The Learn & Play Wiki
For those among the uninitiated, the 16th Learn & Play “Thing” was to play around with the Learn & Play “Sandbox” wiki.
The wikiwas set up with PBwiki, which I have used in the past with success. I like the ease of use if not the appearance of the interface. The WSYSIWYG editor takes a lot of the heavy lifting out of the process of course. I added my blog to the Favorite Blogs page and a favorite website. Really, anyone who’s already used to using Blogger or WordPress should have no problem with wiki editing. It is important for a “real” wiki that there be editing standards so that there’s a consistent look, but since this one is just for playing around there’s no problem here as far as I’m concerned.
Wikis are a fabulous tool for creating information storehouses. The ability to allow a community to create a storehouse of knowledge is fantastic. The only concern I have about them is that they be used properly. There is a tremendous urge on the part of Librarians to limit wikis. The well-publicized stories of vandalism on Wikipedia are certainly foremost in their minds. However, by limiting access to library staff you cut out potential gold mines of information in your own community and defeat the purpose of a wiki in the first place. In addition, wikis create an expectation that one will be able to edit content, and the fact that a public wiki is closed off to editing can be off-putting.
I know this sounds old school, but if you want to be able to control the content on a page, its perfectly alright to make a normal web page for it. I know wikis are “in” and all, but to make a wiki just because they’re more hip is just plain goofy (I feel like I’m repeating myself). If you chose a wiki because of the ease of use, consider that there are ways to add content to a regular page that are just as simple. For that matter, you could create a wiki, but take the time to make it look less like a wiki. There are services out there that let someone with a little CSS know-how customize the look of their wiki enough to disguise the “wikiness” of their site without compromising the ease of use. Of course, most of these cost money at least a little money…
I guess ultimately, my mantra is “use the right tool for the job”. That’s not always a wiki.
Library Wikis…Untapped Possibilities
Thing #15 for Learn & Play asks those following along to look at library wikis. Looking at the four mentioned specifically (three of which I’d seen before), I was struck by something. Librarians don’t really seem to ”get” wikis. I think it’s great that there’s a willingness to try out new technology and explore new concepts, but I doesn’t look like they understand said concepts yet. Just look at the four blogs highlighted in the post.
- SJCPL Subject Guides- This is the best of the four in many ways, but take heed! This wiki can only be edited by Librarians! I truly do get why, and fully respect the reasoning. After all, as librarians we are charged with providing accurate and useful information. Therefore, the idea of a publicly editable wiki of Subject Guides goes against the grain of our professional ethos completely. However, a publicly accessible wiki editable only by a small group of people goes against the wiki ethos just as much. Libraries need to decide if they trust their community and create something in collaboration with the community (content reviewed by librarians rather than created wholly by Liberians). If not, then maybe an “old fashioned” public website with subject guide pages would be more appropriate. A wiki format has built into it the expectation of user participation, and if the user is kept from participating, then the wiki format may well prove counter productive. If I were to be completely honest, the staff wiki for my branch isn’t even publicly viewable, let alone publicly editable. However, any member of its intended audience can edit, and that makes all the difference.
- Book Lovers Wiki- This one really confuses me. This wiki is no longer in active use because its supposed to be a “snapshot in time” of what folks were reading in the 2006 Summer Reading Club. That’s all well and good, but that’s not what a wiki is really supposed to be! A wiki is a living, breathing, evolving website that changes with time rather than sit statically. If they wanted to create such a snapshot, a section integrated into their public web site would have been more appropriate. Let me emphasize this point again. If your creating content that you don’t expect to ever change (with any frequency anyway), you don’t need a wiki!!! A web page/site will suffice!!!! (End of sermon)
- Library Sucess: a best practices wiki- Another wiki that confuses me, but for different reasons. Where exactly is the content!!! Some of the sections are fleshed out well, but a startling majority are quite barren (one or two sentences, if that). We’re supposed to be librarians people! Do you mean to tell me that this is the best we can do? This could be an excellent resource if we get folks to participate! I guess this isn’t so much a knock on the site as it is on us! Lets get moving people!!
- Bull Run -This site confuses me as well. First of all, it defaults to the “external links” section on the sidebar. Are we trying to get rid of people? It should default to your own content, “the sidebar” tab. Be proud! Highlight yourself!! Second, the site seems to specialize in sharing news and upcoming event information. These are not exactly specialties for wikis. A blog would be much more efficient for a sharing news and a calender app like Google Calender would be more effective at sharing the event information. Finally, doesn’t it seem like this wiki has a lot of information that should appear on the library’s web page? Granted, looking at the Prince William County Library site, I can see why the Bull Run branch would want their own web presence. Still, the library system web site should be there to provide a lot of this information.
I don’t want to come off as a jerk, it just seems to me that libraries need to think more about the appropriateness of the technology their using to the tasks they’re trying to accomplish. Having a wiki for its own sake is borderline silly.





