Hey all!

I was tasked with doing some Wikipedia entries here at the Archives of American Art a few years ago and found the experience generally frustrating. From what people who’ve taken up the task far more recently, things have gotten a lot better.

This is a good thing. Back when I started, there was still controversy as to whether institutions could contribute information. This was before Wikipedia decided it was okay to allow people from places like the Archives and various museums to add info. Luckily, now, the expertise of those working in institutions like ours, is recognized.

The biggest piece of advice I’d offer is to remember that you/your organization is the expert. If you have the birth certificate/hand written letter/diary entry/whatever, it pretty much trumps what other people are adding. I pretty much had to say in a couple of discussions something along the lines of, “Well, we have her original papers and according to a letter dated…” or, “The birth certificate we have in the records, certified with the seal of…” That stopped those discussions of whether my info was valid because neither of those contesting my additions had anywhere near the documentation that we did.

Don’t be surprised if after you’ve done a big overhaul of an entry, if when you check back 6 months later and find that someone else has done another overhaul. As long as all the pertinent info that you added is still there in some form, it’s fine Your entry spurred someone else with different info to improve in the ways they could what you had earlier improved.

Also, there is a lot more support for new Wikipedians now, then there was back when I first gave it a try. Depending on where you are, there may be a local group of Wikipedians that get together in person to discuss all sorts of stuff concerning working with Wikipedia.

Good luck!

**michelle**