gabriela's Page

A couple of weeks ago at a "connectivism" group at FB we were talking about socialbookmarking tools (delicious and diigo, mainly). I said,as an old user of delicious, that I have some strategies for tagging and tought about writting them down, so here they are!



The main point on how I came with these "strategies", is being able to find things back and for that is better when I tag extensively and at the same time I keep a consistent "body" of tags (I have~600).



It depends on the page I am tagging, but normally I try to do as much as possible of the following:

- Name the type of resource (video, blog, article, about article, about blog)

- Name the author (if known and important)

- Name the organization (if known and important)

- Name of the publication (if it is an article, etc)

- Name of the tool (if it is about a tool)

- Describe the topics and/or concepts(all that make sense, as much as possible)

- Name if I want to do something about it (to be read, to buy, to talk about)

- I also have a tag for each course I give, so tagg it with all the "course tags" where this thing could be useful for learners



Then I have bundles, where I bundle taggs according to those categories, and also by topics. Bundling helps me as well for recongizing if I am using two different words to name the same thing.



Once in a while (each ~month) I go an do tag management (basicaly bundling new tags, and cleaning misspelled ones, renaming).



Some other things I never did from the begging on delicious but that we are using when tagging our entrances in a collective-team blog:

- Always use lower case (except for names)

- Always in singular (except when the concept is plural)

- Always tagg in Spanish... unless the concept in original language is important, then use both

- Authors, only by last name

-… Continue

Last January 15th, Wikipedia got his 10th anniversary. In Guadalajara, we’ve got a local celebration Mexican style, with mariachi and tequila.

Seeking for a free content encyclopedia, Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger developed back in 2000 a first project Nupedia, where contents were written by experts. The expert’s logic demanded a very slow revision process. The search for speeding that process a parallel strategy started, that when mixed with the culture and philosophy of free movements, ended up in creating Wikipedia, the encyclopedia everyone can edit.

It is this quality, everyone, the one that has lead to lots of critiques around is validity. If it is not written by validated and recognized experts, our first thought is that we cannot think on the information being trustable. Nevertheless, there is formal research that speaks of its quality –in certain topics and languages- (the first one, published just 4 years after it was borne, by Nature, and famous for the conflict with Britanica Encyclopedia). Concerns about quality on information produced by people on internet is in all fields (for example, in…

Continue