We created a wiki at our library to replace the old "Staffnet" web page, which was cumbersome and difficult to update. Maintaining the wiki isn't one of my primary responsibilities, but we were all given instructions on how to create an account and add, and at the time it seemed quite simple.
It seemed simple because it is simple. I've talked to other librarians, and it generally seems to be that it isn't difficult to teach people how to use wikis; the difficult part is getting them to actually contribute.
The Subject Guides wiki was okay, but I normally do reader's advisory so reference stuff isn't as interesting to me. Which brings us to Book Lovers at PPL. I REALLY liked the Book Lovers Wiki; within two minutes I read about several books that I'd like to read. This tool would be useful for patrons who are particularly interested in what we are reading. (I'm always shocked when someone asks me, "What books do you like?," because I don't have any better taste that anyone else...)
The Library Best Practices Wiki is pretty cool, and I'm bookmarking it for the next time I have to put together a project or implement a new procedure at the library. The Minnesota wikis are interesting, but there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of comment on one or two of them, and I still have no desire to take up beekeeping.
I added the bookmobile cartoon strip to the 23 Things on a Stick wiki. Cake.
I always wonder about the validity of information resources that, by their very nature, cannot be authoritative. Example: a few weeks (months?) ago a coworker walked into my office and told me Heath Ledger had died. I checked wikipedia, which reported (just half an hour after the initial call was made to the police) that before he'd died he'd painted his face like the Joker. Disturbing, and ultimately not true. Good thing I didn't have a grade riding on the information.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment