RE: Wikipedia?

Hi Rick

I agree with you about the acceptance of books, newspapers,
etc., 
and the fact that we still read them even though we know
they 
might be biased, inaccurate, etc.

I think the difference with Wikipedia and other comparable
online 
resources is that because the Internet access to information
is 
new, people are not necessarily aware of how it got there.
We as 
librarians understand what is happening but our users don't

necessarily have the knowledge to see the big picture. What
I am 
finding scary is how uninformed some teachers are. When our
local 
primary school principle was quoted as saying that the
school 
library can be downgraded because the pupils can get all the

information they need from the Internet (ie Wikipedia, etc.)
that 
is scary.

Nine year olds are a bit young for a lecture on critical
analysis 
of information, but have previously had the security of a
school 
library with selected books that are suitable for the
curriculum. 
Now, the kids are let loose on the Internet with no idea
that 
what they read might not be right.


Regards

Raewyn Adams
Tauranga Hospital Library
New Zealand

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-liblicense-llists.yale.edu
[mailto:owner-liblicense-llists.yale.edu] On Behalf
Of Rick Anderson
Sent: Thursday, 22 February 2007 07:40 AM
To: liblicense-llists.yale.edu
Subject: RE: Wikipedia?

> Well, I guess if people want to use Wikipedia OK --
each to his 
> own. I still think it shows something of a slippage of

> standards. And for those who think errors are OK --
well, fine

The idea that Wikipedia is somehow uniquely error-prone
cracks me 
up. In libraries, we subscribe to newspapers as a matter of

course, and when it comes to accuracy, I think the average 
Wikipedia entry would compare pretty favorably to the
average 
news story.  We also buy books that are written by political

hacks (across the political spectrum) and that we know
perfectly 
well are filled with distortion and bias.  Are these
resources 
full of errors?  Of course.  Do we use them anyway?  Yes,
because 
a resource doesn't have to be perfect in order to be worth
what 
it costs, or to fulfill a valuable educational purpose
(comparing 
the fulminations of Al Franken and Dinesh D'Souza can be
very 
instructive). If all our tools and resources had to be 
error-free, we'd have precious few tools and resources.

---
Rick Anderson
Dir. of Resource Acquisition
University of Nevada, Reno Libraries
(775) 682-5664
rickandunr.edu