Wicked Wikis ... the performance

I think Wikipedia is invaluable tool. Some of fellow librarians frown up Wikipedia and my colleagues at work wonder why a librarian should use it. Wikipedia is like any other information resource and should be used with the evaluative mindset that any good librarian or researcher should apply to any source, primary or secondary, that they use. I have used it to identify people; (Bryan Guiness), locate places, (the state of towns in the US), understand movements, (situationalism), and the thinking of groups (Rosicrucians).

I feel Wikipedia can be compared with the great Enlightenment project that was the Encyclopedie of D'Alembert and Diderot. Their goals are similar and yet unobtainable in collecting together all available knowledge. Wikipedia defines it policy on entries as engendering "civility". This is a very Enlightenment word. It also encompasses ideas about civilization and Wikipedia is an expression of our current civilisation.

Wikipedia is about collaboration, co-operation and community. This is rather like the eighteenth century bodies such as the Lunar Society, Royal Societies and philosophical societies of the Enlightenment project. It democratises information moving outside the elitism of the the university. This shares in the aspirations of Enlightenment and pushes the boundaries of knowledge further in the co-operation of academic and amateur. It values all information equally and nothing is neglected as unworthy of inclusion. Wikipedia also contributes to the globalisation of information. Some might suggest that Wikipedia is subject to bias but if you look carefully at the objective introduction of any encyclopedia you will identify their "subjective" ideological purpose.

What is also of value with Wikipedia is the added value of its entries; the ease of navigation through entries by hyperlinks, the quick facts panels, hyperlinks to references, the added external links many to reputable academic bodies, organisations and institutions, scholarly projects and established knowledgeable communities such as clubs and societies. The additional information is in many forms of media. The options to locate and purchase books is another useful feature.

I was glad to be able to investigate the prefatory material to Wikipedia, as with any use of dictionary or encyclopedia, this often neglected in the urgent need to find the essential information. I now feel I have to hand to answers to those who a critical of the use of the Wikipedia and better equipped to use the Wikipedia as an effective research tool.

The history and discussion tabs are useful for ascertaining the providence of articles and protect against misleading and inaccurate articles. Editing a page was very easy and here is my meagre contribution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Steele. Must remember to check if there in a couple of months.

I would like to understand further about the Portal projects within Wikipedia

I could write a whole article on Wikipedia but as time is short I will confine myself to the comments above. And perversely, I still feel that somehow I would be uneasy if I saw Wikipedia featured in scholarly bibliography!

Wicked Wikis ... behind the stage curtain

This week's first exercise was useful in allowing one to get behind the stage curtain of the wiki and see behind the scenes. First there was the all important question of the name of the drama "wiki" means "quick" and not "what I know is" or as Wikipedia puts it "wiki has being by some backronymed as what I know is.

Through an error I made when adding more pages then I intended, I discovered that wikis do not necessary have to be vast unconglomerated mass of spurious information but a mediated and controlled environment consisting of specific information for a individual community; in this case Oxford web 2.0 librarians. This suggests to me that the wiki might be an especially useful way of providing a "desk manual" or "FAQ" site for use many professions; outlining practices and procedures, or for quick reference at library issue desk, lodge reception, or in another similar situation.

Having been frustrated with my initial inability to add a page and then succeeding to add rather more then required by the exercise I had little time or inclination to add much more. I did go OULS hunting. Here is my contribution http://tinyurl.com/ybwf4hr. I didn't spot many more; perhaps everyone has been assiduously changing them. Has anyone been keeping a record I wonder distractedly and is there a prize for the one who has changed the most!

This week's exercise also allowed me to tick of a job from my long to do list where it had been lingering since January, when I added LibraryThing to the small but now growing list of web applications supported by my Library but had not added to the Directory of Web 2.0 Resources


Wikis are are wicked