Wikipedia is a great place to START, not stop.

I suspect that Wikipedia is really taking off as a ready reference source in the business world for one main reason--it's (nominally) free. We used it extensively at American International Assistance Services (AIAS) in Houston, Texas. Before that AIAS had a subscription to Microsoft Encarta but let it expire. Wikipedia became the default reference resource by default, and in the main, for the kinds of articles we consulted in it, mainly foreign country info, it was pretty darn reliable. It was also good for information about diseases and injuries to give our assistance coordinators a lay understanding of what our clients needs were, when coordinating between the AIG Medical staff and our contracted Travel agent. I don't know if contributions to the Wikipedia Foundation non-profit are tax deductible, but they should be, and it is in the best interest of businesses to contribute to it, not only for the potential tax break, but also to support a valuable resource for all users.

Wikipedia is a fun way to pass the time on a slow, boring night shift. I used to look up obscure articles on British militaria, aviation, etc, and general articles on Eastern Bloc small arms, etc. It may not be as good as a subscription to Britannica Online, but it's nice for the Middlebrow person interested in self-improvement and self-edification; Though it may seem these values sound a bit dated, I still actively put them into practice, and Wikipedia is an excellent starting point, but by no means should people stop there (as younger generation is often tempted to do). Editorial control has improved over the years, but sometimes gets over-dominated by editors whom I call "Notability Nazis" who delete a lot of rich content about local info because they deem it "not notable enough". I tend to be more "Inclusivist" in my views. Wikipedia's "Talk" pages can also give one a feel for the status of the current debate on controversial issues, especially articles flagged for lacking NPOV (Neutral Point of View). Wikipedia is always a "permanent beta", always under constant revision. I only once tried to submit a complete article to Wikipedia, and it was quickly flagged for multiple failings. Luckily more capable editors stepped in and re-wrote it properly and now it exists in usable form (it was a frivolous article about the third person shooter game Syphon Filter 2 on the Playstation console). I mostly make small edits; a sentence there, a grammar correction there, a link here, a paragraph revision there. But I'm proud when these stand the test of time.

I also play with other Wikis out there, but Wikipedia is the ground breaking original. We also have a restricted departmental Wiki in the library (for Technical Services) that I only just recently joined early in the week last week. It is connected to the library-wide Staff Wiki, and it will all be integrated with the new Sharepoint system in the near future, which is still in the process of doing a "soft" roll out on the TWU campus. I've no doubt the NT23 probably has some upcoming things on Wikis; I don't expect to see much new, but I'll give it a try.

Ideally, Wikipedia should lead users back to the library, to continue their research started on Wikipedia, as the graphic above, featuring Wikipe-tan, the Wikipedia official (anime-style) mascot, seeks to demonstrate.