Wiki: not to be confused as a Wookiee's evil doppleganger

I would argue that Wikipedia and associated wiki technology can, in some cases, be a more reliable source of information than traditional resources. Most often on fringe/niche/informal/unpublished topics where the best sources of information are users, fans, non-professionals. Although wikis, by definition, are created and manipulated by multiple users (there is potential for misinformation and sabotage) this feature is what make wikis wonderful again for many types of information. Theoretically, where users are passionate about topics they will be more invested in providing, supplementing, updating and correcting articles.

I did read somewhere once (sorry no reference) that one drawback of many web based technologies is that there seems to be an unbalanced ratio of consumption vs. production of content on the web. In short, it is very easy for users to consume without contributing which then leads to a very narrow representation of the actual interests and knowledge base of users on the web. Also, where there are technical glitches or erroneous information user apathy is apparent. Few users choose to alert appropriate administration or, potentially, in the case of Wikipedia, correct and add to articles which they know are flawed or incomplete.

Personally, I like using Wikipedia to get started on a search topic which is not well represented elsewhere to find alternative subject headings or similar topics but I do have to admit that I take this information with a grain of salt and am also guilty of not contributing to those areas where I know there are errors or missing information.

Even if Wiki was Wookiee's evil twin, it doesn't look like he's all bad

mmm... palatable?

I should probably use delicious more often than I do, at the very least to help out with the hard subjects (or me this is government and social studies related stuff). However, the visual clutter and complicated navigation keeps it out of my immediate repertoire.

This said it can be very useful, when locating a specific website, or page on a website, is relatively more difficult. A few weeks ago a customer brought in a question regarding family law and child support in Alberta. I struggled to find the appropriate section of the Alberta government website. Later on, I tried delicious as it was the task that week. I was able to find the right page much faster. However, I noticed that many of the tags used for this particular site used abbreviations or compounded words and were not immediately helpful for anyone not familiar with the topic.

For example, when I searched in delicious the tag ablaw was the only indication that this site was about Alberta law, unless of course you chose to display a high level of information. In addition, it is very easy to find yourself looking at Everybody's bookmarks without realizing it. This may lead some users to believe they are looking at bookmarks 'vetted' by CPL when they are not.

All in all, as with haggis flavoured ice cream, not an appropriate accompaniment to every meal or appetite, but suitable for the odd occasion.

Lions, and Tigers, and Facebook Oh My!

I am scared web 2.0 has turned my friends and family into narcissistic monsters