Comments on: And Now for Something Completely Different

By: Juli

Juli — Fri, 02 Sep 2011 13:12:00 +0000

Nice to b here,
Finpecia

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 05 Aug 2011 11:55:00 +0000

Hey Buddy Great post careprost | tadacip|

By: Generic Cialis

Generic Cialis — Mon, 16 May 2011 07:52:00 +0000

Hey, Really great work,
I would like to join your blog anyway so please continue sharing with us,
Thanks

By: free adult personals

free adult personals — Tue, 19 Apr 2011 06:23:00 +0000

What an excellent blog! We should also remember that Enterprise 2.0 term may be in flux because nobody has been able to completely adhere to Wikipedia’s editing standards.

By: Nursery Bedding

Nursery Bedding — Thu, 22 Apr 2010 01:29:25 +0000

“Does anyone have a good explanation for why this particular Wikipedia article seems to remain in great flux instead of converging, despite the pretty clear record?”
I think the issue could be with wikipedia. Having said that, I look forward to the emergence of 3.0 soon…

Alison

By: Nursery Bedding

Nursery Bedding — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 19:29:25 +0000

Alison

By: Traveller_Adventure

Traveller_Adventure — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:13:29 +0000

What I can say is very nice and helpful as well as informative post...really help me very much more!! Thanks..
aladdin coffee mug
(Coffee Mug Online Shop: The Best Coffee Mug Store)

By: Baby Bedding

Baby Bedding — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 02:33:54 +0000

We should also remember that Enterprise 2.0 term may be in flux because nobody has been able to completely adhere to Wikipedia's editing standards.

By the way, Google Trends data is quite conservative in comparison to Ad words, for example.

By: The Moors Murderers

The Moors Murderers — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 11:32:46 +0000

“My spring 2006 Sloan Management Review article” The link seems to be broken, I get 404 error, could you please write the correct one?

By: Alan Morrison

Alan Morrison — Tue, 21 Aug 2007 23:02:44 +0000

I’d second Seth Finkelstein’s comment that the reason the Enterprise 2.0 entry gets so much scrutiny is because the term is controversial. And would add that Wikipedia’s articles on business IT topics get a lot of scrutiny because a large percentage of its editorship is IT-interested and IT-savvy, if not indeed employed in IT. Wikipedians tend to be knowledge workers, and knowledge workers use and know a lot about electronic media these days.

Pick an obscure, non-IT topic, though, and the experienced Wikipedians tend to leave you alone, as long as you follow the basic rules. To learn how to contribute to Wikipedia, for example, I decided to research and write about the 9th Indiana Infantry, a Civil War regiment. To this day, only a few people besides me have edited this entry, and these have only been minor conformance edits, infobox insertions, etc. One thing did surprise me–a bot inserted a notice in the page that I hadn’t added categories. So I dutifully learned how to do that, and did so. Afterwards, someone reviewed my categories and informed me I had too many–he reduced the category list to one. I assume my list was essentially redundant.

I started this April, and continue to add to this entry, bit by bit, and have fun doing so. It’s a sort of citation-rich, objectified note page on the subject that resides in a place where everyone can see it.