Christopher Mahan wrote:
--- Jason Williams <jason(a)jasonandali.org.uk>
wrote:
Unfortunately that is not the case if Wikipedia still clings to the
notion that it would cover human knowledge. The only requirement for
that is to be humans. Tigers and whales can set up their "Tigers and
Whales" encyclopedia.
Try putting some emphasis on *knowledge* as well...
To deny access to wikipedia who do not conform to 20th
century
western academic standards would deny, oh, roughly, 90% of the human
race from participating. In which case, it would not be an
encyclopedia of the human knowledge, but rather a wanna-be
encyclopedia with only 10% of human knowledge.
"The earth is flat" is not human knowledge. "Some people believe the
earth is flat" is.
If 90% of the human race don't know the diameter of earth, it will
suffice to write down that knowledge of the 10% remaining. It could also
be mentioned that most people don't know the diameter of earth, but
their not-knowing (or assuming something wrong) is *not* knowledge in
itself, and can therefore not be counted.
It's sort of like saying: all persons have
inalieanble rights yet
only citizens have access to lawyers free of charge. Pretty silly
huh?
Your comparison, yes.
Magnus