05-09-2009, 02:01 PM | #46 | |
Evangelist
Posts: 478
Karma: 451808
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: California, USA
Device: my two eyes, KLiiK, Sony PRS-700
|
Quote:
http://www.yale.edu/bass/writing/sou...wikipedia.html And finally, I don't think it's sensible to engage with sirbruce in his arguments anymore about Wikipedia. He seems merely polemic and argumentative for the sake of being so, rather than engaging in good-faith arguments. To that I gesture with a |
|
05-09-2009, 02:12 PM | #47 |
Guru
Posts: 675
Karma: 3314796
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Europe & USA
Device: K3/3G(2x), Glo HD, Amazon Voyage
|
I think that with a large enough display (and I'm talking 17"+ connected to a laptop) - ebooks could be very useful. My husband, a university professor who writes research papers in English as a second language - absolutely loves using technical ebooks and texts. He annotates the PDFs, has a dictionary open to look up words, writes alternate proofs or whatever and "clips" them to pages and so on. He just bought a second monitor to extend the process.
I'm certain he'd enjoy a portable reader to carry around to classes and such, but it'll have to wait for a larger, flexible design (and sold in Europe!). |
Advert | |
|
05-09-2009, 02:32 PM | #48 | |
Apeist
Posts: 2,126
Karma: 381090
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: The sunny part of California
Device: Generic virtual reality story-experiential device
|
Quote:
I agree with your last sentence. But I kind of disagree, that Wikipedia is "never" a credible source. Much more often, than not, the information is accurate. But more importantly, Wikipedia can be a valuable source, as a stepping stone to conducting research on a subject, by providing a basic overview. As you continue your research, you may find that some of the Wikipedia information may not be accurate, or you may disagree with it's bias/conclusions, but it is so with many printed books as well. On the whole, it's a valuable resource for all. As to research, at least for what I do, digital is much, much better, than dealing with paper volumes. One can search through a large amount of information much faster, can go back and forth among a great number of sources with ease, etc.. But I know that some disagree, and that's fine, for them. And, the open-source text-books idea sounds good to me. It also does not preclude having editor(s), so I don't see what the problem is. |
|
05-09-2009, 02:44 PM | #49 | |
Wizard
Posts: 2,895
Karma: 6995721
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Idaho, on the side of a mountain
Device: Kindle Oasis, Fire 3d Gen and 5th Gen and Samsung Tab S
|
Quote:
|
|
05-09-2009, 03:14 PM | #50 |
Evangelist
Posts: 478
Karma: 451808
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: California, USA
Device: my two eyes, KLiiK, Sony PRS-700
|
Well, spatial memory is not the same as being able to recall a word to search for. Sometimes, I remember the occurrence of an idea but don't remember how the author talked about it. In that case, I may be able to get to that portion of the book spatially quicker than with search which is more of a verbal kind of memory.
|
Advert | |
|
05-09-2009, 03:18 PM | #51 | |||
Evangelist
Posts: 478
Karma: 451808
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: California, USA
Device: my two eyes, KLiiK, Sony PRS-700
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I don't know if all those comments were directed to me, but they seem to be given how you started your post. But I could be wrong. Last edited by thibaulthalpern; 05-09-2009 at 03:21 PM. |
|||
05-09-2009, 03:27 PM | #52 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 11,470
Karma: 13095790
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Grass Valley, CA
Device: EB 1150, EZ Reader, Literati, iPad 2 & Air 2, iPhone 7
|
Quote:
I would suggest that you not take general comments personally in a forum. This can lead to all sorts of problems that in reality do not exist. Dale |
|
05-09-2009, 03:48 PM | #53 | |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 5,185
Karma: 25133758
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: SF Bay Area, California, USA
Device: Pocketbook Touch HD3 (Past: Kobo Mini, PEZ, PRS-505, Clié)
|
Quote:
Setting aside the random vandalism and strong biases that pop up occasionally, Wikipedia contains inaccuracies and biases that last until someone notices and corrects them. Citing the page on Pluto is probably reasonably accurate; many people watch to make sure that's up to date. Citing the page on Filk music is more iffy; it fails to even mention songbooks except in its links section. The page on the Feri tradition was written by one person, and reflects his biases, with a few minor changes added by people who disagree strongly. It fails to encompass definitions and variations preferred by Feri initiates who aren't online at all. (Am I going to fix it? Hell no; I don't need to get into a wiki war about my religion. I don't need for the general public to have much accurate information about my religion, either; the info there isn't exactly wrong as much as it is skewed, and I'm content for it to stay that way. But it's not a good source for an academic paper about Feri, or Modern Neopaganism, or American Witchcraft, or whatever.) |
|
05-09-2009, 04:21 PM | #54 |
Grand Sorcerer
Posts: 7,452
Karma: 7185064
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Linköpng, Sweden
Device: Kindle Voyage, Nexus 5, Kindle PW
|
I do not see the problem if it means a GPL or a Creative Commons license. You only need to have version numbers and then the review system will take care of the quality. And the quality will probably be much higher than the quality of locally produced material that are just used in one course which is what is common today.
|
05-09-2009, 04:21 PM | #55 | |
Evangelist
Posts: 478
Karma: 451808
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: California, USA
Device: my two eyes, KLiiK, Sony PRS-700
|
Quote:
Last edited by thibaulthalpern; 05-09-2009 at 04:24 PM. |
|
05-09-2009, 04:58 PM | #56 |
Zealot
Posts: 136
Karma: 244
Join Date: Aug 2007
Device: Kobo Glo
|
I'm quite happy to admit that anecdotal evidence from my father in law hardly makes for a damning indictment of Wikipedia Unfortunately I don't really have the to time to conduct my own full scale scientific study of the problem. But I will endeavor to look up and read some of the studies that have been done on the issue.
People do seem however to have a general distrust of Wikipedia even if it's not deserved. I guess that all the attention grabbing headlines that pop up frequently, such as this one http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...07/2562940.htm don't help. You don't see blogs and news sites reporting on how great such and such an article is on Wikipedia because it's so accurate. You only hear about how unreliable it is and how "anyone can edit it", that last point just rings alarm bells in most people's heads. I'm also sure that Wikipedia will make more and more strides in the coming years and will become more and more acceptable as a source for general academic research. It's certainly a resource I make use of on a daily basis. As an aside the only reason I got drawn into this argument at all was because this is one of the few forums I read on a daily basis, due in no small part to the unusually high number of intelligent and thoughtful posters (and yes sirbruce I count you as one of those) and I'd hate to see it go downhill as it gets more and more popular. Often some posters just get jaded and tend to post in a more combative and cynical way as time goes on, even if they don't mean to come across that way. Last edited by deltop; 05-09-2009 at 05:02 PM. |
05-09-2009, 05:16 PM | #57 |
Kindlephilia
Posts: 2,017
Karma: 1139255
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Snowpacolypse 2010
Device: Too many to count
|
The local public school systems here in the DC area do not accept Wikipedia for papers. My kids have been told at both the elementary and secondary levels not to use Wikipedia.
|
05-09-2009, 05:25 PM | #58 | |
Evangelist
Posts: 478
Karma: 451808
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: California, USA
Device: my two eyes, KLiiK, Sony PRS-700
|
Quote:
I posted one from Yale University a few posts up. |
|
05-09-2009, 05:36 PM | #59 | |
Evangelist
Posts: 478
Karma: 451808
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: California, USA
Device: my two eyes, KLiiK, Sony PRS-700
|
Quote:
For one thing, scholars do not generally cite encyclopedias (printed or non-printed versions) at all for their research. Though likely reputable, these sources are too general. Instead, a credible scholar will look at other sources. This is not to say that an encyclopedia won't be used in the process of doing research but it will NOT be used as a source material for the actual writing itself. Case in point: I'm doing some reading on gossip and rumours as it has been studied by anthropologists. Gossip used to be a hot research topic in anthropology but no longer is the case. Niko Besnier is a contemporary scholars who has revived this topic. He has an encyclopedia entry in an anthropology encyclopedia. I've read that entry and find it useful. He also has a bibliography at the end of his entry. That is what I turn to in step 2 to do further reading. When I write my chapter on gossip in my own fieldsite, I won't be citing the encyclopedia entry but possibly the other sources he lists in addition to others I find. Last edited by thibaulthalpern; 05-09-2009 at 05:39 PM. |
|
05-09-2009, 11:31 PM | #60 |
Karmaniac
Posts: 2,553
Karma: 11499146
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Miami FL
Device: PRS-505, Jetbook, + Mini, +Color, Astak Ez Reader Pro, PPW1, Aura H2O
|
most likely in a pdf like format, for laptop.
Schools are finally moving on to laptops instead of those heavy bookbags filled with books and maps. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
TomeRaider to go open source | MatYadabyte | News | 27 | 11-18-2012 12:23 PM |
Open source | bradrice | Kindle Formats | 2 | 12-21-2009 09:30 AM |
Open Source Text Books for California Schools | shrimphead | News | 6 | 05-09-2009 03:37 AM |
iRex and Open Source | jrial | iRex | 8 | 03-03-2009 10:34 AM |
TrueCrypt V2.0 Open-Source | Alexander Turcic | Lounge | 1 | 06-21-2004 02:02 PM |