<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>bbgm - the discussion - Latest Comments in Wikipedia and science</title><link>http://mndoci.disqus.com/</link><description>At the interface of science and computing</description><atom:link href="https://mndoci.disqus.com/wikipedia_and_science/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 May 2007 04:40:04 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Wikipedia and science</title><link>http://mndoci.com/2007/05/13/wikipedia-and-science/#comment-1297580</link><description>&lt;p&gt;For my teaching of organic chemistry I would say that Wikipedia definitely has a useful role to play as one information source among many others.  It comes in handy for basic properties of common chemicals and solvents and for definition type of questions that are not always found (quickly) in other sources like textbooks.  For example, the best simple of explanation of the SNi mechanism (like SOCl2 with alcohols) I have found is in Wikipidia and I include it as a link in my class content page.&lt;br&gt;Also, in doing extra credit work with my students we have also had the opportunity to update missing information in Wikipedia - like the chirality of natural adrenaline.&lt;br&gt;Like any tool, a teacher has to instruct proper use.  But I guess many teachers just find it more expedient to ban.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Jean-Claude Bradley</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2007 04:40:04 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>