Re: [Textbook-l] Problem with NPOV

A problem with wikibooks at the moment is that we don't have any formal statement of the wikibooks "mission statement" anywhere, and we also don't have any formal accepted definition of what precisely a "textbook" is, how one is identified, etc. If we want to measure textbooks against the standard that they must be used in an "accredited institution", that begs the question what we mean by "accredited". Accredited by whom, precisely? There are plenty of educational institutions that are "accredited" by all sorts of bogus agencies, and there are plenty of educational institutions that are not "accredited", but which do teach valuable, meaningful courses and lessons to students. Consider for instance an "accredited institution" that teaches phrenology, astrology, etc. Such an institution would certainly be accredited by groups that advocate such topics, but neither the educational institution, nor the accrediting agency would be listed as "respected". Consider now the existance of community organizations that teach informal classes to children and the elderly. These organizations would certainly not be "accredited", but they can certainly teach valuable lessons to the respective students. Jimbo: If you want us to use a specific defintion of "textbook" and "accredited institution", then you are going to have to mandate such definitions to us. At the moment we are picking our way through such matters, with varying degrees of success. -- Andrew Whitworth "Whiteknight"