[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia for education

[Ray Saintonge]

Jimmy Wales wrote:

>Daniel Mayer wrote:
>
>>Well in order to be "acceptable" in at least US public schools,
>>Wikipedia would have to dramatically censored. Sadly, state and
>>local school boards in the US have effectively censored the content
>>of textbooks by not accepting material that could possibly be
>>offensive to a very long list of lobby groups (both on the right and
>>left of the political spectrum).
>>
>I wonder if NPOV would be sufficient for the bulk of this requirement.
>
>What I mean here is that our NPOV policy and wiki process tends to
>make pretty sure that no material is offensive to a very long list of
>wikipedians, from a wide variety of political and cultural
>backgrounds.
>
>Not everything in wikipedia is going to be considered by mainstream
>parents as appropriate for children, that's for sure.  Probably 99%
>is, but I acknowledge that a large number of people do feel that
>children should have even NPOV presentations of some information
>withheld from them until they are older.
>
>I heard a news story the other day that in California, textbooks
>are now forbidden to mention Mount Rushmore.  See:
>http://www.wtvw.com/Global/story.asp?S=1288473
>
>Wikipedia would obviously handle that topic differently.  We would not
>omit the existence of Mount Rushmore, but we would cite the names and
>arguments of those who find it offensive.
>
>A lot of the excessive political correctness that we read about in the
>news is really just a lack of talent in expression.  It's entirely
>possible to talk about controversial things in a way that is not
>itself controversial.
>
I just read that news story.  It shows how deeply embedded the dumbing 
down process has become.  The most significant fact is that the textbook 
publishers want to sell books, and they will do whatever it takes to 
maximize their market share.  If that means pandering to the lowest 
common denominator that's what they'll do.  That's not the same as NPOV.

The NPOV process happens openly right in front of everybody.  Both sides 
of an issue get a full airing on the way to a mutually acceptable 
understanding.  The distilled results of that process are akin to only 
showing final answers on a math test.

Ec