Even after doing the readings and playing around with a wiki I still don’t quite “get” them. In theory, I understand them and think that they’re pretty awesome. And Wikipedia is, for the most part, the ultimate example of a wiki in practice and I use it and admire it. But deep down I can’t get off my “information specialist’s” (to be) high horse – the thought of any and every one editing information is a bit of a nightmare to me.
Schiff’s article in The New Yorker stoked the fires of my raging doubts, so when I got to Farkas’ post I could barely handle her optimism. I can imagine her ideas being implemented and working in certain libraries, mainly academic, but my imagination hits pause when I think about wikis on public library websites – particularly the “community wiki.” Is the library website supposed to take over the roles of forums and other methods of communication? Can patrons trust the information included in such a wiki? I don’t think the website is going to become a “true community resource” just by including wikis. In order to be a true resource the website needs marketing behind it.
I know that wikis don’t have to be open to the public at large and that the role of editor is often undertaken by the librarian/library staff, but a community wiki would require the community to have access. In certain case examples, and in the course test wiki, users have to either request permission or have a certain status to be an editor. Does this extra step just serve to maintain quality control? Or does it act as a deterrent? Maybe it’s a little from column A and a little from column B… (Personally, when/if I have to wait for approval to post or comment online I usually lose interest and move on, but that’s just me.)
I’m not writing wikis off; I’m just wondering how relevant they are in public libraries. And in this era where social software usually involves instant contact/communication/results/gratification/publishing, are regulated wikis really 2.0/social?
I do, however, see wikis as productive tools for content management within an organization. Why? The goals and motivations of the users are often explicit or more clear – and in most cases, staff members are working towards a common (and defined) goal. But of course, a wiki won’t solve all problems and won’t always be the best tool; and I liked Suarez’s article for pointing that out. We need to keep reminding ourselves: the right tool for the right time/people etc.