[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia isn't just a good idea - it's compulsory

[Ray Saintonge]

doc wrote:
> More seriously, I have primary age school-kids, and I would not allow 
> them to read nevermind edit wikipedia. I can't be alone in that. When my 
> daughter showed an interest, I went out and bought Encarta and 
> Britannica - which she loves and which are great for school.
My son is now in first year of college, and I tried for years to get him 
more involved; I even brought him with me to Alexandria.  It hasn't 
worked, but I know that he used Wikipedia to help him in his research 
for school papers.  He has had the good sense to know that using 
Wikipedia should not be both the beginning and the end of the research 
project, but neither should Encarta and Britannica be so. In a recent 
paper on Machu Pichu he ran into a stub article about some relevant 
person, but there was a link to es:wp which had a much longer article.  
I then told him that figuring out the other language was his problem, 
and he managed.

Having Wikipedia as a substitute for a school history curriculum would 
not be appropriate.  It should be a supplement there, with probably 
greater importance than for other subjects taught at that level of 
school.  Nationalism is a major factor in school social studies 
curricula, and a great medium for indoctrinating the child with official 
truth.  Access to Wikipedia and other on-line sources helps him to 
formulate the questions that needed to challenge the teachers of those 
truths.

Ec