Wikis

I think wikis are really cool. Its a way for people to be able to make changes to a page without the technical knowledge normally required. When I need just some general information that accuracy isn't a huge concern I check out wikipedia for it. One time I helped a patron use it was for a project a second grader had on a type of moss. They needed some general information about the moss to help point us towards the right books because none of them had the type of moss the child was assigned. After checking out wikipedia we found that the moss had another name that was commonly used to describe it. Searching using that name provided us with plenty of resources and the resources supported that it was the same type of moss the little girl had been assigned. Of course I always feel cautious using wikipedia since you really can't always be sure who posted a particular piece of information.
I thought the booklovers was a great idea though because I love reading reviews of books. In my opinion this is the best way to apply wikis to libraries because allowing patrons to edit the catalog would concern me a little bit and be something we would have to constantly be watching over. But book reviews are just personal opinions so they are a perfect way to allow the public to put in their two cents and a wiki is a great way to go about it. However I was disappointed that the reviews are only arranged in one way. Right now there aren't too many books in any category but in the future browsing by author instead of title would be a good option and so would by rating so if you have a long list you can start with the best rated books and work your way down. I did like the 5 star category.
I think internal use of wikis is also a good idea for libraries. We use them at CCPL for teams. The summer reading team wiki has meeting minutes posted, which is an easy place to go to quickly retrieve past minutes. Especially since you can access the summer reading wiki anywhere versus if you saved or printed the minutes.