Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia not educational

My three cents worth (inflation, you know): Any article in Wikipedia should present information in such a way that a person of average intelligence who's motivated to learn can interpret it and use it. In the process, some education is absolutely necessary. A number of articles start with arcane, technical language that even a polymath genius would have trouble deciphering if that isn't one of his/her knowledge areas. Presenting knowledge is a process of education. I assume that Rotem Dan meant that entries should not be pedantic in nature, with which I agree, but they must be educational by way of being accessible. For instance, if an article states something like "The geological history of sedimentary rock is stratigraphic in nature," (not a real example in W.), then it should be rephrased to say something like "The geologic history of sedimentary rock is stratigraphic in nature; that is, the history is shown by the succession of strata, or layers." Then stratigraphic may be re-used without explanation, because it's been adequately explained. Simply putting in a link for stratigraphy is not sufficient (though it should be there) and invites the user to get lost in a maze of multiple open windows and computer stress. -- John Knouse jaknouse(a)frognet.net