Re: Another take on Wikipedia and (academic) libraries

[David Goodman <dgoodman@Princeton.EDU>]

This almost never happens, at least in the English Wikipedia, 
considering that Wikipedia has a rule that original research, 
including original interpretation, is prohibited; this limits the 
possibilities to a popular work or a textbook.  We'd love to see 
good popular writing, but it means sacrificing the satisfactions 
of individual authorship: anyone in the world can change anything 
you write, sometimes--but not necessarily--for the better. This 
essentially limits the use to didactic writing, and the Wikipedia 
style is very abbreviated--it can no more be used as a 
satisfactory textbook than one could have used Brittanica.

What those like myself who work there to help develop scientific 
and other academic content really hope to see is authors first 
publishing original scholarly papers, and then adding a summary 
of the work to the pertinent Wikipedia article.  Even better, 
authors simultaneously publishing review or didactic works in 
professional journals, and simultaneously writing a version 
suitable for a general audience on Wikipedia.

But at least we hope that when someone recognizes an error or 
omission in Wikipedia, they just add it. Anyone can edit, not 
just the amateurs.

What Wikipedia really has to offer is the basic virtue of open 
access: readership. If you can explain something clearly the way 
an expert should be able to, there is no other medium which will 
let your explanation reach so many millions of people. And it 
won't be just in English--there are Wikipedia editions in over 
270 other languages that can translate and use the material.

David Goodman, Ph.D., M.L.S.
previously:
Bibliographer and Research Librarian
Princeton University Library
dgoodman@princeton.edu

presently, a volunteer administrator at Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG

----- Original Message -----
From: Velterop <velterop@gmail.com>
Date: Thursday, October 28, 2010 5:45 pm
Subject: Re: Another take on Wikipedia and (academic) libraries
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu

> Might it also be the other way around? Authors putting their
> chapters in Wikipedia, i.e. making them Open Access?
>
> Jan Velterop
>
> On 28/10/2010 00:20, Laval Hunsucker wrote:
>
>> Some may find interesting this (two-page) article by Corinna
>> Nohn, dated Monday 25 October, published on sueddeutsche.de :
>>
>> http://www.sueddeutsche.de/kultur/wikipedia-kompilationen-
> bullshit-amen-okay-1.1015680
>>
>> "Fehlkauf mit System: Immer mehr aus Wikipedia-Artikeln
>> kopierte Bucher finden sich in Uni-Bibliotheken. Die
>> "Enttarnung" gestaltet sich schwierig."
>>
>> etc.
>>
>> - Laval Hunsucker
>> Breukelen, Nederland