A Wikipedia Article Is Not Your Org's Home Page

People sometimes forget that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a place to promote an individual, organization, point of view, or cause. The word is dispassionate. As Joe Friday used to say,"Just the facts, ma'am."

For example, Wiki editors will quickly remove your eloquent discussions of the importance of pep rallies at your school or the sizable impact the new chef has had on school lunches. Those sorts of testimonies belong on your school's home page, at MySpace or Facebook, or on a community bulletin board of some sort. Think instead about the school's founding and important turning points -- who, where, when, how, and why? Think about the what -- What does the school teach, how many students, ethnic mix, major legal challenges or public events? What does the school sponsor? Don't slip into team promotions but links to the school's sports conferences and accreditations are appropriate, and championships are often mentioned in such articles. Don't forget famous alumni and prominent teachers or administrators. Provide details about the school's building, renovations, relocations, mergers with other schools, etc. Add a box with information about the name of the school's yearbook, school mascot, principal, etc. Add a photo.

As for advocacy of issues, good pages to read to get a sense of how people struggle between passion and dispassion are the Islamic Terrorism talk page and the Abortion talk page. Just keep in mind that a balanced discussion is difficult because of the biases we each carry along with us. Some pages remain locked in battle, so for those with high-blood pressure it might be best to keep your distance and find something less controversial to assuage your Wiki needs. Again, if you want to advocate for a cause, establish or participate in a web page designed for such advocacy. Facebook groups are a good place to start -- search and you're liable to find a number of advocacy groups where you can post your thoughts. Or you can create your own group. I've done it -- it's easy enough. The Web and Blogosphere are always good places to look. Remember, Elton John fans, Saturday nights are alright for fightin'. But, as Jon Stewart might say, "Wikipedia -- not so much."

Genealogical Support to Wikipedia Articles

Wikipedians are pushing beyond the edges of current biography. As we widen the scope of our pursuits, Wikipedians are outstripping the ability of biographers to keep up with our many tangential interests. This calls for creative solutions.

Genealogy databases support Wikipedia production quite nicely. Over the past six months or so, I've dug into the US Census, Social Security Death Index, and other databases to find details about individuals about whom little has been written. I've gathered some information about Henry B. Vincent, founder of the Erie Playhouse, using the US Census and other public sources. An article should be forthcoming soon. I've recently helped a couple of folks working diligently to upgrade the Wiki articles on Pennsylvania state parks. Turns out that Maurice K. Goddard is a major figure in the establishment of the park system in Pennsylvania, but no one could find his date of birth. So I used the Social Security Death Index (SSDI) to find his records. (SSDI has him as Maurice V. Goddard for some reason, but the other details all match nicely. What, the USG make a mistake?! Humbug!) For the Colton Point State Park article, the duo of Wikipedians wanted to know more about Henry Colton, for whom the park is named. I found some interesting details about this Williamsport lumberman in the US Census, local newspaper clippings, and a local history. (You can see the results of my digging on the Colton Point State Park discussion page.)

Wiki is a great way to develop local historical biography. Genealogy is a great way to support biographical production. Get creative in your pursuit of the details of your community leaders.

SharePoint Wiki

I've had an opportunity to try SharePoint's Wiki (SP Wiki) for about two weeks. It is easy to use but utterly featureless. I can only wonder what Microsoft was thinking when they included this no frills item and pretended it was a Web 2.0 collaboration tool. (You can see an SP Wiki online at the University of Missouri's website)

KM Space is quite unhappy with SP Wiki because it doesn't adequately communicate incremental changes to pages like Wikipedia notifications do. I've not tried this yet, but apparently SP Wiki sends you a copy of the entire new page, rather than pointing out specific changes to the text.

Lawrence Liu is tired of hearing complaints about the SP Wiki. Liu says that users should look at SharePoint overall and be amazed at the package and not pick apart its elements which can't compete with separate tools available on the market today. Seems to me he is satisficing (and rude). Liu might as well get used to the unruly hoardes, because we're unhappy with SP Wiki and unlikely to stop complaining. Maybe this is standard fare for Microsoft, to put out a crappy product and say it is a marvel, but I'm truly surprised that anyone would put this out there and say it is a Cadillac. It's a Geo.

Now I'm wondering how I will ever transfer two weeks of input into another product, if my employer will ever add a different Wiki tool to SharePoint.

I'd Rather Be Writing discusses the use of columns to force the use of metatags. It seems cumbersome and not all that successful, from what this blog says. I'm not impressed.

Jackie Bodine briefly ran a SharePoint blog which included a discussion of how to add columns and tables to an SP Wiki. After a month or so she dropped the blog and that was about a year and a half ago. Maybe she recognized that the product was weak and decided it wasn't worth its own blog?

InformationWeek has an October 2007 article announcing that Atlassian, which produces the Wiki product Confluence, was teaming up with Microsoft to make a seamless connector between Confluence and SharePoint. A video embedded at the Classic Scoble Show contains an interview with Atlassian folks who explain many of the interesting features that this connector will provide, including a search engine, personal Web page and blog, and the capability to embed Confluence Wiki pages in SharePoint. Sounds promising. Atlassian has its own blog article about the release.

Of course InfoWorld says you probably already paid a lot of money for Microsoft products, so you might as well make use of the Wiki that is provided for free in SharePoint. Now that's an endorsement.