Editorial

Citation

Chalcraft, T. (2007), "Editorial", Reference Reviews, Vol. 21 No. 2. https://doi.org/10.1108/rr.2007.09921baa.001

Editorial

Ask any reference professional working in a non-specialist setting to name the most important web reference tool of the twenty-first century and a good number will answer Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page). When Reference Reviews carried the “Viewpoint” article “Power to the people: the case for Wikipedia” just two years ago (19(2), pp. 6-7), I was surprised to discover Wikipedia had not been used or even encountered by many readers even though it had existed for several years. Among those who had come across it there was often scepticism that an online encyclopedia to which anyone could contribute was either sustainable or reliable. Fast forward several years in which Wikipedia has mushroomed in size and become widely used by the general public and the sustainability question has been settled, but the issue of reliability continues to loom large, especially for the information professional. Various well reported incidents in which entries have been “vandalised” to peddle a particular perspective have fuelled ongoing concern. As a result, despite now dwarfing Encyclopedia Britannica in terms of size (and, many would consider, functionality and ease of use), the reference world continues to stand back from a full embrace of Wikipedia.

Just before this issue of Reference Reviews went to press came news of a development which could address the issue of Wikipedia’s reliability and authority. Larry Sanger, one of its co-founders, is to launch Citzendium “the citizens compendium of everything” which, based on the content of Wikipedia, will combine public participation and “expert guidance”. The “experts” will be academics and others with specialist subject knowledge who will have the final say on the content of an article that falls within their area of expertise. Apparently to be funded by sponsorship, grants and donations from individuals this, if it can be completely carried through, has the potential to transform Wikipeda and give it the same authority and standing as the great general encyclopedias. Effectively it will marry public participation and scholarly oversight in a way that could become a model for other Internet reference tools and possibly information publishing as a whole.

Days after the Citzendium announcement hit the information headlines the British Library announced that English Short Title Catalogue (ESTC) (http://estc.bl.ac.uk) was to be made freely accessible to all. Developed from the printed catalogues of Pollard & Redgrave, Wing and the British Library’s database of eighteenth century books, ESTC has previously been available mainly as a subscription service. Its opening up will be an immense boon to libraries of all types, allowing even the smallest branch access to the bibliographical record of the first 300 plus years of English language publishing that just a few years ago were searchable only through forbidding print volumes and multiple microfiche.

In my library one of the printed sets students previously seemed to find forbidding was the Grove Dictionary of Art. Since we provided online access a number of years ago the barriers to use appear to have tumbled. Although Google might sometimes prove the convenient temptation, it is pleasing to see many arts related students use this source in its online format even without direct recommendation by reference staff. Late 2006 saw the tenth anniversary of the online Grove Dictionary of Art and its now owners Oxford University Press marked the occasion with an announcement that from summer 2007 the database would be enhanced by the addition of 2,000 images from the Metropolitan Museum of Modern Art.

In this issue of Reference Reviews one of the most important new titles reviewed is also from Oxford University Press, the Oxford Encyclopedia of British Literature (RR 2007/86). Its five volumes represent one of the most ambitious reference undertakings in English literature of recent years and will be an essential purchase for many larger libraries. The value of works such as this lie not just with the articles, but in bibliographical references which, in my experience, many users find easier to digest than the often lengthy lists thrown up by database searches. Another important five volume literature source reviewed is the Greenwood Encyclopedia of American Poets and Poetry (RR 2007/84). Containing over 900 entries, this is one of the few works in an otherwise surprisingly empty reference field and will be a possible acquisition where more general literature sources are found wanting. These two multi-volume sets are dwarfed, however, by the latest mega project from K.G. Saur, the 16 volume International Encyclopedia of Pseudonyms (RR 2007/61). Surely the final word on pseudonyms, this specialist title will be the point of reference for any query concerning pseudonymous publication solving many mysteries over which Google or Wikipedia will stumble.

There are numerous other reference titles in this issue of Reference Reviews that could be highlighted, including a few each from the Blackwell, Gale and the Taylor and Francis families of imprints. I mention these publishing groups because at the time of writing all three are prominent in a flurry of the wheeling and dealing that increasingly characterises commercial publishing. Literally as these lines were being written, came news that Blackwell Publishing had been acquired by John Wiley. Blackwell has a substantial reference pedigree, largely concentrated in the humanities and social sciences, while Wiley is primarily science and technology based (see, for example, the online version of Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology in these columns (RR 2007/93)). Perhaps the takeover will provide an across the board “synergy” and a boost to both reference lists, but many reference librarians will be apprehensive, especially as Blackwell’s book division has been widely reported as ailing in recent years. Science and technology publishers appear to be in a hungry mood as a few days before the Blackwell announcement there was news that Springer had bid for Informa. Parent company of Taylor & Francis, which now incorporates the well known Routledge brand with its heavy reference programme (and which in turn now incorporates other names from the reference past such as Europa and Fitzroy Dearborn), Informa has itself been an aggressively acquisitive company, so Springer’s move was a surprise. Finally, while most of the news points to further consolidation, Gale Group, which regularly features in these columns with its multi-volume printed sets or bibliographical and full-text databases and is here represented by the two volume Worldmark Encyclopedia of Religious Practices (RR 2007/69) and a new edition of the established single volume Encyclopedia of Management (RR 2007/79), appears to be headed in the opposite direction. Canadian parent company Thomson Corporation has announced that it will sell its Thomson Learning subsidiary, which has Gale as a key component, to concentrate on “electronic workflows to business markets”.

All-in-all these developments signal further that reference publishing is in a state of flux and uncertainty. Merger and consolidation is the major trend, but in the long run will even giant companies be able to produce and sell products that match the scale and accessibility of free resources such as Wikipedia, the projected Citzendium, and any subject-based mirror projects they might engender?

Tony ChalcraftEditor, Reference Reviews, and University Librarian, York St John University, York, UK