What's not to like?

I'd almost forgotten that Wikipedia is a Wiki, and have been using it for a couple of years as a 'proper' reference source. I often referenced Wikipedia whilst working on obscure cataloguing projects when all the other information I could find about a particular item was from even more obscure sources! Hopefully the fact that it's a collaborative project will mean that if you are writing an article for Wikipedia, you're an expert or at least a very interested amateur. There's no advertising, no garish colours, and the the interface is so much friendlier than some other, more traditionally print-based reference sources. I'm also fond of the featured and random articles, from which this clown image came.

The 'history' and 'discussion' tabs are easy to miss, but they're interesting and help to point out which areas of a subject are contentious. I must mention that I have seen the occasional vandalised site where a few words have been changed in an article (usually to good comic effect). The changes were blindingly obvious and now that I think of it, I should probably have done my librarian-ish duty and sorted out the truth from the lies.

In my library Wikipedia is usually the first point of call when I'm confronted with a book about Markov chains or heterocyclic compounds, and for this purpose it is perfect. I don't need to become an expert, but a general summary of the subject is useful for cataloguing purposes, and to avoid looking like a complete fool in front of students.

Painting by Herbert Schondelmaier, photo by Erik Christensen.