[Foundation-l] university blocking wikipedia

[C F]

On 10/2/07, Florence Devouard <Anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Thomas Dalton wrote:
> >> Ask them to cite their sources :-)
> >> (for example, ask the person to provide names of universities
> >> supposingly doing that)
> >> Then, if the person reveals unable to provide any names, adopt a very
> >> serious and dignified face, nod gravely, and says "urban legends are
> >> terrible. I wish so much people would start using figures and citing
> >> sources when they make a claim. We should ban sentences starting by
> >> "many says that", or "some people consider that" or "Most people know
> >> that"".
> >
> > You want to pass [[WP:WEASEL]] into law? Sounds like a plan. Everyone
> > pick a country, and we'll start work.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> Let me pick up France :-)
>
> Recently, I read a report from a French teacher. He enjoys a certain
> reputation in the teaching environment, so whilst not all agree with
> him, he is certainly listened to by many.
>
> He made a comment which I thought was interesting.
>
> He said "Wikipedia can not be used in the French formal educational
> system (schools) because our nation is laic, whilst Wikipedia follows
> the neutral point of view. Being laic means that our schools precisely
> chose a certain value framework and deliberately educate the kids to
> hold certain beliefs and share certain values. On the contrary,
> wikipedia holds that all points of view must be given room. For this
> reason, Wikipedia is not compatible with our schooling system and should
> not be used as a resource".
>
> I found that approach interesting indeed. For once, the issue he was
> raising was not so much a question of quality or of stability of the
> information, or even of manipulation, but simply a statement "we want
> our kids to learn that certain things are true, and others are not true.
> Or certain things are good, and others are not good. Wikipedia is a
> great resource, but can't be used as teaching support".

For some reason I don't find this odd at all, could be it's my
Orthodox Jewishness in me, which I know just mentioning this will make
some read this as my POV, and yes I think it is my POV, but isn't
pushing democracy or pushing NPOV a POV of it's own?

I'll give a non related example, but one that I use frequently. Logic
and math is a paradox, simply because 2 half's make for one whole in
math, but for 2 half's in logic. NPOV and the truth is NOT the same,
nor should it ever be considered the same. It's the *excepted* truth
for an encyclopedia. That said, I totally agree with that Frenchie.
Even in cases where it's the real truth. The truth is the truth, but
not showing anything (showing half is even worst than showing the
whole truth) is sometimes more desirable than showing the whole truth,
and outweighs the benefit offered by the NPOV and/or truth, which
should make it (not showing anything) something that's practiced
rather than the truth. We do it all the time and some times even
because of an NPOV, be it not telling an elder sick person about a
family tragedy because of fear that it might kill them, or anything
else like that.





>
> Topics that come to my mind are of course topics such as revisionism,
> cults, creationism, or pedophilia.
>
> ant
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>