November 2, 2007 (3) Wikis

Thing 8: Wikis
So that is how a wiki works. I edited and saved to add my comment to 10Things @ SPL: Staff Picks - TV shows. It is easy to use. Now for the questions.

An alert, diligent, committed, and independently well-informed user base may keep the information in a wiki such as Wikipedia relevant and I do not want to discount common knowlege entirely. However, what passes for knowledge these days is often extremely biased and shallow, critical for the sake of criticism, not understanding, heavy on popular culture and celebrities, and light on scientific and historical knowledge.

I think libraries should stick to expert sources when providing information to patrons not only currently popular sources. That is what patrons are relying on, especially for medical, financial or government information. Now, in some cases, a wiki may offer the only information on a topic. (Example: A librarian found a definition for fahrvergnugen in Wikipedia, not a German-English dictionary. Why? It was a Gernan advertising jingle from the 1970's not a dictionary word--that is a wiki strength--answering questions pertaining to popular culture. Also, I could see where a historical fact from, say, Shepherd's Historical Atlas could be supplemented by someon's personal observation from a trip, as long as the two sources are clearly labeled fact and opinion or comment.

Wikis as demonstrated in the Video example on the Ten Things site could be useful to our department perhaps as a project management tool if it ever became impossible to communicate with everyone involved in person by other means. It also might be a useful tool if it were ever necessary to stimulate and gather opinions from our group. That is, long as it is used to supplement, not replace face to face meetings.