Wikis for Reference: Eight Resources

My Delicious bookmarks, compiled through the semester of LIS644, include many uses of wikis that have led me to believe that the technology has the potential for nearly limitless innovation. Among the most exciting uses I discovered were (1) wikis as instructional design resources in preK-12 school classrooms and libraries and (2) wikis as reference tools for libraries, students, and scholars. After exploring a wide range of wiki applications, I settled on their use as reference tools for special focus in my final blogpost and paper.

    The eight resources annotated below are ordered to tell a story of sorts. They begin with a definition of wikis that encompasses reference tools, include two explorations of reference wikis and a site that wiki creators with a mission to inform should consult, and culminates with reviews of four topical reference wikis.


1. Rennie, Ian. (2006, April 25). Wiki, wiki, wiki. Library Trainer. Retrieved December 14, 2009, from http://librarytrainer.com/index.php/2006/04/25/wiki-wiki-wiki/
There are a gazillion definitions of wikis available (including the Webjunction wiki and "Wikis: A Beginner's Look," both BOOKMARKED), but this article supplies a description and analysis that are highly relevant to the use of wikis as encyclopedias and other tools of reference. While most library resources define wikis in terms of their use as collaboration tools among staff and for community information-sharing, this focuses on the wider picture of "pooling knowledge or exchanging ideas" in the form of a wiki encyclopedia. "A wiki is a good way of gathering facts quickly and pooling expertise from a large number of people," explains Rennie. Referencing Wikipedia as an example, Rennie provides a detailed, objective examination of the pros and cons of using a wiki for this special purpose. [BOOKMARKED]

 
2. Bell, S. (2008, November/December). Wikis as legitimate research sources. Online, 32(6), 34-37.
This article starts by listing the uses of wikis that are becoming most common—knowledge management, workplace applications—then poses the question: "Can we start to count wikis among our legitimate information sources?" The piece looks at two growing uses of wiki for public reference: health wikis and city wikis. For matters of health, accuracy and trustworthiness are essential concerns, which the creators of these wikis are addressing by restricting editing rights. Three health wikis are profiled, including a general medical site edited by doctors only, a nutrition site, and a specialized site on sleep apnea [BOOKMARKED]. The use of the wiki as a forum for local events and services is also profiled, with special attention to wikis of Davis, California, and Omaha, Nebraska [BOOKMARKED]. This is a thorough examination of the content uses of wikis, rather than their technology aspects, with a focus on issues of credibility. Bell's list of evaluation criteria is worthwhile: "Is editing restricted or open to anyone? Is the wiki active? Are there new entries? Is editing current? Are the editors experts?" Astutely she notes that depending on the type of wiki, "expertise is not synonymous with education."


3. Bell, S. (2009, January/February). Wikis for reference, enthusiasts, and government information. Online, 33(1), 20-23.
In this second article about wikis as credible information sources, Bell looks at "enthusiast" wikis (e.g., beer drinkers, amateur genealogists, vintage seamstresses, and more) and the use of wiki technology for topical encyclopedias. The encyclopedias place "a very strong emphasis on authority and credibility," and are as worthy as most items in the print reference section of a library, says Bell. For most, this is accomplished by restricting editing rights to experts, and by a well-communicated mission of providing the most comprehensive, accurate information to anyone in the world who needs it or want to know. Enthusiast wikis, on the other hand, derive their value from the "wisdom of the crowd," which is perfectly appropriate in this context. Bell also looks at government wikis for public reference, a small group indeed, but with benefits for both the government and the public [see Peer-to-Patent BOOKMARK]. With many specific wikis mentioned, this article examines up-and-coming uses of the technology, along with their special features, and essential modifications for making the most of the innovative approaches.


4. Wikimatrix [Web site]. Retrieved December 14, 2009, from http://www.wikimatrix.org/index.php
For anyone contemplating the creation of a wiki, especially for public purposes such as a large reference tool, this is the place to start information gathering. Wikimatrix helps you choose the best provider for your purposes with its wizard that asks about your needs. The site then assists by comparing all wiki providers on every possible dimension, including general features (e.g., last release date, URL, open source, intended audience), hosting features, system requirements, data storage, security, development and support, common features, special features, links, syntax features, usability, statistics, output, media and files, and "extras," plus it provides syntax examples for each provider. "Last updated" is listed for each provider, and the dates are within the last few months for the ones I investigated. This website also includes a Help forum for discussing wikis, a list of "random" wikis of interest, and a list of upcoming wiki conferences. The layout is extremely easy to follow, and the language is accessible to all, from neophyte to savvy. This is an exceptional consumer site for the wiki user that can help determine the best provider for a wiki that is intended for a variety of reference purposes. [BOOKMARKED]


5. Medpedia [Web site]. Retrieved December 14, 2009, from http://www.medpedia.com/
Medpedia is a new health wiki, launched in February 2009 (see Bell article about health wikis in general). According to its creators, Medpedia is "a long-term, worldwide project to evolve a new model for sharing and advancing knowledge about health, medicine and the body among medical professionals and the general public. This model is founded on providing a free online technology platform that is collaborative, interdisciplinary and transparent." To control the accuracy of the information, only physicians and doctoral level scientists in biomedicine can be editors, although the general public can "suggest changes." To bolster its authority, the site carries the endorsements of Harvard, Stanford, and the University of Michigan medical schools on its home page.

    The content of the site is quite rich, including editor biographies, news and analyses, alerts, Q&A, tools for medical professionals, patients, and organizations, lists of communities, affiliated organizations, and weekly profiles of an editor, an article, a group, and an organization. Articles are very easy to locate, in alphabetical order by subject. Each article has a "clinical" and a "plain English" tab, although very few have both versions. The site is quite new and growing, and is striving to make itself meaningful to the public and authoritative.

    Despite its concern for credibility and efforts to maintain it, Medpedia has extensive disclaimers: it does not diagnose nor make recommendations, and it is not peer reviewed. "Medpedia is intended as an educational resource for you to begin learning about health issues. There is absolutely no assurance that any statement contained or cited in the Content touching on medical matters is true, correct, precise, or up-to-date." [BOOKMARKED, provider Mediawiki]


6. The Psychology Wiki [Web site]. Retrieved December 14, 2009, from http://psychology.wikia.com/wiki/Main_page
The Psychology Wiki was started in 2006 by a clinical psychologist in the United Kingdom whose goal was to provide a vast, free collection of psychology knowledge for all. Contributions are not restricted at this point, but its creator hopes to impose more authority once it has gained sufficient respect and renown.

    "It seems like a trustworthy resource with good intentions and an appropriate guiding spirit," says Suzanne Bell (2009) in "Wikis for reference, enthusiasts, and government information." "It would be interesting to test it head-to-head against a commercially published, online psychology encyclopedia." That said, the wiki has already become one of the largest in existence, with more than 50,000 pages and 25,000 articles and growing by the minute. The earnestness of its aims is evident in its mission statement, worth quoting: "We aim to provide an up-to-date, authoritative statement of knowledge, theory, and practice in the whole field of psychology. The site is written to serve both staff and students of our academic community, to inform professionals, both in training and in the field, and to provide information for the people we seek to help…. We aim for factual accuracy and all articles should be properly referenced. We also aim to be a forum for ideas, so on each discussion page we encourage alternative opinion, proposals for hypotheses requiring verification, practitioner reports, user views, etc…. Our goal is to share, without costs of any kind, psychology knowledge between academic and professional psychologists and with a wider audience of non-psychologists."

    The wiki has a simple, unadorned structure without much in the way of unnecessary bells and whistles. It contains a "How to Use" section and "About the Psychology Wiki" and features such as a list of psychology journals and a forum for upcoming events. The main page shows the structure of the wiki content, much like a Table of Contents, with 17 "chapter" headings in either "Foundations" or "Applied Psychology." The chapter and article structure was created at the outset, and articles are continuously added to it, fleshing out the skeleton. The articles themselves are inconsistent in tone and depth, but such issues are fully acknowledged. This is a good resource for beginning a psychology inquiry, and because the project is so active, its future seems quite promising. [BOOKMARKED, provider Wikia]

 
7. The Thomas Jefferson Wiki [Web site]. Retrieved December 14, 2009, from http://wiki.monticello.org/
Immediately under the head "Thomas Jefferson Encyclopedia" is the line "Trustworthy information on Thomas Jefferson and his world by Monticello researchers and respected Jefferson scholars." And in case there is any doubt as to what that means to the amateur TJ-phile, or to the Jefferson scholar seeking resources, the site clarifies, "You have to be an approved scholar to write and edit, but the public is invited to make comments, pose questions, and engage with the scholars."

    With straightforward intentions and a layout that is simplicity itself, this encyclopedia is easy to explore, as well as fun. Locate articles by either browsing an alphabetical list of topics or by clicking on a link in a tag cloud. The tag links are essentially the same as the topic list, except they indicate which topics receive the most attention because of their relative size. Possible topics include Architecture, Personal Life, Quotations, Legends, Sally Hemings and Thomas Jefferson, and of course Politics. People, Personal Life, and Monticello (House) are at this moment the dominant categories in the tag cloud.

    The articles are lean but informative, and they contain footnotes that often contain links to other sources—including digital images of documents that are housed at the Library of Congress. The site is very active, with almost two dozen edits on the day of this writing alone. Each article reports the number of times it has been accessed; I noted a range of about 20,000 to 1,500 in the articles I opened; the home page has been accessed almost 110,000 times. This seems to be a very reputable site, one that could be consulted by reference librarians and cited by scholars with confidence. [BOOKMARKED, provider MediaWiki]


 
8. Encyclopedia of Earth [Web site]. Retrieved December 14, 2009, from http://www.eoearth.org/
"Everything Earth, articles by experts, ever expanding"--the EoE, as it is called, is a polished resource that is both trustworthy and fascinating. The editorial and review process is as exacting as that of the most reputable print publisher, but the site claims its wiki-centric mission of delivering the highest quality information for free, from a wide community (of experts), to the world: "Our goal is to make the Encyclopedia of Earth the largest reliable information resource on the environment in history." Contributions are (1) original articles by identified experts in their field, (2) existing material from "content partners"—reputable organizations that support the mission of the EoE, and (3) suitable open content from sources such as the United States government.

    The EoE is part of the Earth Portal, which also includes Earth News and the Earth Forum, where lively discussions among experts and the public flourish, making the most of the wiki technology. The numerous articles in the encyclopedia are cataloged and fully searchable by entry title, author, subject, and "collection"—groupings by meta-topics, such as Climate Change, Africa, Biodiversity, and Coral Reefs. Browsing by topic or collection is a rich experience. The site is well-organized and easy to navigate, even though there is much going on; indeed, in terms of appearance, it is as professional as a well-funded website. For purposes of scholarship, each article contains a full bibliographic citation. Of the many special features of the EoE, one that especially stands out is an entire section devoted to the encyclopedia's uses in education, including classroom and teacher resources. This is an exceptional resource for students, scholars, and the general public. [BOOKMARKED, provider Trunity]