On 06/01/2011 11:11 PM, FT2 wrote:
Information is educational. When I read Wikinews, it educates me as to significant matters going on in the world, and provides other related resources.
I fully agree with you. Any information is educational; it just depends of particular project scope would it be there or not. For example, you don't want to put Shakespeare's works on Wikipedia, because the proper place for it is Wikisource. Particular colony of ants is educational and could be interesting for making a photo of it, but it is not likely that it would get an article on Wikipedia. And so on.
But, why then Board decided to force "educational" component as mandatory in its statement? If there is no difference between "informational" and "educational", statement "we host only content that is both free and educational in nature" doesn't have a lot of sense, as it would sound like "we only host content which is free" (and that's the very known information), as "content" is more precise synonym for "information" (to be precise "content" could be interpreted as "set of information" or so).
So, I would like to know distinction between "informational" and "educational" interpreted by Board members; or it is, as you and Michael said, just not so common interpretation of the synonyms of the adjective "educational".