Wiki-ed

I have problems accepting a public wiki as a source of authoritative information. Although Wikipedia is wonderful in that it covers so many topics you won't find in a traditional encyclopedia, I think it's really most useful as a starting point to lead to other sources that have been more reliably fact-checked.

But a staff wiki is another matter . The example of an internal library wiki at "Wikis: A Beginner's Look" I actually found exciting (maybe I need a hobby).

Aha! I thought, as shivers ran up my spine. Now THAT could be useful! The wiki in the example is used to pull together lots of different kinds of staff resources. In other words, a bunch of stuff that I have a hard time remembering where and how to access (what folder is it in, what password do I use) could all be kept in ONE PLACE. A wiki for IS could house, for example:

-- Our Fugitive Facts file
-- A link to our blog
-- A link to our delicious account (Or here's a heretical thought: abandon delicious and add our subject bookmarks directly to the internal wiki instead. Wouldn't be available to the outside world, but does the world care?)
-- Software and other specs for SAM and PAL
-- Known machine problems & fixes (Internet, PAL, printers)
-- Resources for the homework topic of the moment
-- A link to the staff schedule (if we can link to the Yakima server)

According to the Online Community Report, 87% of organizations say they use wikis for internal purposes, and only 27% use them externally.

For me, one of the most stressful aspects of technological change here in the library over the past few years has been the proliferation of technological issues to remember solutions for, and the proliferation of places where our work-related information is now stored. (And many of those places require different passwords. AARGH@!&#) If we could get it all under one roof (and have a single password that applies to everything there?) how much simpler and sweeter life would be. And when we have something to add -- another blog, another 2.0 application of some kind, or whatever the heck else comes down the pike -- maybe we could put a link on the wiki, and not have to add another bookmark to every one of our computers.

On the downside, it would take time to set up. And if not maintained well, there's the risk that instead of centralizing everything, the wiki would become just one more place that you need to check when you're looking for some bit of information. The maintenance concern is touched upon in the report referenced above; it says that wikis work best "with a clear final product in mind," and that "aggressive co-editing of content is harder to effect using wikis."