Comments on: “Let’s give ‘em something to talk about:” Discussions of GCpedia on the Internet http://blog.gtec.ca/government-20/%e2%80%9clet%e2%80%99s-give-%e2%80%98em-something-to-talk-about%e2%80%9d-discussions-of-gcpedia-on-the-internet/ Make the Shift to Government 2.0 Tue, 07 Sep 2010 15:49:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Richard Akerman http://blog.gtec.ca/government-20/%e2%80%9clet%e2%80%99s-give-%e2%80%98em-something-to-talk-about%e2%80%9d-discussions-of-gcpedia-on-the-internet/comment-page-1/#comment-2454 Richard Akerman Thu, 24 Sep 2009 17:37:02 +0000 http://blog.gtec.ca/?p=592#comment-2454 The core engine that drives Wikipedia is verifiability. That means everything has to be verifiable with reliable, third-party sources. And Wikipedia prefers sources like newspapers and magazines to blog postings. With very little information about GCPEDIA publically available, and with the site itself GC internal only, there's not a lot that you can put about GCPEDIA in Wikipedia. And since the references to GCPEDIA are likely to be other GC internal sources, it's not surprising that there aren't many other articles in Wikipedia that link to the GCPEDIA article. Organisations need to understand that Wikipedia is not a marketing platform. It's a collaborative space to share and refine verifiable (i.e. public), neutral information. If you want your article to do well, seek out reputable third-party sources to reference. The core engine that drives Wikipedia is verifiability. That means everything has to be verifiable with reliable, third-party sources. And Wikipedia prefers sources like newspapers and magazines to blog postings. With very little information about GCPEDIA publically available, and with the site itself GC internal only, there’s not a lot that you can put about GCPEDIA in Wikipedia. And since the references to GCPEDIA are likely to be other GC internal sources, it’s not surprising that there aren’t many other articles in Wikipedia that link to the GCPEDIA article.

Organisations need to understand that Wikipedia is not a marketing platform. It’s a collaborative space to share and refine verifiable (i.e. public), neutral information. If you want your article to do well, seek out reputable third-party sources to reference.

]]> By: Todd Lyons http://blog.gtec.ca/government-20/%e2%80%9clet%e2%80%99s-give-%e2%80%98em-something-to-talk-about%e2%80%9d-discussions-of-gcpedia-on-the-internet/comment-page-1/#comment-2456 Todd Lyons Wed, 23 Sep 2009 19:34:13 +0000 http://blog.gtec.ca/?p=592#comment-2456 If you'd like to get your knowledge up on GCPEDIA but are unsure about the markup and layout, please contact me through my user page (click the link on my name). I'm more than happy to teach you the markup, show by example by formatting and arranging the data as you need it, or even edit it with you live and in tandem during a phone call. This is, above all else, a collaborative tool. Those with content but no software knowledge can help and be helped by users with the technical knowledge but no new content to share. With Web 2.0, one person need not--and should not--do it all. If you’d like to get your knowledge up on GCPEDIA but are unsure about the markup and layout, please contact me through my user page (click the link on my name). I’m more than happy to teach you the markup, show by example by formatting and arranging the data as you need it, or even edit it with you live and in tandem during a phone call. This is, above all else, a collaborative tool. Those with content but no software knowledge can help and be helped by users with the technical knowledge but no new content to share. With Web 2.0, one person need not–and should not–do it all.

]]> By: smith.pcw http://blog.gtec.ca/government-20/%e2%80%9clet%e2%80%99s-give-%e2%80%98em-something-to-talk-about%e2%80%9d-discussions-of-gcpedia-on-the-internet/comment-page-1/#comment-2455 smith.pcw Wed, 16 Sep 2009 15:25:04 +0000 http://blog.gtec.ca/?p=592#comment-2455 Thanks for linking. My concerns still hold- many of my peers in the GoC communications world are very turned off from actually making contribs to GCpedia since it involves learning "techie" stuff (I'm thinking it's really more about IM than IT but hey). e.g. frustrations remembering the arcane deets of wiki markup or not knowing when to create a subpage rather than a new page or category. Part of it is training, but mostly not enough resources dedicated to wiki gardening. The ideal would be for them to be able to contribute their knowledge and then have gardeners come by and clean it up for them. But it is a struggle to resource that kind of background activity. Sigh. Thanks for linking. My concerns still hold- many of my peers in the GoC communications world are very turned off from actually making contribs to GCpedia since it involves learning “techie” stuff (I’m thinking it’s really more about IM than IT but hey). e.g. frustrations remembering the arcane deets of wiki markup or not knowing when to create a subpage rather than a new page or category. Part of it is training, but mostly not enough resources dedicated to wiki gardening. The ideal would be for them to be able to contribute their knowledge and then have gardeners come by and clean it up for them. But it is a struggle to resource that kind of background activity. Sigh.

]]>