classroom use.
Both may pose problems to school administrators and parents regarding the suitability of Wikipedia for children, but the vast majority of vandalism is not much different from what is scrawled on bathroom walls or heard in the schoolyard.
Those actions are also subject to sanction in schools.
Given that most such vandalism is quickly removed, it is of an entirely different nature than more or less permanent content sanctioned by the community.
Absolutely. The two are distinct problems, but both render live Wikis and other volatile web environments unsuitable for use in schools. Using a filtered Wiki is much more sensible.