[WEB4LIB] Librarian: Don't use Wikipedia as source

[D.H. Mattison]

I think the point many people are missing about wiki, especially comments
such as "a wiki is probably not appropriate for scholarly communication," is
best answered by the observation that banks are probably not appropriate for
keeping money and valuables because they get robbed, which is why many banks
and wikis have gatekeeping and security protocols in place to keep the
valuable cash and data from being tampered with. But, in their purest form,
wikis maintain an open door policy, which is totally unlike any bank, so the
metaphor breaks down at that point. It's the very nature, however, of this
ideal type of wiki that makes some of us nervous and thrills others for
various reasons, not all of them socially acceptable.

I think a wiki is highly appropriate for scholarly communication if all the
scholars trust one another and are collaborating on a text or whatever, and
security and rollback mechanisms are in place. To put some perspective on a
collaborative intellectual property like a book or article as compared to
wiki content: when you read a collaborative or jointly written article or
book, including fiction, do you even know who wrote what? No, in nearly
every case, you don't. You put your trust in the authorial expertise,
editorial control, or other individuals' opinions when selecting something
to read for yourself or others. Normally you don't even think about who
wrote what or what method was used to achieve the final product.

Wikis are just another tool in what I, borrowing from others, call the
Collaborative Web: technology and applications that let individuals work
together or independently directly through the Web browser without a
gatekeeper (e.g., a Webmaster) standing in the way.

The question of whether what emerges from that collaboration is
authoritative or scholarly depends on other factors often above and beyond
the collaborative process itself.

David Mattison
Victoria, BC, Canada
dmattison at shaw.ca
http://www.davidmattison.ca/tiki

-----Original Message-----
From: web4lib at webjunction.org
[mailto:web4lib at webjunction.org]On Behalf Of Rich Ackerman
Sent: August 25, 2004 10:03 AM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: [WEB4LIB] Librarian: Don't use Wikipedia as source


 From the Post-Standard:

Wednesday, August 25, 2004
AL FASOLDT
STAFF WRITER

In a column published a few weeks ago by my companion Dr. Gizmo, readers
were urged to go to the Wikipedia Web site at www.wikipedia. org/wiki/Main
Page , an online encyclopedia, for more information on computer history.
The doctor and I had figured Wikipedia was a good independent source.

Not so, wrote a school librarian who read that article. Susan Stagnitta,
of the Liverpool High School library, explained that Wikipedia is not what
many casual Web surfers think it is.

full article:

http://www.syracuse.com/technology/poststandard/fasoldt/index.ssf?/base/news
-0/1093338972139211.xml

I thought Gerry & others might find this interesting. It highlights the
problem of authority in wikis, one reason that a wiki is probably not
appropriate for scholarly communication.

Rich Ackerman