In a way this is the one I had been waiting for. I mean, I use wikipedia quite a lot normally. It's a good site for looking up spoilers for Grey's Anatomy when I just can't wait (which is every week).
In terms of advantages and disadvantages, wikis mean that everybody can contribute, which is obviously both good and bad. While wikipedia, from a scholarly point of veiw, can be viewed with disdain, I think this is something of a generalisation stemming from the idea that print equals verification, and like anything, if you're investigating something important to you, scholarly or not, chances are you'll check multiple sources anyway. Certainly I have other sources for info on Grey's Anatomy too. So I would suggest the wikipedia is the best thing since sliced bread, and a great source for all sorts of things as well as pop culture.
The idea that wikis can be manipulated, in my opinion, is almost naive, since anything that is written, published or not, is written with an agenda in mind. The onus is on the reader who needs to be discerning in using the source.
How to use wikis in the library- a totally neat way for customers to interact, something like an online book group, really. Princeton Public Library has a wiki which does just this, and it's rather good in terms of options. User names are displayed, meaning a librarian may have more authority than someone called 'anonymous', but there's still a place for everyone.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment