Over at Denham Grey’s weblog he has just been sharing a weblog post that all of us, knowledge workers, Knowledge Management advocates and so forth should not be ignoring. In KM Wikipedia Regression he just mentions how the quality of the KM related article in Wikipedia has gone down a bit. Probably quite substantially. Shawn Calahan has also been commented about it on Call to update Wikipedia’s KM entry.
So what Denham is asking us all to do is to go out there and start updating the Wikipedia article on KM so that it has got all the good quality it deserves. Thus Denham is suggesting the following sections:
- The KM domain
- Core Theory
- KM competencies
- External links
- KM bloggers
Then he also suggests that, where possible, we should also be able to update the different sub-themes related to Knowledge Management, like Intellectual Capital, amongst many others. Overall, I think that this is a terrific idea actually and I would very much like to help getting those articles updated. Even more, I think that I would also be very keen on having another section dedicated to Knowledge Management Tools. But instead of just going ahead and update things further I would also be very keen on setting something, perhaps, much more rewarding in the long term.
Some time ago you would remember how I created a weblog post, KMWiki – A Collaborative Persistent â€˜Conversationâ€™ on All Matters Related to Knowledge Management, where I mentioned how Denham had created a KMWiki space whose “ultimate aim is to prepare Wikipedia entries on key KM concepts, develop topic and concept maps of this exciting domain“. So what I would like to propose in here is to indeed go ahead and start doing some updates on the KM Wikipedia article but work on those updates first over at KMWiki and then once we all feel comfortable with the level of information and accuracy we can then go ahead and update the Wikipedia entry. That way, once we all reach a consensus on what to add to the main entry, at the same time we can continue working on further updates without disrupting the information already available and establish a period of say monthly or quarterly updates that could constantly keep Wikipedia’s article accurate and relevant throughout time.
Does it make sense to continue making use of KMWiki to prepare those items for the KM Wikipedia article and perhaps help create some other additional resources around KM related topics ? Does it make sense to add another category for KM Tools giving the good amount of Web 2.0 related tools that have certainly given an incredible boost to KM related topics (Content Management, Social Networking, Collaboration, eLearning) over the last few months / years, amongst other traditional KM tools? What do you think ?
Technorati Tags: Knowledge Management, KM, Wikipedia