I'll out myself on this one... I called it thoughtful because it presented a point of view that has lots of traction. In journalism, it's the mark of a good editor to give a voice to stakeholders on many sides of an issue. Just because you find this editorial in the Christian Science Monitor doesn't mean that the editors agree with it. Incidentally, the CSM recently discontinued its print publication, converting to an all-online outfit, so it's likely that this editorial was part of a conscious effort to encourage exploration and debate. As to the content of the essay... It is frustrating to see how this essay romanticizes the silent contemplation of old technology romanticized, while abstracting to annoying sound effects the tools that 21C students use so frequently in their social lives. Wisner imagines a library for patrons who don't exist, but he makes a good historical case for that library, and his essay will likely be a good discussion prompt if I should use it when I teach a class this spring on the history and future of the book. A few months ago, a senior faculty asked members of a committee to think of the word "technology" and then call out the first thing that comes to mind... I called out "play" and "game" and "learn," while others called out things like "fear" and "paralysis" and "confusion". The essay helped me to understand the point of view of those colleagues who think of technology as a soul-draining chore, as well as students who don't fit the plugged-in demographic, who may feel threatened when I advocate technology. I'm glad your post gave me the chance to spell out my thougths in more detail.

@Mark, "some kind of company I can hire to check my manuscript" Turnitin.com?

If "write-through" means "paraphrase to avoid having to cite," that's still a problem, since you're still building on the Wikipedia article without citing it. (Paraphrase can still be plagiarism of ideas, as the discussion on VQR clarifies.) If "write-through" means "go directly to the sources cited by the Wikipedia article and cite them directly," that's a lot of extra work, and will typically result in longer passages (with multiple citations). Having said all that, I recognize that you're doing the right thing now.