I'd have to say open source is about as close to the spirit of librarianship
as it gets. However, open source technology can be tested to see if it is
"right"; open source textual content, on the other hand, tends to raise
eyebrows instead.
But I personally am a fan of wikipedia: while I would never cite it in a
scholarly work, I think it is an excellent *first step* on a search. It also
often contains valuable external links. And most of all it is current: with
over 1 million articles, Britannica lags far behind (100,000). Needless to
say the range of content alone makes it interesting.
In any case, history-buffs and the might want to check out the article, "Can
History be Open Source? Wikipedia and the Future of the Past."
http://chnm.gmu.edu/resources/essays/d/42
-Chris
ps-wikibooks will be the next big thing
On 7/2/06, RECMGMT-L automatic digest system <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> There is 1 message totalling 38 lines in this issue.
>
> Topics of the day:
>
> 1. OT: Friday postings, ? about Wikipedia as a general source
>
> List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
> Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2006 12:13:12 EDT
> From: Maarja Krusten <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: OT: Friday postings, ? about Wikipedia as a general source
>
> I caught up on List reading on Saturday morning after a busy day Friday,
> when
> I barely had time to dip in to Archives List, much less Recmgmt-L. So
> much
> to look at here, and nary an OT header in sight! Glad I didn't look at
> this
> yesterday, when all the talk of food would have had me fighting the
> temptation
> to run to the canteen or snack machine, LOL.
>
> As to political correctness, after reading the consensus views expressed
> on
> the List, I (ever the researcher, must be in my genes), clicked on
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness
> to read what the entry says. Interesting write up, as is the linked talk
> forum discussion on the neutrality of the entry itself (!) I have to say
> I
> haven't used Wikipedia much, I'm still trying to get used to the idea of
> collaborative presentation. Have any of the rest of you used
> Wikipedia? What do you
> think of it as a reference source, its strengths or weaknesses?
>
> Happy Independence Day to my U.S. colleagues! And thanks to our
> colleagues
> abroad for your forbearance in wading through so many OT but
> unmarked-as-such-postings this past Friday. (You seem very patient with
> us North Americans
> during periods around our national holidays, thank you for that, LOL). It
> looks
> as if they were lighthearted, for the most part. Too bad I didn't have
> time
> to read them during the workday when I could have used a break or two. Ah
> well.
>
> Have a good weekend, all!
>
> Maarja
>
> List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
> Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of RECMGMT-L Digest - 30 Jun 2006 to 1 Jul 2006 (#2006-179)
> ***************************************************************
>
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
|
