After a recent post on academics and social media strategies, I was asked about Wikipedia pages.
Truthfully, I don't have a strong opinion about academics and wiki pages.
On the one hand, it seems faculty who win national or international awards such as noble prizes, Pulitzers, and whatnot merit a wiki page.
On the other hand, it seems many senior faculty who have not won such awards have vanity wiki pages.
What should be the defining logic? For having a wiki page?
I think it's up to you.
If you are a scholar of substance, no one will blink an eye.
If you have not yet made your mark, you will be subject to ridicule.
Why?
Because you have not earned the respect, people will quietly ridicule your delusions of grandeur.
It's sort of like the people that buy titles in Scotland, you can claim to be a laird, but, you will never be nobility, and your friends will quietly mock you when they learn of your faux noble status.
So if you are tempted to create a Wikipedia page, make sure you really merit it.
And if you opt to put one up, make sure it is accurate.
In writing this, I paused to check out a few Wikipedia pages.
I found one that was profoundly dated - it seems it was important to create - but not to maintain.
I found another that was flat-out deceptive - it conveniently glossed over a professional stop at a less prestigious uni.
I found another that made me smile - we all know that he's not really a computer scientist - perhaps, hacked by a vengeful student?
From my brief sojourn on Wikipedia, I gleaned one fundamental piece of insight - Academics are not very good at site maintenance.
So, if you aren't willing to do an annual update, are open to fact-checking, and to make sure that the content has not been vandalized, don't bother with a Wikipedia page.
Dated content will eventually embarrass you.
Best of luck!
P.S. you can buy a title in Scotland: https://lnkd.in/dykDEkac - apparently- anyone can be a Scottish Noble or have a Wikipedia page!
Comments