On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 22:11:50 -0700 Alan Dayley writes: > > I try to express these ideas: > > - They are correct, it is likely that some of the information in > Wikipedia articles is wrong. > > - Since Wikipedia requires references and places that need them get > flagged, references in Wikipedia can be used as a starting point > for > research. > > - Ask if they believe everything they read on websites but only > doubt > Wikipedia. > > - The same person can enter incorrect information in a Wikipedia > article, that everyone can edit, and publish the same incorrect > information on a website only they can edit. Ask why the later is > more > credible than the former. > > - Having said that, ask if they have ever watched or read a news > article > that they knew to be incorrect. Ask if they think it odd that > printed > encyclopedia sets issue correction addenda from time to time. > Errors, > or at least, mistakes are in all sources of information. > > - Point out that waiting for addenda or a new addition is far less > useful than an encyclopedia that can be changed nearly immediately. > > - There is great value in "experts," even true experts, writing > peer > reviewed articles. There are many avenues such as journals and > other > publications for their contributions. There is also great value in > allowing people with direct knowledge, though perhaps without > official > credentials, to publish their knowledge to the world. The > democratization of knowledge sharing is very important in ways we do > not > know just as Gutenberg probably only had a imagining of the power > of > what he created. Wikipedia, or at least such a concept, is an > important > part of that. > > - Change and incorrect information are everywhere, all the time. > Wikipedia simply exposes that truth to everyone instead of masking > it, > even if the mask is not purposeful. > > That's all I can think of right now. If all of that is to "high > minded" > for you or them, just tell them it's fun to participate! > > Alan > Well said, Alan! I love the democratization of Wikipedia. If anyone doubts the value of "open-source" information, they might want to read "The Language Police," by Diane Ravitch. Marvin --------------------------------------------------- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings: http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss